folo

EX-Celsior! Sun Herald publishes the sentencing transcript

June 27th, 2008 @ 5:56 pm - by lotus · 27 Comments

Tags: McClatchy
Filed Under: Herald & Examiner

27 Responses so far ↓

1. lotus says:

   June 27, 2008 at 6:44 pm

   Zach’s case of the willies starts here:

   … The Court finds that there were five or more people involved. The defendants question whether Zack Scruggs is one of the five. The Court finds that, although he has not been convicted or pled guilty as a conspirator, the statute does not require a conspirator – - five people to be conspirators. The statute requires that at least five be participants in aiding in the crime in some way.

   And the Court finds that Zach Scruggs was a participant. He looked at the order, proposed order, made comments on it before it was to be submitted to Judge Lackey; and he was there when this scheme first started. Some people have called that first meeting a scheme to earwig. Some have called it the first part of the conspiracy.

   But whatever it was, when the defendant and these others, Zach Scruggs and Mr. Backstrom and Mr. Patterson and Mr. Balducci, got together for the purpose of sending Balducci over to talk to Judge Lackey, in this Court’ s mind, that was the starting of the scheme to corrupt the integrity of the Lafayette County Circuit Court.

   Whether money was talked about or whether it was a job that was talked about, a monthly stipend to have your name on the letterhead was talked about, they were sending somebody who was not a lawyer in the case over to see a judge to try to persuade him to rule in favor of Mr. Scruggs for whatever reason. And the Court finds that there were five or more people and that was the attempt – - the start of the scheme to corrupt. …
2. shaveswithaoccamsrazor says:

   June 27, 2008 at 6:54 pm

   In military terms what the judge did was hollar, “INCOMING.”
3. BoynamedSioux says:

   June 27, 2008 at 7:30 pm

   as a small town lawyer that never had the chance to reach for the golden ring that these guys had in their hands, and in sympathy for them that found that golden ring, i say justice has been done. opportunties are there if one if is willing sell your soul. they sold. they pay.
4. ccvz says:

   June 27, 2008 at 7:38 pm

   Does Dickie now not have to cooperate that much when any questions come up regarding DeLaughter?
5. Only When I Laugh says:

   June 27, 2008 at 7:46 pm

   The Clarion Ledger quotes Mike Moore as follows:

   Moore said after the sentencings that federal prosecutors are recommending probation for Zach Scruggs. He is scheduled to be sentenced July 2.

   “This is tragedy after tragedy after tragedy,” Moore said. “Unfortunately, there’s nothing good that comes of this.”

   How, exactly, is this a tragedy? Or a tragedy to the third power? It was intentional conduct aimed at making more money for rich folk and screwing your co-counsel out of money in the process. As Judge Biggers noted, at least the elder Scruggs entered into this behavior with some ease. Certainly we haven’t forgotten Zach’s comment that his Daddy could get motions granted in another matter even if they were written on a napkin. Sounds kinda easy, doesn’t it?

   I will agree with Moore that nothing good has come out of this for his buddies, but then crimes hopefully turn out that way. I think that’s why most folks sorta shy away from committing them.
6. Confounded says:

   June 27, 2008 at 7:59 pm

   on WLBT interview Mike Moore contradicted Biggers and said this was just one isolated incident. Nothing good could come of all this (referring to the sentence I presume).
7. dmwriter says:

   June 27, 2008 at 9:43 pm

   I have looked into Jones V. Scruggs. If anybody wants to check it out click my link.
8. NMC says:

   June 27, 2008 at 10:43 pm

   What does Mike Moore think he’s doing?!? This is not calculated to help his client next week.
9. shaveswithaoccamsrazor says:

   June 27, 2008 at 10:57 pm

   Flashbulb thinks he’s invincible too. Somewhat similar to Icarus would be my analogy. He doen’t realize that his feathers were primarily supplied by Dickie and they’ve worn a little thin. Bless his heart.
10. curious georgette says:

    June 27, 2008 at 11:09 pm

    NMC, any thoughts on which of Zach’s lawyers is likely to do the talking at his sentencing next week? It seems they all have a downside at this point.

    I must be out of synch with everybody else, but I am suprised that these sentences are as long as they are.
11. supergreg says:

    June 27, 2008 at 11:48 pm

    Few thoughts…

    Keker realized a little too late that he may have taken the fallen angel spiel a bit too far, but at least he picked up on it at the sentencing hearing- Moore, not so much. The allusion to Faulkner and Percy, however, was nauseating.

    Khayat made a mockery of himself and the University. His presence at the hearing made it worse for Dick. Khayat’s letter was without a doubt the reason that Judge Biggers added the cost of confinement to the sentence, appropriately imo.

    Without a doubt, Biggers put a great deal of thought into crafting the sentence and in articulating his reasons in support of it.

    Also, no one seems to acknowledge that rich people give to charitable causes to avoid paying some taxes. I am not discounting that generally, but Dick’s benevolence was not completely altruistic.

    Zach is screwed. He ain’t gonna get a sentence on papers.
12. Tim says:

    June 28, 2008 at 8:46 am

    Getting the Transcript has nothing to do with McClatchy, its ANITA LEE. She is an excellent reporter and very aggressive. I’ll bet you she was the only one who thought to approach the Court Reporter and even ask for a transcript. Of course, she has been around the courtrooms for a long time on many big trials along the Coast so she’s more comfortable and familiar with it than most reporters. She knows what look for and is not afraid to ask. ALA the let me see the letters and can I get the transcript.
13. lotus says:

    June 28, 2008 at 8:56 am

    NO slight to Anita intended, Tim — she’s really busted butt this week in particular. The reason I’m pulling for McClatchy is that they prefer reporters who bust butt, instead of the hacks Gannett usually settles for.
14. dmwriter says:

    June 28, 2008 at 9:08 am

    Thanks Lotus. The only time I have considered myself a hack is on the golf course.

    Tim: I wanted to get the transcripts (even asked the U.S. attorney when/how to get them); however I am financially hurting right now. Even if CL would pay for them I didn’t have a penny to buy anything on the spot.

    Ooh, the life of a hack college student reporter … always broke.
15. ConJuGal says:

    June 28, 2008 at 9:23 am

    Anita is a hack! I’m familiar with a lot of her stories and she was sipping Dickie Boys kool aid while he was the glory boy and is now just another person “heaping on.” Her house was toast after Katrina and she has been about as unbiased a reporter of the whole affair as anyone I have ever seen. You couldnt get more slanted coverage if Dickie and Jim Hood wrote the stories themselves. In some instances I think they did!
16. lotus says:

    June 28, 2008 at 9:23 am

    Y’know, dmw, maybe, just maybe, this isn’t about you.
17. dmwriter says:

    June 28, 2008 at 9:34 am

    Ha-ha Lotus, I just had to make sure. And now the only guarantee I have it isn’t about me is two maybe’s. I guess that’s better than probably, or definitely.

    Anyways, good morning, the blogs looks great today. Congrats on the blogger award!

    And I only consider myself a “hack student…” in golf terms. Shooting a 101 on 18 isn’t something I’m proud of.
18. duckweedpond says:

    June 28, 2008 at 10:33 am

    I like McClatchy too but I read somewhere yesterday that they are cutting staff by 10%. Can’t help but wonder what That’s gonna do to their quality.
19. lotus says:

    June 28, 2008 at 10:50 am

    Nothing good, of course, but that’s not the abject horror of 99 gone from our paper or 300 from the PBPost.

    ducky, not to change the subject, but have you clicked through to :pastry studio this weekend? Oooooo
20. duckweedpond says:

    June 28, 2008 at 11:14 am

    I did lotus and I’m gonna try me some of that clafouti for brunch. My Kroger produce dept doesn’t have any cherries right now so I’m gonna mosey up to the Fresh Market and scout around soon. Will report back.
21. MSlawyer says:

    June 28, 2008 at 11:34 am

    dwp — I just got back from the Fresh Market. They’re having a marathon or something at Renaissance — must be a couple thousand people milling around.
22. curious georgette says:

    June 28, 2008 at 11:38 am

    The Walmart on Lakeland Drive had some amazing cherries a few days ago. Maybe they still have some if you can’t get to Fresh Market.

    I’m trying the peaches with jasmine this weekend if I can find the ice cream maker to do the lime sorbet.
23. duckweedpond says:

    June 28, 2008 at 11:55 am

    Thanks MSLawyer & CG. Think I’ll wait til the traffic clears to do my foraging! Would you let us know how the peaches turn out? I was curious about those m’self.
24. lotus says:

    June 28, 2008 at 12:04 pm

    Never say this ain’t an all-purpose blog!

    Mmmm, p e a c h e s with j a s m i n e & l i m e s o r b e t . . .
25. NMC says:

    June 29, 2008 at 12:01 am

    Curious in 10

    I have no idea what Zach’s lawyers might be thinking, but I would be telling my client he better get in there with a grovelingly abject apology for his behavior and pray that’s enough. The only other thing he could do to help with Judge Biggers is go to the feds and say he’s ready to talk about his fathers long carnival of crime.

    And answering your comment: The sentences where what I expected. I thought Sid would get two months more.
26. Anderson says:

    June 29, 2008 at 12:05 am

    The allusion to Faulkner and Percy, however, was nauseating.

    And condescending. What do you think Keker’s favorite Faulkner novel is? Percy novel?
27. NMC says:

    June 29, 2008 at 12:29 am

    Anderson: My take was that he was pandering and didn’t know how to help. He wanted to go high culture, trying to appeal to this particular judge or posterity.

    The reference to Percy was off the wall entirely (run through the Percy books– The Moviegoer, The Last Gentleman, Love In The Ruins,, etc etc) and none matching remotely. I think everyone can agree that Dickie is not an existentialist hero.

    So what about Faulkner? If Keker knew diddly about Faulkner, he’d have been hoping for Sutpen, I’d presume, but he’d be wrong. Flem Snopes is the closest I can think of but doesn’t really capture it. (There are folks in Oxford who would tell you that, no, Dickie isn’t Flem, that Flem was one of the developers writing letters for him).