This is the kind of storyline you used to see on the TV show Boston Legal week in and week out. The prosecuting attorney full of huff and puff would make some tactical blunder or courtroom faux pas only to have attorney Alan Shore for the defense make mincemeat out of him/her in only the smartalecky Brahmin way that he could.

If John Stagliano had Alan Shore for an attorney his case would have been over by now in a 43 minute episode not including time for commercials. But it’s getting there thanks to Pamela Satterfield. Satterfield’s the prosecutor trying the case for the Justice Dept and she found herself in one of those between a rock and a hard place situations that Shore would thrive on.

In Satterfield’s case she had to contend with FBI agent Daniel Bradley’s inaccurate statement the day before regarding the issue of Judge Richard Leo purportedly giving him instructions via Satterfield regarding the re-review of films.

What happened was Leon gave her two options: either draft an affidavit stating she did not tell Bradley that the judge wanted him to re-review the films or take the stand as a witness to deny it. The latter choice would have had Satterfield recusing herself from the case.

The government agreed to draft an affidavit and did so, but, Satterfield said she could not sign it and to do so would violate the professional code of conduct for employees of the Justice Department.

She did relent to the affidavit, however. The jury was then told that an inaccurate statement had been made by the witness and that Leon had not given Bradley any instructions or directed Satterfield to tell Bradley anything.

Leon then read for the jury Satterfield’s affidavit denying she told Bradley that the judge directed him to re-review the video or prepare in any way for the case. Nudge-nudge, wink-wink.