Major Update by NMC
There is now a 4 part series of posts on Tim Balducci’s testimony I’ve posted. It can be found as follows:
Balducci testifies on the Motion to Dismiss, part 1
The 3/28 meeting and Lackey’s recusal: Balducci testifies on the Motion to Dismiss, part 2
Balducci testifies on Motion to dismiss, part 3: More about the March meetings
Balducci testifies on Motion to Dismiss, part 4: June-September
Balducci talks about Trent Lott and Bribing Judge DeLaughter, Balducci testimony Part 5
Update below
Balducci, who already has pleaded guilty in the case, began the morning proceedings before a packed courtroom by testifying about what he did in conjunction with the Scruggs firm and his offer of a bribe to Circuit Judge Henry Lackey.
In an unusual move, government prosecutors turned over Balducci[']s grand jury testimony to defense attorney John Keker.
I do surmise that that last graf promises more fun for folo than for Team Scruggs, but I guess ya never know . . .
UPDATE: H/t to My Thoughts for the Clarion-Ledger story, first out with some details on Balducci’s testimony.
amicus, here’s a story somebody told me via email a few weeks back:
When Trent Lott caught wind of the investigation and went to DoJ to try to stop it (according to this emailer, whose identity has now slipped me in the rush of a few thousand since) . . . supposedly Mukasey told him he had 72 hours to resign or face an obstruction-of-justice charge. Well sir, within 72 hours, it was November 26, 2007 . . .
Per Jerry Mitchel article: “Balducci said this morning that it was Zach Scruggs, who was aware that Lackey was a mentor to Balducci, who suggested Balducci have an off-the-record conversation with Lackey and persuade him to rule in their favor.
After that discussion, Balducci met with Lackey March 28. During the conversation, he said he mentioned the possibility of Lackey, who was nearing retirement, coming to work for Scruggs. He said it wasn’t intended as a quid pro quo, but sees how Lackey may have interpreted it that way.”
Also…
”
"Did Judge Lackey make you commit a crime you didn’t want to commit? " U.S. Assistant Attorney Bob Norman asked Balducci.
"No, sir, " Balducci said.”
Per Mitchell’s article…. “He (Balducci) recalled a meeting at Scruggs’ law firm involving him, Scruggs, Scruggs’ son Zach, law partner Sidney Backstrom and former State Auditor Steve Patterson. At some point the conversation turned to a legal fees dispute involving a Hurricane Katrina case.”
So, guess we can expect Patterson to testify as well that it was Zach’s idea for Balducci to approach Lackey.
WLBT in Jackson just reporting in breaking news (televised report) that Biggers refuses to dismiss charges against ScruggsCo.
All of them, Bud, or just the one NMC just now reported?
They only referred to the bribery charges. No more specific than that.
Thanks, Bud. Worth a guess that they got that garbled.
TV reportage. What you see is often what you don’t get.
Just broke for lunch…it’s been kinda fun. I like this part:
Norman: “Was there something that led you to believe you would be able to get the 40k from Scruggs?”
Balducci: “I was privy to conversations on another matter when Scruggs bribed another judge to solve another matter.”
In cross by Keker..
“Who was the judge?”
Balducci: “Judge Delaughter”
Keker: “Who was he bribed by?”
Balducci: “Dickie Scruggs”
Keker: How was he bribed?
Balducci: “Scruggs offered the influence of his brother-in-law (Trent) Lott to put him on the list for consideration for a federal judgeship (?) … Mr. Lott called Delaughter at Scrugg’s request … being considered to be put on the list ..”
YUM, Alyssa!
Ugly for Lott
WLBT just previewed Hood’s presser that goes down in about 5 minutos. Hood is going to try and set the record straight, again.
Anyways, WLBT reporter mentioned that Hood is taking a beating in the blogs.
As I mentioned lotus, our traditional print and TV outfits can’t keep up with this pace. They’ll keep following the blogs as long as the blogs lead.
WLBT:
OXFORD, Miss. (AP) – A federal judge has declined to dismiss an indictment in a judicial bribery case against powerful Mississippi plaintiffs attorney Richard “Dickie” Scruggs and two others.
U.S. District Judge Neal Biggers Jr. ruled Wednesday that there was enough evidence that Scruggs and the others participated in a scheme to bribe a sitting Mississippi judge for the case to go to trial.
UPDATE: I see that WLBT was merely parroting the AP. They read the story on the air almost verbatim.
Or we can pretend we’re in Cafe Braunerhof (see header photo), reading this version in the IHT.
Lotus: Have heard same thing except Lott went higher than DOJ down the street, all calls into this particular office are recorded, there are two phone calls concerning trying to stop it.
Well, amicus, I can’t vouch for my source’s source, so how about yours? Not sure I’d give Mukasey that much credit, myself.
D’ya mean Trent called BushCo twice, or somebody called him twice to shut him up? Or one from each side?
Did the DOJ agree or make a deal with Lott to not prosecute if he resigned. If they indeed did this , what is this called ? Need someone to fill in the blanks….
mag, what this is called is “a rumor” — so let’s not get too wrapped around it just yet.
Lotus: I truly would hate to clarify becuase of the inability to confirm the “rumor”, but can say came from someone who would have good access to such info
Well, amicus, we certainly can confirm that this one’s out-and-about pretty broadly by now, huh?
But that’s all I know to say about it.
alyssa #10 – why would keker follow that trail? or rather why did he? what was he trying to do other than screw Scruggs’ in another case?
MSLawyer @ 24, Keker’s using this hearing as an opportunity to learn as much as he can about the government’s case. Depositions are rarely ever allowed in criminal cases, and there are no interrogatories or requests for admission. So this is his best shot at discovery.
Much better to hear this for the first time at a motion hearing than during trial.
Bingo, OMTL– this is like a preliminary hearing. He’s using it very well and very wisely. Balducci bloodied him a couple of times on cross– better now than in front of a jury. He also got all of the Jenks material relating to Balducci, a major thing– in this district you ordinarily get that stuff during trial
Perhaps Keker is trying to demonstrate to his client(who may not listen to him) just how bad things really are so he will take a deal.
Very good points.. and since it’s not looking as if the wiretaps will be thrown out….Scruggs may need the proverbial brick dropped on his head
And a teaser that his brother-in-law could come tumbling down along with him in this whole thing. But since it apparently doesn’t bother him that his son his tied to his ankle now as well, though Zach now seems to have purchased the rope.
Irony is so much fun… this is what the press hoopla from Hood was about:
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080220/NEWS/80220021
Well, the blog hoopla anyway . . .
Wonder what they choked down at lunch? Did they recess for lunch or is it over for today? I bet Scruggsie is cussing a blue cat at the law office, if he ordered in. I,too, heard about Lott’s call up, but not to DOJ, further up, and then his quick retirement. None of that surprises me as from years ago, he and Dickie were involved in going after non-profit or for profit hospitals, or something like that. Lott provided him (Dickie) with contacts and worked together to go after them. This has been years ago though. I’ll be checking up on this and posting a link, if I find it.
Hmm, Ht52. Naw, they went into afternoon session at 1:15, your time (or MS time anyway).
They just need to make sure they’re finished by 7:00… State v. Ole Miss basketball game in Oxford tonight.
was Dickie, Zach and Sid in the courtroom or has anybody said?
All three defendants were in the courtroom. Along with about a dozen lawyers.
Looks like Trent got off easy.
Ok, found an article on Lott from Harper’s Magazine published 12/07/07 by Scott Horton. ‘I have learned that the criminal investigation that produced the indictments may have a connection with events that rattled Washington only 36 hours before a team of FBI agents descended upon the Scruggs Law Firm in Oxford, when Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, who just secured reelection last year and had five years left on his term to serve, suddenly and dramatically announced that he was resigning from the Senate to pursue other objectives. His explanations produced blank stares. Washington insiders who were close to Lott rushed to explain that due to changes in lobbying restrictions, Lott would benefit from a transition to a K Street practice by leaving before year’s end. Others were unconvinced. ( "Something’s seriously the matter, " one Republican strategist told me, "but I don’t have an inkling what it is. ") ‘
‘Here’s one scenario, which two senior law enforcement figures in Mississippi told me was "more than simply plausible. " The FBI had secured warrants to monitor Scruggs’s phone calls early in the course of the case, during the summer or early fall. In some of those conversations Dickie Scruggs asked for his brother-in-law’s help in fighting off Judge Acker’s attempts to have him prosecuted. Trent Lott picked up the phone and spoke with a few friends in the Justice Department …or perhaps even directly with a U.S. Attorney or two in Alabama, or a senator from Alabama …and asked them to lay off his misbehaving brother-in-law. My examination of prosecutions in Alabama over the last two years …of which the Siegelman case is the most notable …show that in few places in the country are the federal prosecutors’ offices so politically charged and motivated as in Alabama.’
‘If the FBI was listening in, and it gathered information that Lott had tried to influence the situation to help bail out his brother-in-law, that would raise major issues. Politicians should not try to influence the course of specific criminal cases. Such interventions are not normally grist for a criminal investigation. Most likely they would evolve into an ethics investigation inside of Congress. Was Trent Lott facing this prospect when he decided to step down? (If that’s so, then his resignation parallels very closely that of Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico, who was in just that predicament.) ‘
That said, the two prominent figures in the Mississippi legal community mentioned above told me that Lott has recently engaged a well-regarded local criminal lawyer to advise him on some questions relating to the Scruggs case. There’s no crime in hiring a lawyer, but it does point to Senator Lott having on-going dealings with the U.S. Attorney handling the Scruggs case.’
‘Might the prosecutors have asked Trent Lott, one of Washington’s political titans, to resign as part of a deal? A week ago I would have found that very far-fetched, but now I am not so sure. ‘
I disagree—I’d say that things haven’t even started for Trent.
But if he only had to resign that’s getting off easy. He he tried to use his power to get them to ease off Dickie he needs an adjoining cell.
Amen MyT…or any of the other scoundrels…
Might get real interesting real quick if the Feds ever move forward with other expected indictments
I think with that statement on the stand this morning, you saw Balducci standing on the top of a hill, in front of a ball with the name “Trent” on it… and Balducci touched the ball juuuuust enough to start it rolling down the hill.
Ht52 (and others new around here), try “Lott” in folo’s search box at upper left and you’ll get that Scott Horton post and several more . . .
Nice image, MT 43. Yup, nailed it.
Makes you wonder if Lott should be in the same breath with Peters, Blake, Delaughter, Langston, what a tangled web we weave
I know how I feel about the ethics end—I think everyone gets to make up their own minds/opinions about that… but lawyers, where can Lott’s actions cross the line to criminal, whereby charges can/should be expected?
None of this group figured on the bloggers. To have a site like FOLO where lawyers are also bloggers along with workaday Mississippian’s was beyond their scope.
I agree with all the speculation regarding the ex-Senator from the Coast; however, one mitigating factor to be considered is that someone named “Chet Lott” registered the domain name “breauxlott.com” on October 16, 2007. http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=breauxlott.com So, there is some evidence he was pretty far along in his thinking about leaving the Senate in October. He would have waited most likely to the bitter end of 2007 to avoid the controversy over his replacement and the timing of the election. In the end, I suspect all this mess made it an easier (and earlier) decision.
And none of this refutes or supports the question of whether he has ever spoken to the most honorable judge in Hinds County, as alleged in open court.
Guess it all depends on the conversation Dickie and Lott had as to DeLaughter.
And the results of those conversations, I would imagine. Did Trent ACT on anything and then if that act were illegal, beyond just being unethical. However, can any ethics sanctions be brought against him? I hate it when folks get by on a technicality!
Check out the new post upstairs — Lott-a details from the AP.
Just off nola ap
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-37/1203539973306480.xml&storylist=louisiana
sorry L was researching when I found this and then posted w/o looking at your post above.
Delta N…his first name is Chester…but that too is interesting. Just a note, think of Scruggsie’s problems not yet vented in this case, ie, Alabama and others.
The BreauxLott registration can be explained by the fact that John Breaux and Trent Lott have been long-time friends and Washington neighbors. Chet Lott and Breaux’s son grew up together and both were working as lobbyists before Trent’s resignation. Putting Breaux’s name first may be because he was a Dem and they are in power now, but it may be because Chet was the junior member of the proposed firm in which the former La. Senator was the lead rainmaker.