“Something is happening here but you don’t know what it is. Do you, Mister Jones?” Bob Dylan, “Ballad of a Thin Man”
Updated as noted below
At this point, Balducci thinks he is about to close in on a successful bribe, cheating the unwitting Johnny Jones of a fair ruling, and an equally unwitting Balducci is unaware what is happening to him– the federal government is about to spring the trap. With the information they’ve got, on September 26th, they apply for and get authority to listen in on Balducci’s cell phone. The application for a wire tap notes that the government already had in place a pen register that showed 4 calls to Scruggs Law Office and 8 from it on Balducci’s phone, including a 4:02 call immediately after the 9/21st meeting in Lackey’s office.
This series of posts outlines what is public about the conversations that led to the indictment of Dickie Scruggs and others for judicial bribery. Part 1 outlined Tim Balducci’s initial off-the-record approach to Judge Lackey and Part 2 described conversations between the two from late May until early September, a period the defense says Lackey “pursued” Balducci. Part 3 deals with the period that talk moves from hints to an actual cash bribe. In this post are the first conversations involving Patterson, including talk of P.L. Blake, as Balducci works to get the order from Judge Lackey.
- September 24th, Judge Lackey calls Balducci. Balducci begins, “What ya say, Judge,” and Lackey responds, “Lackin’ style.” Lackey says that “In this metal building of mine, it doesn’t work.” [I have no idea what the reference to his office in Calhoun City means.] Balducci says he’s headed over toward Lackey the next day, and asks where he’s going to be. Lackey says he’s going to be in Jackson for a hearing on a matter the Supreme Court asked him to hear “and that Monette agreed for me.” Lackey offers to cancel the hearing if it is a problem for Balducci, who says no and asks if it is a one-day deal. Lackey says it is, and Balducci asks if they can meet on Wednesday (the 26th), and Lackey says his schedule would work for Thursday morning instead; he’ll be in his office and can clear out everybody. Then, Lackey says: “Let me ask you one thing. And I tell ya, I’m, and I hate to even, uh, bug you with it. Can I commit to my folks, that are pressuring me, something by this weekend?”
Balducci: Yes, sir. Uh, I’d say, on the safe side, I’ve already taken care of half the problem, and.. you think we can, based on what you said the other day, do you think we can take care of the other half, next time.
Lackey: Next time whenever. Okay?
Balducci: Yeah, but you can go ahead and commit, that, uh, you got half the problem solved.
Lackey: All right. Well, I appreciate it. Well that sure, I’ll sleep tonight because I have got some, uh… Oh me. Thanks, buddy.
Balducci: Okay, I’ll see you Thursday morning.
- September 27th, Balducci and Lackey phone conversation. No transcript available. Presumably about setting up the meeting for that day.
- September 27th, Balducci and Lackey face-to-face conversation about 10:00 AM, “first rodeo” one. Details of partial transcript are here. There are five pages missing at the start; this is where Balducci delivers the first $20,000 in cash to Lackey and Balducci delivers the order to Judge Lackey. In the part we have, Lackey says, "Well, what did the, let me, let me, let me tell you, I don’t want a nickel of your money, Tim. " Tim says he knows that, and Lackey says, "And if this is not comin’ back to you or if it’s not, uh, Mr. Scruggs’ money, I don’t want a nickel of it because it’s not gonna do Tim any good and he’s not the one I’m trying to help. "
Balducci says he understands, and tells Lackey not to worry. "All that’s been taken care of. " When Lackey suggests Scruggs would have to know, Balducci responds, ” " here’s how it works, just so you’ll have some, some comfort, some understandin’ of how it works. Um, they’ll come a time where I’ll sit him down in private and I’ll tell him that I solved a problem for him.” Later, Balducci says Scruggs is “not involved in a direct manner. doesn’t wanna be. Doesn’t need to be. He knows how things work. " I mean he, you know, you don’t, you don’t climb the mount he’s climbed without cuttin’ a corner here and there, so, it uh, you know, like I said, I will be fine.”
Paterson told Balducci "that his wife had just gotten off the phone " with P.L. Blake "who had just gotten out of a meeting that Patterson asked him to have. " Balducci asked for details, and Patterson called back and told him that Blake had "met with Dick Scruggs and "he’ knows its going to be "40. Patterson assured Balducci that P.L. was confident that Scruggs would take care of Patterson and Balducci, and Patterson said "We got your horse sold " or words to that effect.
- September 27th, Patterson and Balducci conversation, right after Balducci has left the meeting with Judge Lackey. There is a partial transcript, detailed here. At the beginning of the conversation, Patterson describes talking to P.L. Blake about getting the $40,000 from him (although Balducci implied to Judge Lackey in the meeting they’d just had it would come from Balducci’s own slush fund). Patterson then says, "Do I go ahead and take care of it or what? And he said, yeah, go ahead and take care of it. I said, well, we’ve already taken care of half of it. " Balducci, having just left Lackey, says, "I’ma just reinforce that this morning. I just stopped by his [Scruggs's] office um, to pick up that thing that Sid [Backstrom] had gotten for me " " "I called to Bethie, " says Balducci, "and she said he’s gonna be there this morning, so I’m going to go back on my way through. " Balducci says that he’s leaving Oxford heading south. "So what I’ma do is I’ma come back through here, I’ma stop and see him. I’m gonna lead with this issue and then I’m gonna tell him I need you to make two calls and get him to make those two phone calls. " I think Balducci is saying that he’s going to start with the "problem " he’d solved and then ask Scruggs to make a couple of calls.
In the Patterson plea colloquy, there are two phone conversations with Patterson and Balducci for which the transcripts aren’t out yet. It is unclear which quotes come from conversation. According to the colloquy, Paterson told Balducci "that his wife had just gotten off the phone " with P.L. Blake "who had just gotten out of a meeting that Patterson asked him to have. " Balducci asked for details, and Patterson called back and told him that Blake had "met with Dick Scruggs and "he’ knows its going to be "40. Patterson assured Balducci that P.L. was confident that Scruggs would take care of Patterson and Balducci, and Patterson said "We got your horse sold " or words to that effect.
- 9/27, Balducci and Patterson, telephone conversation. There is no transcript for this one. It’s after the meeting at Scruggs’s. The FBI wiretap applications say that Balducci tells Patterson “Done. Handled. All is well.” He also says, “Well, heh, what I can tell you is from this trip this morning, all is done and all is handled and all is well.” Balducci says that he has done the follow up, has met with Scruggs, and that although P.L. and Scruggs have not talked, P.L. will be giving Scruggs a call soon.
- October 7th, Balducci called Patterson. Patterson said he had just talked to Blake, and that Patterson would be calling "the guy in Oxford tomorrow " who was "expecting a call. "
- October 8th, Balducci called Patterson, who said he was about to call Scruggs. Later the same day, in a conversation about "the firm’s financial problems ", Patterson "reassured Balducci that, "We’ve got 40 coming from Scruggs’ ". "
- 10/10, Patterson calls Balducci’s cell phone and asks Balducci to find out “when the order will be signed.” Balducci asks if there is a problem with the deal, and Patterson says “P.L. wants to know.” Within a few minutes, Balducci calls Patterson and says the situation will be taken care of. There is no transcript of the conversations with Patterson in the defense transcripts; this is from one of the applications for a wiretap.
- 10/10. A short time later, Balducci calls Lackey.
Balducci: You got just a second?
Lackey: Have plenty of time.
Balducci: Good, um, listen, I was just calling to, uh, ask you you know, uh, I was gonna get those sweet potatoes delivered to my friend down there.
Lackey: Oh yeah!
Balducci: And I was wondering do you have any idea when you might get those that that bushels of sweet potatoes, uh, down there, uh where I can get them, uh, over to him?
Lackey: Okay? Uh, Let me, uh, I will, yeah, it should be, uh, should be tomorrow or the next day, if that’s okay?
I should interject here that not only is Judge Lackey’s office about 8 miles from the sweet potato capital of the world, this would have been about the time (October) for new crop sweet potatoes, and anyone who knows about that part of the world is aware that getting one from a local, you’re liable to get better ones (the varieties people grow for their own eating rather than to sell to Krogers and Walmart, for instance). Back to your regular programming.
Balducci says that he’d told him “I’d just call and check on it to make sure so you figured by the end of the week they’d be ready.” Judge Lackey says “Yes, sir,” and Balducci says, “OK, well good, good.” Lackey asks about a trip Balducci is planning. Balducci says, “I appreciate you taking care of that,” and “Let me know if I need to get back up with you too.” Lackey says, “I think, uh,” and Balducci responds, “I’ve got to see ya about finishing up on that other deal, so, uh.” Lackey thanks him, and they say goodbye.
Update: The paragraph about the 9/27 Patterson and Balducci calls from the Patterson plea colloquy was added. The conversations on October 7th and 8th were added from the same source.
Speaking of PL Blake does a picture of him exist on the internet? I’ve searched and searched and have turned up empty handed. I can’t even find any info on him as it relates to playing football at Cow College.
I think we almost need one of those “family tree” type things you see with the mob when it comes to all of this.
NMC, like many another, I can’t get over the work you’re turning out here. Does a cloud of blue smoke hang over your computer? Does your dog recognize you anymore? Dang, boy.
irate 1, I’ve come up empty on that too. Maybe some newspaper morgue has an old one somewhere, but that won’t do us a lot of good. But … butbutbut, ya never know when a nice fresh perp-walk might come available, huh (to make our jim’s day-week-and-month)?
When this story broke there was not a google on PL. Not sure to this day the man exist in the context his name is being used
Little is known about him currently it seems, although there are quite a few court cases in which he is involved.
Thats exist.
iratetoday, How many years has that been, or how recent.
Jane who could end probation without restitution being paid…
The court cases where mainly during the 80s. There is a web article that lists all of them. Let me see if I can find it.
If there’s a photo, I guess I could sell copies for the price of postage.
Ayup, reckon you could do a right-smart better’n these fools trying to sell muscadine seeds to Mississippians on this page.
First ad that’s 707ed me.
Oh well, shoot, now it’s changed.
http://www.insurancecoverageblog.com/archives/industry-developments-scruggs-nation-day-14-waiting-for-the-other-shoes-to-drop.html
Here’s the article.
Oh, Rossmiller of the Insurance Coverage Blog will be at MSU in April presenting an insurance CLE.
PL is not passing the smell test..The Nutt firm is the paper pushers, they keep up with money on Dickie’s Dubias Deals, Patterson had connections with former state accountants (who worked for him ) when he was auditor who now work for Nutt…Patterson’s wife is the only person in all wiretap conversations who has contact with PL, except Dickie…Is it not strange for a bag man (who is approving all the slush fund money not to be checking in on a regular basis.Damn I could have never worked at any of these firms.my curosity would have gotten the best of me.
You may have ended up sleepin’ with the fishes!
dear mag: Patterson was an officer at the Mississippi bank when pl Blake took it under with bogus loans he acquired by bribing the bank officers. Dickie scruggs represented pl Blake in his bankruptcy. Blake had to file bankruptcy to avoid his creditors, including the Mississippi bank. Blake had borrowed over 30 million. So Patterson scruggs and Blake go back that far
According to his depo transcripts and dogs, Blake splits his money with republicans tom Anderson and john sears. Anderson was on lott’s staff and also was an ambassador. Sears was campaign manager for Reagan.
So who says this is about corrupt democrats? Its more pervasive than that.
Mississippi should be put under a state of martial law. Every state official should be removed and the whole place should be reconstructed again.
Now here’s a story: why did Trent resign the day before dickie was raided? And why is no one asking that question? And why is he being allowed to open a lobbying firm in Washington?
Confounded we have found our voice..You and I know why he stepped down…Our goverment cut a deal with him. Before any of this come out I was told by someonehe close that a man named anderson shared the first 10million of tobacco money with Langston and Scruggs, I didn’t have a clue who Anderson was.
Confounded, one point of my blog posts is to MAKE PEOPLE ASK THAT QUESTION (about Trent Lott resigning the day before the Scruggs search and two days before the Scruggs indictment).
Let’s say this whole mess crosses all political lines…I think it does.. All those involved should face the music. This non-lawyer has a question. When a new POTUS goes into the WH and let’s say that soon after USA Greenlee is replaced-not unlikely-what happens to this case? Placed on the back burner, dropped, swept under the rug, still pursued or just left to smolder until the clock runs out?
Greenlee won’t be touched in my opinion. NMC: thanks 4 all your work. That might explain why 10 million was laundered through to Blake through langston’s trust account in 1998 or 1999.
1) SOG, I’m going to repeat my consistent theme: Greed is bipartisan.
2) I don’t think a case like this will go to the bank burner. It is being aggressively by career prosecutors in the ND Miss. US Attorney’s office. Greenlee, btw, was in that office through the Clinton era. He is a Republican and appointed by Bush. But I don’t see this case going away.
Also, given the view of the local judges about speedy trial, and the way things are going, I think this case will be moving along. I expect more indictments before the election, and would be shocked if there are not.
you’re welcome, Confounded. There is a lot of this story that has yet to hit the light of day. I want to keep on.
Both enthusiasm and contributions from people who read this blog have contributed a lot to my ability to do that.
I found this today and loved it. It is from KLG’s response to SF who is trying to get rid of it lawyers. . . anyway here it is:
False claims act, case law and common sense … all of which expect and encourage the transmission of information to private attorneys and the government without the knowledge of the company being investigated.
In the American legal system, criminal conduct must be proven and the intent/scienter requirements of the law cannot be disposed of with the two-step 1) "presumed guilty " and 2) guilt by association.
all of this is why I am not impressed by phil bryants lawsuit against langston over the mCi. If phil really cared, why didn’t he look at mike moore tobacco fund years ago? Why did he close his eyes to that and do much more prior to the hood-Hopkins contest?
Why would he care about 14 mil and not care that Moore was getting 20 mil a year that wasn’t going in the state’s trreasury? Anyone want to guess at the answer? I only can guess myself.
My guess is trent and dickie. Since phil never left tobacco alone maybe that’s why Trent backed phil 4 of. Gov. And dickie did not back phil’s opponent. At the same time dickie backed hood but Trent didn’t back al Hopkins.
Phil’s lawsuit on mCi raises more questions than just langston’s fee deal.
Raises hand: I know! I know!
In Re Trent Lott. It is rumored that he attempted to “help” Dickie out regarding the contempt charges in Alabama. I have heard this from several people but rather it is true or not remains to be seen.
One only read Minor’s letter to senate judiciary. Barbour represented tobacco. Hey did you know Alan Lange used to work for Worldcom? Check it out! Trent is out of this deal, he was busy in D.C.
Belle: tell me. . . Inquiring minds want to know
It’s all about all that money going to Democrats. Trent’s not in on that. They want to cut it off at the knees.
Barbour still gets money from his tobacco lobbying firm while he sits in the gov’s mansion!
Belle: by Jove I think you have a good point there too but do you think Trent gets no tobacco money?
A lot of people worked for Worldcom.
Irate, here are some public facts:
1) A district judge in Alabama said “prosecute this guy for contempt.”
2) The district judge’s reasoning is not crazy.
3) Normally U.S. Attorneys want to keep their dist. judges happy.
4) The U.S. Attorney in Alabama has been accused of a notoriously political prosecution and there are a lot of reasons to think she’s a far more political operative than we want in US atty’s.
5) The U.S. Attorney blew off the district judge and declined to prosecute (If anyone here says it was because of Jim Hood’s goofball letter I will scream).
We know all this to be true. No one has adequately explained to me why the US attorney declined to prosecute (I’ll interject here that Scruggs partisans say “it’s because there is no basis for a contempt charge.” well, all right, let’s move on).
I have heard the same things as you have heard– before the DeLaughter story surfaced, I was willing to bet a small amount (a round of drinks at City Grocery bar perhaps) that Trent Lott’s resignation was connected to an inappropriate call to that US atty in the Northern Dist of Alabama. But I can’t tell whether the rumors are just based on people making the same guess from the factors I’ve listed (and thus no better than my own surmise) or whether there’s something more to them.
What do you think? This is probably one of the top 5 issues for surmise and discussion in this scandal right now.
irate I heard that Trent got caught on something during the scruggs wiretaps maybe that was it.
Trent did support Al Hopkins. Held a fundraiser for him on the Coast and gave at least $10,000
And Phil is/was very tight with Moore… Moore appointed him to the Partnership Board and several other “affiliate” boards.
another elaboration on my last comment. Forget the “greed is bipartisan” comment and note what I posted.
There’s an anti-contempt-prosecution take on that mess that is apparently shared by the US Attorney (Republican), Jim Hood (Democrat), and perhaps Trent Lott (Republican).
From my viewpoint, the district judge (in opposition to all of the above) is probably right.
I think that what is required to “keep the eye on the ball” here is to forget partisan politics and focus on what is required to make the system more honest.
Should I be writing Part 5 rather than commenting on part 4?
Sigh.
At least I have some decent port to drink while I’m writing.
well given that Trent was willing to help dickie with delaughter, it is not a great leap to believe trent acted on dickie’s behalf in alabama but I don’t know if it is true.
Nmc: yes!!
yep, confounded.
I have to watch this though because one needs to be wary of guesses that fit one’s prejudices.
And things that are completely false as well.
I think we could raise a plethora of conjectures as to why Trent resigned, but at this point it would be mere speculation. I do think, however, that hearing things from several different sources tends to lend the alleged involvement in the AL contempt charges an iota of weight. Perhaps this will come out on some phone calls or taps.
Turning from Lott I think there’s still a hundred other things we could address that haven’t even been mentioned either at all or very little involving the wipespread corruption in Mississippi.
1. The Commission on Judicial Performance. It appears their own investigator fudged reports. The Commission has effectively swept this under the rug. They dismissed Jenning’s complaint against Patton. Why?
2. Mike Allred. Looks like Delaughter was keeping pleadings under seal to protect Mike’s big crazy ass. What else has Mike been up to? He holds great weight in several jurisdictions with some judges.
3. DeLaughter. Should the Judicial Code be amended so a sitting Judge could be suspended with pay pending the outcome of an investigation or criminal trial, etc.?
4. Former Judge George Bell.
There’s several others who we could discuss as well. Hell if 52 target letters went out as rumored then we will be busy for many many months.
Speaking of politics, I think folo does a fairly decent job of staying above the fray….for the most part!
Irrate, taking yours out of order:
3) Yes. Hell yes. I think there is an unanswerable argument that there is an appearance of impropriety for him to sit till something is resolved.
2) There’s more to write about the Eaton Corp. case and I haven’t got to it yet, but you have a point there. Unfortunately, I have to double back and do some work with Wilson v. Scruggs before I even think about Eaton and Mike Allred.
1) I would credit incompetence with the judicial performance commission and Patton, not malfeasance. However, the speed with which the complaint seems to have been dismissed suggests I may be wrong about that.
Well, I have: (1) found a good Dylan quote for parts five and six (why has no one commented on the degree to which I’ve found dead-on Dylan quotes for each post?
) ; (2) started roughing five out.
“found a good Dylan quote” isn’t quite right. Most have just come to mind.
Well time to turn in. Thanks for all the good work NMC and others. It’s been a hell of a ride so far.
from above…Barbour still gets money from his tobacco lobbying
and coal too, don’t forgethis ties to Southern.
NMC, when you look back at Wilson vs. Scruggs try to dig up Wilson’s deposition of PL Blake – intersting things abound there
I want to see a quote from “Planet Waves” album.
1- I can assure you P.L. exists. For Magnolia.
2-You folks are putting together the Patterson, Blake, Mississippi Bank, Billy Sol Estes, grain bin saga.
3- Just remember these old connections go back for years– some to the J.O. Eastland days.
4–What a great legal/political system we have, and have had, in this state. Any wonder we are dead ass last in everything?
5– We need a dual picture of Blake playing for MSU and Lott cheering for that bastion of justice and politically correct UOM. I do think Blake was gone from MSU (1959) before Lott arrived at UOM (1960?)–I think.
2 additions have been made– on 9/27 and on 10/7 and 10/8, as noted above.
No official in any branch of any government wants to go back and open a real investigation of the tobacco deal. Not the Democrats, not the Republicans, not the lawyers, not the tobacco industry, and especially not the lobbyists who got paydays for promoting and then preventing federal tobacco legislation.
I fear Researcher is probably right.
I think that is one of the reasons we are approaching a stopping point. I once thought there would be bigger fish (and there is) than Scruggs. I think he will do for a “check valve” because of the reasons Researcher points out above. No doubt this thing has longer tentacles but it is about time to cut them–I fear.
Jim– Researcher’s point about the tobacco cases does not mean this thing is over by any means. There are other directions it seems clearly headed.
I hope that you are correct. I just have a strange feeling and as you well know I was on the front line when it comes to how vast, wide and deep this thing could become–maybe my current strange feelings are a result of why I had my original feelings? If that last statement makes any sense to anyone other than myself?
Question, and this may be something I’ve missed in all of this thus far, but… what is it that Balducci and Patterson are expecting to receive as “compensation” for “getting the horse sold?” The comment of “We’ve got 40 coming from Scruggs’ ". " by Patterson—isn’t that referring to the $40K that will go to Lackey—or is that what they’re expecting to receive as a fee also?
My thoughts, I’ve wondered the same thing. It’s clear that Balducci got Scruggs to make some calls for him as a part of this, and I think that’s all connected to the Black farmer legislation I’ve mentioned. But I don’t see any sign of any cash going to P&B out of this. I think the $40K was the bribe money and that’s it.
I tried to follow the money – they had already paid $20K when Balducci picked up the $40K and somewhere there was mention of other money.
It’s hard to read a lot about this case and not see conversations and other evidence as “oranges” instead of “apples” – the money is an example of things that just don’t add up.