folo

“Too much of nothing / Can make a man ill at ease.” Bob Dylan, “Too Much Of Nothing”

UPDATE as noted below.

In Part 1, I described the filing of the Jones, Funderburg suit against Dickie Scruggs and the decision by Scruggs to have Tim Balducci contact Judge Lackey about the case off-the-record in hopes that Balducci’s prior relationship with Judge Lackey would influence the judge. I noted that sometime about late May, the case (and contact) went on hold, partly because the FBI agent working with Judge Lackey was out of the state doing military service for 6 weeks. On July 9th, a hearing on the Scruggs motion to arbitrate occurred.

There are three recorded conversations in this period: On May 29th, a phone call between Balducci and Judge Lackey, and then a meeting between the two on May 30th, and then on June 28th, a meeting between Judge Lackey and Tim Balducci. I haven’t found anything in the indictment, the governments applications for wiretaps or warrants, or in the transcripts offered up by the defense about what happened in these conversations.

What there is is pretty peculiar: Rather than produce transcripts, Keker’s team filed an affidavit of one of the lawyers, saying that he had reviewed the transcripts, that between May 4th and September 18th, there were seven instances in which Judge Lackey called Balducci but none the other way around. He doesn’t give the dates. One, May 9th, occurred in Judge Lackey’s chambers, so Balducci must have come there. Another is the May 21st “bodies buried” conversation, in which it hardly seems that Lackey is pursuing Balducci. Notes on what we have about the other four are below.

The affidavit also says that Balducci did not call Lackey about the recusal, and that they did not talk for eight days after the recusal.

You’ve read about the calls before May 28th. There is no transcript available to me from the May 28th phone call.

• May 29th, Judge Lackey face-to-face in New Albany with Balducci. Apparently, Judge Lackey was wearing a wire. In an affidavit filed with the motion to dismiss, Scruggs lawyer Brooks Dooley states that no transcript has been produced from this conversation, but that he has listened and transcribed it to the best of his ability. He says that “Judge Lackey explained that he had recused himself because he had been seen at a court function speaking with a member of the Daniel Coker firm, which represented the defendants in the Jones case. Balducci did not to try to dissuade Judge Lackey or other wise convince him to stay in the case. To the contrary, Balducci told Judge Lackey he should ‘do what your heart tells you.’” In the 2nd motion to continue, the defense stated that Balducci said in this conversation: "I damn sure didn’t want to do anything to jeopardize my relationship with you. I didn’t want to do anything in the world ever to do that relationship any harm. " I want to make sure that you and I are ok " and "it would break my heart if I thought I had put you ina bad position " when you called the other night I could tell that you were troubled by it. That’s why I told you "do what your heart tells you.’ "
• May 30th: Judge Lackey and Balducci talk, and the Jones case is not mentioned, according to the defense 2nd motion to continue.
• June 28th: Judge Lackey and Balducci talk, and the Jones case is not mentioned, according to the defense 2nd motion to continue.
• July 9th, the hearing on the motion to send the case to arbitration occurred.
• August 3rd, Lackey calls Balducci and does not reach him.
• August 9th, Lackey calls Balducci at the office of another lawyer, Richard Babb, who is in Ripley, Mississippi, part of Lackey’s judicial district and about 30ish miles from New Albany, where Balducci’s office is. Lackey asks Babb about someone named James Irvin and another named Jay Keenan, both apparently relating to local elections of about the time. There’s a gap of about 10 pages in the conversation. The conversation picks up again with Lackey and Balducci talking about Balducci’s man-crush letter to the president of the local bar, and then Lackey asks if Balducci is in private. Lackey asks about Scruggs and arbitration, and Balducci says that arbitration is Scrugg’s's number one goal. Then Balducci makes the remark about being afraid of Jones in court “blowing his snot bubbles and stuff.” More details are in this prior post, here.
• August 27th, Lackey and Balducci, no available transcript or information.
• September 11th, Lackey calls Balducci, does not reach him because he’s in Washington. Lackey says “If you run into Chaney, tell him I’m going to pass on the duck hunt. Uh, but I do need to talk to you about this matter that we’re both concerned about and interested in. I’ve got something I want to run by you and see what you think about, and, uh, I’ll see if I can catch you Thursday, I know, or Friday….”

The conversations discussed above must be the ones that Scruggs’s lawyers argue involve Lackey’s “pursuit” of Balducci. In all this back-and-forth, Balducci has made clear what he and Scruggs want; where it goes other than that is still an open question.

Update: Some additional details from the May 29th conversation and accounts of the May 30th and June 28th conversations, all between Balducci and Judge Lackey, were added from the 2nd defense motion to continue.