In Patsy Brumfield’s latest report (h/t Seacrest), we read:
In its delay motion filed Friday in U.S. District Court, the government asks to continue [Steve] Patterson’s sentencing until after the trial "to enable " him "to substantially assist the government and to provide him with an incentive to do so. "
I ask y’all more experienced in the genre: Is this “and to provide him with an incentive to do so” phrase mere customary boilerplate, or is it there more purposefully this time, suggesting that Patterson actually does need more convincing? I accept the risk of feeling a little silly (again) if, come to find out, it is just S.O.P. boilerplate, since
(a) Patsy’s report on the parallel motions re Joey Langston and Tim Balducci doesn’t contain this language,
(b) no one (that we know of) has ever accused Steve of high wattage,
(c) his wife Deborah apparently ain’t exactly a font of wisdom either, and
(d) as late as three days ago, Patterson attorney Hiram Eastland “could not confirm that Balducci and Patterson tried to persuade [Jim] Hood to withhold criminal charges against State Farm. "
These perceived deficits notwithstanding, Patterson’s ties to Ed Peters, P.L. Blake, and other Mississippi- and D.C.-based figures of interest in Scruggsiana make him a crucial enough dot-connector for investigators that at least the non-crim-law-specialists among us may understand my WTF.
Oh, and while we deal with mine on Patterson, David Rossmiller and commenters are dealing with his re Judge Vinson’s dismissal of the Alabama contempt charge . . . so watch out, it’s going around.
This is just standard operating procedure. Patterson is not going to be sentenced until after all of the trials and investigations (assuming there are others ongoing, which is a pretty safe bet) are over. The same goes for Balducci and Langston. I don’t see the different language as being significant. They are pretty much all in the same boat.
And, Hiram Eastland, should not be answering any questions like that about what Patterson can or can’t testify to. That is the U.S. Attorney’s prerogative, now. And, Patterson backing up at this point, would just make him a punching bag for the USAO. It’s too late for that for him.
As far as the Alabama case, I never really got into that one too much (just can’t spend all my free time reading about Dickie Scruggs’ legal troubles, LOL).
Ah well, observer, we can call it the Lotus-Channels-Emily-Litella Post then: Nebbermind.
Let’s see, what else can we yak about today?
Here’s somethin: Your European visitors might especially enjoy this little report on the heirship to Bluesman Robert Johnson’s estate. I want to know where I can read a copy of Justice Mike Mills’ opinion.
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080229/COL0410/802290312/1144/archive
“Born in Hazlehurst in 1911, Robert grew up in the Delta but quit being a field hand to pick his guitar for parties. On a visit to Lincoln County in 1931 he sired Claud out of wedlock in a woodland frolic with 17-year-old Virgie Jane Smith, while another lovemaking couple looked on. (That became a key legal point in establishing Claud’s birthright.)
…
When Kitchens was hired by Claud to push his claim in the estate case a distant cousin had started, Kitchens wisely took video depositions with the aging Virgie Jane, as well as the still-sharp Eula Mae Williams, her companion in the 1931 two-couple tryst. Eula Mae gave an account of the lovemaking, which Virgie Jane confirmed.
A Leflore County Chancery Judge in 1998 declared Claud Johnson’s biological son and the estate’s sole heir. It was upheld in 2000 by the state Supreme Court (with a hilarious opinion by then-Justice Mike Mills) and even the U.S. Supreme Court.
As they say, this should be made into a movie. Well, it will be: HBO is producing one and Claud and Jim Kitchens will be in it.”
Hi, ducky. Doncha know NMC will be interested in this too, even though he’s not a Euro. In fact, I think he was the one who sent me a link to a similar story awhile back. Bet he still has that — and maybe the Mills opinion too (which could have been what he sent me, now that I think about it).
Lotus, your observations re Patterson are keen.
Many may have forgotten that when he entered his guilty plea before the judge, after he admitted his guilt, he appeared to then try to say that he wasn’t really guilty. And he had his lawyer insert some language in the plea to suggest that his guilt was somehow less than the others’ guilt(and now that we have all seen the wire taped transcripts, we know that is a bald faced lie of great magnitude).
This man’s arrogance knows no bounds. I think he is playing games with the prosecutors and trying to have it both ways —plead guilty to avoid a trial and harsh sentence, but at the same time profess his innocence and fail to cooperate fully with the prosecutors. He is a true scoundrel among scoundrels, one of the worst in the lot, IMO.
And if he fails to deliver the goods, I hope the judge fails to follow the plea deal and sends his fat arrogant ass to prison for most of the rest of his crooked life. Let him “lobby” within prison to stay alive and well.
And keep in mind that since he is not a lawyer, punishment in the form of taking away a law license is not an option. The only punishment he will get will be from the fine and prison time upon his sentence stemming from his guilty plea. And the deal he worked out insulates him from further federal prosecutions. And God only knows what other crooked activities he has committed in other matters. I seriously doubt this Lackey matter was his first rodeo.
After he gets out of prison, he could theoretically go right back to doing what he has always done — illegal and shady “lobbying”. And I think he still delusionally thinks he can do just that at some point in the future, while arguing that he really wasn’t guilty and only pled guilty to avoid going down with those other real criminals.
Not a Steve fan, huh, afotl? I lack grounds to disagree.
Here’s a little something from the Small World Department: I found a little dog running loose in the Belhaven neighborhood (Jackson) yesterday and took him back to the address on his collar. Damned if Johnny Jones didn’t answer the door.
I wanted to tell him, “Johnny Jones, we be talkin’ about you all the time over at the folo blog. We all be speculatin’ and stuff.” But I didn’t.
Haw, Dragoman, I wonder if Johnny J doesn’t have a face to go with your handle now. (As long as we all be speculatin’ and stuff. It’s our bes’ trick.)
Well, I think he was upstairs taking a nap, so he was draggin’ a little bit.
In the old days, though, a dragoman was a Turkish interpreter or translator. I ain’t no Turk, though, nor no drag queen, if anyone’s speculatin’ about that. Not that there’s anything wrong with…you know.
Always have been intrigued by your handle, Dragoman. How’d you arrive at it?
Well, lotus, some years ago I read this book called “Lords of the Horizons” by Jason Goodwin; it’s about the Ottoman Empire.
Anyway, I was interested in the sultan’s various court functionaries, like dragomans and such. I guess I just liked the word, and you don’t get much of a chance to toss it around in everyday conversation, so I decided that using it as my handle would be a way of getting it out there. I sure don’t do no translatin’ or interpretin’ in my daily life, though, like a real dragoman.
Have you ever been to Turkey, Dragoman? If not, I hope you get there sometime (and that I get back). It’s pretty dang wonderful.
That’s what I understand, lotus. My godson, his parents and siblings vacation there often. They like some of the beaches and resorts on the Mediterranean side. They’re Germans, and apparently Turkey is a big vacation destination for Germans. I guess those old Central Powers ties die hard, huh?
I sure would like to get over there myself sometime.
Gawd, it’s been 35+ years since I was there (*gasp*), but the wonderful people, food, and general gorgeousness of the scene — historical and contemporary — all stick with me. I think it’s a good deal more touristed-up now, but nothing’s ever gonna McDonalds-ize Turkey too much, I’ll wager.
duckweed: You can find the original Mills opinion here and the final opinion, also by Mills, here. Enjoy.
Big thanks, soms. You don’t forget Ms. Williams’ testimony once you’ve read it (or fail to imagine the mirth in her eyes and the pity in her voice), do you?
But I do wonder whether Mills and Banks, JJ., are back on speaking terms again by now . . .
Thank you soms! How funny!
I am doing tedious work this weekend and that sure did lift my spirits.
lotus, dragonman, (turkish translator)
Anyone heard of Sibel Edmonds?