Update: First para is newly added.
When Dickie Scruggs came into the courtroom, he went straight to the front after his wife and Zach had come in and sat down. The defense said that it did not need argument on the guidelines issues. The government began by offering two exhibits– the Jones suit and a letter on March 9, 2007 from Scruggs to the Jones firm. The exhibits were offered to corroborate their view of the amount. From there, Judge Biggers announced he was turning to the intended benefit issue.. The judge noted he could consider the amount of the bribe or the benefit the defendant expected to receive, $4m according to the government. This case, he said, was not about the amount of money, but rather the purpose or effect of the bribe. The bribe amount, the court concluded, is not reasonable. There is no doubt that the defendant expected more than that amount in benefit, and did not want his case heard by a local jury and was willing to risk conviction and prison to get that.
The judge concluded that the amount involved was $400k, although he said that was low. He concluded that Scruggs was a leader in the scheme, that he sent Balducci to talk to Judge Lackey, “starting a scheme to corrupt the integrity of the Lafayette County Circuit court whether money was involved at that stage or not.” There is “no doubt in the court’s mind that Scurggs was a leader, planner.” He noted that Backstrom did not make decisions on his own– he’d tell Balducci he would get back to them.
Judge Biggers sustained the objection about 404b evidence, about “another case in another court” involving testimony of Langston, Balducci, and Patterson. “That is something the defendant will have to answer for later but not a matter this court will consider in this case.”
The court would later in the hearing come back to that other crime evidence, twice.
One answer about “what do those letters mean”: The judge responded to a complaint in a letter that incarceration would be a waste of the taxpayers’ money by upping the fine to account from the cost of incarceration. Those in the courtroom mostly heard this to mean a $250K fine plus the cost, although I wasn’t sure.
what’s the part before the . . .
Anita Lee
DJournal
AP in NYT
MarketWatch
C-L running one sentence of the AP story.
From Anita’s story:
“I could not be more ashamed to be where I am today. I realized I was getting mixed up in it and I will go to my grave wondering why. I have disappointed everyone in my life – my wife, family and friends here to support me today. I deeply regret my conduct. It is a scar and a stain on my soul.”
From Patsy’s:
The ellipses (…) meant that there will be more in this post and the others. I’m just trying to get rough notes up
Will the civil cases against him have to wait until he is out of prison?
What a sad day for Scruggs and his family, but what a bright beginning for the reestablishment of the rule of law in Mississippi. Judge Biggers showed courage from the bench–a quality that is much needed in our state. He showed more courage than the many judges in our state court system who would have cowed to Scruggs both before this episode and after the guilty plea. Perhaps Scruggs can find freedom and spiritual healing in his imprisonment.