Kingfish! Dang it, man, don’t you know that white-on-black format is mighty hard on tarred-out ol’ bloggin’ eyes? I hadda highlight yer whole freakin’ post to read it.
So lissen here, if you gonna keep writing great smashmouth on Ed Peters’ slimebucket bidness history, would you please consider lightening up on your po’ ol’ readerz?
Tha-ankyewwww,
lotus
Lead counsel for the defendants, Peters et al., is listed in the District Court opinion as Robert H. Taylor, Royals & Taylor, Jackson, Miss. Is this the same Robert Taylor whose deposition has featured so prominently in recent posts? He’s the only Robert H. Taylor listed on the Bar Roll on the Supreme Court website. Shows you how close-knit (even Appalachian) the bar used to be.
Ahbedawg. I don’t know, soms, the Shelton-prominent one is Robert Hart Taylor (Jr., I think), but he’s a retired lifer of the Hinds County DA’s office. Anybody?
all right, I’m blind from reading on a white background. Where did you find the law firms representing Peters in that opinion. Must be having a brain lock because I didn’t see it.
Hey, Kingfish! I bet that’s on PACER or Westlaw — something lawyerish lak dat.
Speaking of Ed is anyone willing to speculate on why he and Delaughter have yet to be indicted? Could it be they will be testifying against Scruggs in March???
I figured as much. Case was forwarded to me and I didn’t see it on there. thanks.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH–
I have a post sitting in draft form about this case! I’ve been scooped!
There is so much Peters malfeasance and Scruggs news we can’t keep up!
It’s Mardi Gras ok? Being from Baton Rouge I was trying to give it a Mardi Gras them, which caused me severe headaches instantly.
What is the significance of Robert Taylor? Some of us are still learning all the players.
Times like this I wish we did not have a mandatory Bar.
Could RT be on doing a little CYA!
somslawyer- 4:27
The Robert Taylor of Shelton fame is one and the same as the one who was counsel for Peters. For what its worth.
Thanks for the confirmation, tired. Haven’t seen you around for a few days, glad you’re back.
…and I thank all of you folks who deliver great information for your wit – can’t count all the lol moments I’ve had trying to catch up on the afternoon’s converation.
Heard from a very reliable source that the folks at State Farm informed the “2 ladies” that all State Farm laptops have a GPS device and that the first time the “2 ladies” met with Scruggs and others was at the Trent Lott/Richard Scruggs hunting camp. How about them apples!
fishwater- 5:45
I certainly do not wish to challenge RHT’s version of the facts nor to challenge his veracity. After checking my recollection of how the Hinds DA’s office functioned in this time period with some of my colleagues with better memories than I, it does seem inconceivable that he would lack knowledge of how the case was presented to the Grand Jury or of who presented it since he was the assistant who handled all matters before the Grand Jury and signed the indictment. Perhaps his memory, like mine sometimes, has not improved with age. On the other hand he could be doing a little CYA as you first raised. He did experience a change of bosses during all of this.
Mr. Taylor’s statement makes it sound like the Shelton case was not the first “indict on dare” rodeo. Was Taylor one of Peter’s “people” as he puts it. How often is “occasionally”?
"[Y]ou get down to the area of though where . . . . the prosecutor says let’s see if I can bluff a plea out of this guy by indicting him. . . . . I’ve always had personal problems with it, to indict a case that I know deep in my heart if I have to go to trial I can’t win it. That was okay with Peters, he was willing to have his people indict on a dare. "
Over the years I have known a pullman car full of lawyers who have worked in the Hinds County DA’s office for a period of time. To a man, or woman as the case may be, I have always heard them tell that Peters philosophy was that they should never indict on a case that they could not win at a jury trial and that they did not get paid to lose cases.
I have never heard a single former assistant even use the term “indict on a dare” until RHT’s remarks showed up here.
While I certainly have no knowledge of the goings on in the DA’s office regarding the Shelton fiasco, I do tend to question RHT’s version. Perhaps it is totally accurate, but then again, perhaps he is attempting to shift the spotlight away from himself at a much later date. As I posted earlier, it is after all his signature that is on the bottom of the indictment.