@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland I’ve looked at this issue: I’ve read the court’s opinion, the motion, & the amicus brief mentioned in the footnote. It is unfortunately the case that the language in several parts of the motion is identical w/no indication it is quoted from the brief.That is plainly plagiarism./1
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland The footnote in the motion (#22), refers the reader to the amicus brief, but it doesn’t attribute the earlier language in the motion, which appears on 4 pages & in footnote 21, to that brief. So there is not a proper citation or proper attribution. /2
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland Citation & attribution are two different things. Citation is naming the authority where an idea, concept or holding you’re discussing is found. Attribution is using techniques (like quote marks or indentions) to show that the words you’re using are not yours but someone else’s./3
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland In legal writing lawyers are often doing both citation & attribution. Because a lack of attribution (plagiarism) has the effect of passing off someone else’s words as yours it is considered dishonest in academia & law. It does not have to be done intentionally to be plagiarism./4
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland The amicus brief referenced was from a Supreme Court case that Sidney Powell handled & addresses a Brady issue. The discussion in it was relevant to the motion she filed in Flynn’s case. /5
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland Other than flagging it in his opinion, Judge Sullivan doesn’t say if he’s going to do anything else about it. In theory he could make a referral to the DC bar for discipline for plagiarism. Whether he will or not I don’t know. /6
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland There is a risk of plagiarism when you have multiple lawyers drafting a paper & no one lawyer is familiar with all the language of the paper & also all the source materials relied upon or cited in that paper. /7
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland Another problem is that new/young/junior lawyers frequently do not understand what is & what isn’t plagiarism. They sometimes wrongly think that if there’s a citation to authority that’s enough, but it isn’t. If the language is a quote, that has to be 100% clear in the paper. /8
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland If someone who doesn’t understand plagiarism does the drafting & doesn’t show that language is quoted & the person editing, revising, or finalizing the paper has not read all the source materials, there is a heightened risk of plagiarism. /9
@Cinevents @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 @ProfMJCleveland This issue doesn’t really have anything to do w/the substance of the issues raised for Flynn. It’s purely a commentary on the motion. It could have influenced Judge Sullivan’s views of the arguments but possibly not & if it did it would be extremely hard to determine how much./10
