UPDATED BELOW
A lawyer charged with trying to bribe a Mississippi judge claims a key government witness lied to the grand jury that indicted him.
Attorney Zach Scruggs asked a federal judge Monday to dismiss the indictment due to “prosecutorial misconduct.”
Scruggs, whose father and law partner, Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, also faces a judicial bribery charge, says grand jurors heard false and misleading testimony from witnesses in the case.
Zach Scruggs claims attorney Timothy Balducci’s testimony mischaracterized his knowledge of the alleged conspiracy to bribe state Circuit Judge Henry Lackey.
The younger Scruggs also accuses FBI Special Agent William Delaney of giving grand jurors a misleading account of taped conversations between the suspects in the case. …
Got PACER, NMC or anybody?
UPDATE: While we wait for NMC to start dishing it up hot from PACER, here’s a longer version of the AP story as our horse-doovers (sorry, I can’t spell “hors d’oeuvres”).
wow it took zach almost 2 weeks since balducci and delaney’s testimony to come up with this? Methinks zach is signaling a willingness to roll on dear ole dad.
How so, confounded?
Just talked to NMC, who says this is 200 pages worth of “gold-mine” on PACER, so stand by for mo’ fun.
In the meantime
“It has been clear since the filing of this indictment that the government has no credible evidence that (Scruggs) knowingly participated in any scheme to bribe a judge,” says a motion Scruggs’ attorneys filed today in U.S. District Court.”
http://www.sunherald.com/185/story/408339.html
because he is in my opinion breaking ranks with dad and sid and saying hey I wasn’t involved, rather than saying hey WE are not guilty. Just my opinion.
Wups, sorry, Seacrest, I didn’t see you already had that link — owe ya a Coke.
As Sid stays resolutely mum, confounded. Meaning I need to take a number and queue up to borrow your handle, I suppose.
confounded-
here’s what i think: This move is completely consistent with a united front, particularly with his father. If he gets the indictment dismissed, Zach makes the next stage simpler.
OTOH, I don’t think it likely to work (but have not studied the motion yet) and think it really likely to annoy the opposition.
oh, and the fascinating stuff is less than 200 pp
Didn’t the recorded conversation between Zach and Balducci in which he rationalizes the bribe because of the other issues including State Farm lock up Zach’s involvement?
Does anybody want to place a side bet that a motion to disqualify the judge is coming sooner or later?
interesting question NAAS. I’ll have to say I’d bet no, but that’s not to mean it isn’t an interesting long shot.
nmc: you may be right.
Confounded at 5
For what it’s worth I had a similar feeling, but my gut reaction was this was a warning shot to Blackstorm. DS in my opinion is going to protect his son and I thought I heard the sounds of the bus coming around the corner in that motion.
After reading the transcripts and Sid Blackstrom’s wording in them would it not be probable that he may be thinking, “I’ve done alot of work while these two prima donnas have talked the talk and I’ve been walking the walk for a lot less money so I’m bailing before they cut a deal for Junior and leave me hanging.”
Razor, if he’s just now thinking that, I submit he’s about three months late.
There’s got to be something important we can’t see or guess about Sid’s situation, or his silence so far makes no sense.
I didn’t follow The Minor Trial but knew DS was up to his AR-SE in alligators and was never indicted. HE WAS The Gothan Lawyer untouchable, and Sid Bachstrom was a lowly employee who knew this was wrong , but unless he has a strong bright lawyer just may end up taking every bit of the blame and Dickie and Zack walks.
I don’t think Zach’s counsel works independently. I’m thinking they’re DS puppets on a string. Looks like an attempt to get Zach out of the way and then DS will throw Sid under a bus. I was thinking how uncomfortable and alone Sid must be since he probably knows pretty well how DS operates. I can’t believe there is nothing of value he can’t trade.
Lotus- Usually the best deal is the one made right before the transaction ends. Timing is everything and Sid knows that the Feds will welcome him right up until the end, so why not play the proverbial “both ends against the middle” game. If he pleads too early he misses out on the long shot of DS/ZS getting it all booted out and still retains his right to turn a trick right before the clock ticks GAME OVER. You know its the “quite ones” that usually cause the most ruckus.
Sid will cut a deal …. maybe soon. The closer it gets to deadline and more likely it is that DS and ZS are going to trial the more likely that Sid cuts a deal. He can not afford to sitting at their table at a trial. On the other hand, if they both plea who really cares about little ole Sid. maybe he do no jail time. He will have to let this play out unless it likes like they are really going to trial.
Seacrest– I am for a variety of reasons operating on the assumption that they (Backstrom’s lawyers) are not Scruggs puppets. I just don’ t think that is so. They are making strategic and tactical decisions that (from outside) I’m not buying, but that’s a different analysis. They are still in the bounds of what I’d call legitimate differences of opinion.
["Balducci testified that he told Backstrom and Zach Scruggs that Lackey wanted "another $10,000 €³ and they said it would be no problem when in fact Balducci said that Lackey wanted "another bushel of sweet potatoes, " which would not have meant anything to Zach if he did not know about the bribery scheme".]
Hmmm, let’s think. Have any other defendants in any other crimes, ever used code words to describe their criminal activities, and then tried to avoid punishment by saying they didn’t know what the code words meant?
Well, except for pretty much every drug dealer ever caught on a wiretap or in an undercover scheme, not all that many thousand more. Anybody here think drug dealers say the word “cocaine hydrochloride” when they are talking about buying and selling drugs? Or do you think they use code words like “blow”, “girl”, “white”, “cars”, “bricks”, or “fried chicken” instead?
It’s fun watching rich white guys commit crimes where they think they have thought up something new, or are being clever.
I suspect Sid will want to protect his family’s financial future. Now, what he can do towards that end is where he will go.