Here at Office of Hearings and Appeals in Window Rock, Ariz. Hearing Officer Riche Nez presiding over two election complaints against presidential candidate Chris Deschene for lying on his oath that he was a qualified presidential candidate because he speaks Navajo language fluently.
Brian Lewis, attorney for Deschene
i would be remiss to advise my client to walk into test. Deschene has no burden. he is putting affirmative experts, not buddies. He has no need to walk into test that is not proper profiency to sign off on his oath. there are more than 9,000 voter rights and the supreme court decision says that those 9,000 rights trumps the two rights here.
David Jordan, attorney for DAle Tsosie
if you deny default motion, and you shouldn’t, then we will ask deschene – in navajo – questions about supreme court decision. and i noticed that one of the miss navajo qualifications is proficiency in navajo and it’s harder for someone to become miss navajo because navajo language test is five days.
You swayed us for an objective test and now we are being accused of not thinking this thru because we thot Deschene was an honorable man and take the test. we thot a presidential candidate would take the test as he agreed. to say that there is no consequences for deschene refusing to take test is wrong. and how hard would it have been for Lewis to pick up the phone and tell me that he advised deschene not to take test. it’s not our fault that dechene has gone thru four attorneys. the bottom line is they were not there and we were.
Jim Barton, attorney for deschene
it would have been irresponsible for deschene to subject himself to test that had not been weighed and that had not been validated.
richie nez, hearing officer
so whey did you call David jordan?
we field in afternoon but it was a problem on our part. but consequences, court needs to consider that attorneys advised deschene not to take test and that test put together in short time.
Nez, hearing officer
that was your decision with Lewis. and so jordan saying you all agreed.
i’d have to take your word that it hapened.
it did happen
there was objection wednesday.
is there any law that client can refuse advice of counsel?
Barton, deschene’s attorney
Nez, hearing officer
can client refuse legal order?
Barton, deschene’s attorney
Brian Lewis, deschene’s attorney
this tribunal has no authority to force dechene to hostile test but it has authority to put Deschene on stand but they only have test and if that is all they have then you shud dismiss their complaints.
White, Hank Whitethorne’s attorney
the supreme court ordered hearing and appeals to have hearing in five days, today. and it was you, you called us and said that you had an idea for a subjective navajo language test that would be created by the Navajo Nation Division of Education. I examined two ladies from education division. i examined them under oath and the proceeding was official. it wasn’t our test. we didn’t come up with idea or test. it was OHA following through with supreme court order. when look at Deschene list, one comes from dine college. one concern was that this test could not be leaked and testing place was confidential and why had gag order which was to make as fair as possible.
it goes to heart of office of hearings and appeals complying with supreme court order. this office is responsible for that and that is the point of our motion for default.
Calvin Lee, deschene’s attorney, didn’t put motion to withdraw as attorney until after Monday and on Monday, Lee was Deschene’s attorney. Samuel Pete entered motion to withdraw as Deschene’s attorney.
NEZ, HEARING OFFICER
my question is if i hired you as attorney, can a client oppose legal advise.
right of client versus right of attorney. can client refuse advice of attorney. of course. but that is not how we would phrase question. is client bound by what attorney agrees to? supreme court says client is bound by statement of attorneys in court.
Lewis can taunt me, you dummy, you thot deschene was going to take test. yes, we were silly in believing that deschene would keep his word. but we are prejudiced because we didn’t have right to discovery because it was agreed that there would be objective measure. i told the other attorney that if deschene passes test then there is no reason to have hearing.
but deschene, the day before hearing, comes in and says i will not honor my statement that i will take test because i changed attorneys. that violates decision of supreme court. we cud have gathered evidence in discovery in pretrial by questioning deschene but we all believed that as a group that the decision after talking thing out that there would be a test and taht deschene would take it. you, richie nez, as nataani, announced the group’s decision. and if someone does not honor their words then there are consequences and if you, richie nez, do not order consequences then you are violating our rights to discovery.