The government has filed its responses. The first one up is a response on whether to sever Zach and Backstrom (whether they get separate trials). For those wondering about how the government will deal with the selective transcripts, there’s footnote one, a very newsy footnote that tells us among other things that we’ll see the 90 minute transcript as a part of these responses: Here’s the footnote:
In their recitation of the evidence defendants select isolated events and snippets of conversations, upon which is superimposed a distorted interpretation and a demand that this myopic view is somehow exculpatory and should be considered by the Court alone, to the exclusion of the entire volume of evidence to be presented at trial. An example of this tactic can be found at page 18, paragraphs 18-19 of Backstrom’s Motion for Severance as relates to the consensually recorded telephone conversation between Balducci and Backstrom on November 13, 2007. …
In context, Balducci is bringing Backstrom up to date reviewing the fact that “we’ve” given him (Judge Lackey) fifty (thousand dollars) to order the case of arbitration, but broaches the possibility that for more money the judge would keep the case and ultimately dismiss against Scruggs, et al. Backstrom ruminates that if “we overreach again” that it might come back to “bite us.” Backstrom decides to stick with arbitration rather than to “do something exotic.” As opposed to evidence of exculpatory behavior, the November 13th conversation is clear evidence of the knowledge and participation of co-conspirators to bribe Judge Lackey.
Other examples abound, such as the November 1, 2007, consensual recordings between Balducci, Zach Scruggs and Backstrom, and Balducci and Richard Scruggs, the transcript of which is attached as a part of a response to other motions filed in this case.
Here’s the Government Response on Motion to Sever and here’s the Transcript, Balducci and Backstrom 11-13 phone call. More later!
Richard IUBE… must be the IUPE we were all looking for… former LA AG, FOD (friend of Dickie)
Woot..Woot Figured it out.
Ugh! Feel like I need a bath after reading that transcript. What a pair of jackasses.
Kentucky Deal with Joey????Balducci and Joey was crossed // Does anyone know what happened there.
Who is TIM CANTRELL?
Kentucky must be the fen-phen litigation in Kentucky. Three attorneys up there have already been indicted for mishandling clients’ settlements. Joey’s brother is involved in that litigation as well.
Yep, we gonna see some more indictments before this is over.
I think Kentucky is the fen-phen. I’ve all but one motion up now, just lack the motion to dismiss response
Doing great as usual… you’re amazing
For some reason the Kentucky settlement of fen-phen was sent to MS. for settlement, but the fee money disappeared into lawyer coffers of high ranken political friends. Up until I read this it had been mere speculation, but something happened to put Balducci/Langston/Scruggs in the crosshairs.
I’m probably jumping the gun, as it hasn’t all sunk in for me either yet, but…. at the end of the day, which defense motions (if any) do you think have a shot or the best shot? The ones to pull Sid and Zach out of this for their own party? The venue?
Wondering what you lawyers think about that…
I think they’re all losers My Thoughts
Well, didn’t take so long after all!
Thanks…. for everything NMC
Add a third vote. I think the defense motions are all losers.
In re: Iube above
It appears to be spelled Ieyoube, and is pronounced eye-yoob, with the accent on the first syllable.
Got it, NMC… thanks for the directions
I just did a new post about the personalities here. I guess it’s my daily snark.
Where did Richard Ieyoube come up? Did I overlook him in the transcript and the Response?
He’s in several places, Curious. First, there’s a transcript where Steve Patterson and Balducci talk about someone transcribed as Iube. It’s so cryptic that there is a comment thread about what this can possibly mean (I’ll dig out a link if you can’t find it, although searching Iube should get you there. On the transcripts released today, I think the 11/1 one, Balducci explains an of-counsel deal he’d worked out with the guy.
I’m VERY VERY CURIOUS about that one. There are some serious possible connections here I’m not willing to go public with quite yet. Anyone who has a clue about Richard Ieyoube connections write me at nmisscommentor@gmail.com
Can anyone tell me what time is the hearing tomorrow at the federal courthouse in Oxford?
Thanks, NMC, I found it. I’m very interested in this development, but have no clue how these LA/MS connections came together.
Wasn’t it “IUPE” with a p in the earlier transcript? And some of y’all knew of an Iupe family of drycleaners or something?
Anyhow, I been tickled by a few other of the FBI transcriber’s guesses too. Can’t remember the one that made me LOL, though, drat.
NMC, though many of your other habits are good, I just hafta accept that you’re fooken hopeless as a proofreader. But dang, boy, when you pass out your email addy, at least check that one! Ain’t nobody but Misss Ssssally gonna find you at “nmsss …”
(mutter mutter mutter)
Yes, it was Iupe. I’m not familiar with any Iupe drycleaners, but they had a clothing store in Canton for many years, and I’ve noticed a new Iupe establishment open on Highway 51 in Madison. I didn’t think the Iupes I know would have any connection to Scruggs. Ieyoub makes a heck of a lot more sense.
Ah, thanks, MSlawyer. (Knew the name had something to do with clothes, just couldn’t recall whether selling or cleaning them.)
The old google turned up a lot of news stories about Scruggs stuff today, including a couple of opinion pieces in the Clarion-Ledger, an article by Jerry Mitchell, one by Anita Lee, etc. etc. None as informative as what NMC has already provided. Sid Salter’s piece is pretty interesting.
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080220/COL0412/802200329/1144
And so is the other editorial.
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080220/OPINION01/802200325/1007
One of the Iupe’s family members owns a ladies clothing store….now THAT would be a funny twist if we added some cross-dressing drag queen ball to the mix.
“Not that there’s anything wrong with it.”Seinfeld
well, since you brought the subject up, razor 27:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1073879
snips:
Judge Robert Somma, a Newbury resident, pleaded no contest to the drunken driving charge in New Hampshire and agreed to have his license suspended for 12 months, the Manchester Union Leader reported.
The Union Leader reported yesteday that Somma crashed his Mercedes into the rear of a car stopped on Elm Street after leaving a bar in the city last week.
When cops arrived, the paper reported, Somma was wearing a cocktail dress, fishnet stockings, women’s heels and fumbled through a purse for his driver’s license.
Jerry’s article in the CL about all of yesterday’s motions doesn’t mention or quote Scruggs and Balducci talking about the extra 10k. And some folks are letting him have it, lol. Don’t understand why he didn’t use that quote.
Now let’s see, ducky 28 . . . who was it named Somma to the federubble bench?