ELEMENTARY!
Lawyer turns Sherlock to nail ‘ lying’ husband
Divorce attorney Laurence Greenberg became Sherlock Holmes in court yesterday, pulling out a magnifying glass to blow a hole in alimony evidence from Susan Branche’s ex- husband.
The only thing missing was the deerstalker hat and calabash pipe.
A Manhattan divorce lawyer took a page right out of Sherlock Holmes in court Wednesday, when he pulled out a large magnifying glass and used it to blow a hole in his opponent’s case.
Attorney Laurence Greenberg used his detective-style lens to show that someone may have used whiteout to alter financial records so that they showed Douglas Holloway, the former head of broadcasting company ION Media, was nearly broke and thus unable to pay his $ 16,000amonth alimony.
“Judge, I happened to have a magnifying glass with me. I’d like to show it to the witness and have him use it,” Greenberg said as he handed the oldtime detective tool to Holloway, who was on the stand.
Greenberg represents Holloway’s former wife, Susan Branche, who is fighting her husband’s efforts to cut her monthly alimony and child support.
The 60yearold former cable TV big wig says he can no longer afford to keep his former wife living in high style. He lost his job when he was given 20 days in jail in January for trying to hide $ 2 million in assets from her.
But Greenberg and Branche argue that records portraying Holloway’s woes are a crude forgery. Branche claims that, rather than being poor, her ex continues to spend lavishly on island vacations and fancy restaurants.
Greenberg argued Wednesday that Holloway appeared to have submitted only bank statements showing withdrawals from his account, excluding deposits. He used the white correction fluid to change the page numbers to make it look as if no pages were missing from the statement.
With the help of the teak-handled magnifier, Greenberg showed the court that there was discoloration on the pages.
“Isn’t it a fact, Mr. Holloway, that it appears on the face of this document that it’s been altered?” Greenberg said, after handing the exexecutive the glass.
Holloway’s attorney objected, but he was overruled.
“I can’t testify to anything about this document,” Holloway way said, claiming he has bad eyesight.
But the Sherlock Holmes routine seemed to show that someone did a sloppy job with the whiteout.
Greenberg claimed Holloway left an incriminating mistake — a “little piece of letter that might have said page 2 of 3” was visible.
Outside court, Holloway told The Post he never used whiteout to forge the paperwork. But Greenberg wasn’t buying the story.
“He thinks the whiteout pen is mightier than the judicial system,” Greenberg quipped.
The case continues next week.