Comments on: Wilson v. Scruggs new civil case filed in Northern District

By: YourLiesHaveLies

YourLiesHaveLies — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:44:32 +0000

After reading the complaint, all I could do was . Give them what they deserve, Mr. Wilson. Aut Pax Aut Bellum

By: duckweedpond

duckweedpond — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:25:03 +0000

Thanks, NAAS 35, that’s the answer to what my feeble self was trying to ask.

By: Not At All Surprised

Not At All Surprised — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:10:04 +0000

DWP No.29:

I’m not an attorney either. But, I think it would take some kind of extrajudicial (outside of the judicial process)comments, actions or bias by Judge Biggers for his recusal.

It takes something that might cause the average man on the street to feel the judge is partial toward a party or biased against a party.

What he does and says in court usually does not fall within these parameters.

By: lotus

lotus — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:50:31 +0000

And it’s so beautiful, I’ve asked my bro to play it for my funeral if he’s around to do so. Have you heard the choral version, known as “Agnus Dei”? Also wonderful, but I guess I slightly still prefer the Adagio.

By: Silence Dogood

Silence Dogood — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:27:40 +0000

Ben @ 12, Considering that Barber’s Adagio for Strings moves much like a funeral durdge (and was even often used as such during funeral processions of fallen WWII soldiers), I think that Rog’s suggestion might be quite appropriate if not just a little premature.

By: magnolia

magnolia — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:24:19 +0000

Oh, It is being told this morning The Feds are working on a deal with Madoff because Cox and The Fox’s turned their head so many times, and it would cost so much money to prosecute him in a trial, maybe a deal is being worked in Scruggs 2.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:19:34 +0000

Works for me, NMC. But I hope they have the goods. Since Lott’s not even a defendant, para. 24 struck me as a tad gratuitous.

(I think the allegations might be libelous even under NYT v. Sullivan, but it was the pleadings privilege I was uncertain about. Everyone seems to feel free to lie in complaints, so it appeared there was *some* kinda privilege there ….)

By: magnolia

magnolia — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:16:55 +0000

This may already have been ask, but is it a normal practice to have Civil Rico before The Feds even bring indictment against Delaughter, Peters, Lott and Various John Doe’s?

Now, NMC, There were two missing numbers you found doing research…Could something be underseal, nah, and where does P L Blake fit in here.

Would be nice to go all the way back to John McCains office where Moore/Scruggs/Lott hatched one of the Biggest Golden Eggs in History…

By: duckweedpond

duckweedpond — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:43:43 +0000

I’m not a lawyer, obviously, and don’t know the specific rules for recusal which is why I asked. But it seems reasonable to me to ask if Judge Biggers can be the most impartial available arbiter after having made the rulings and said the things he said in Scruggs I.

By: rogerwilco

rogerwilco — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:30:14 +0000

I’m intrigued by para 22, where it says that Scruggs is “mutually liable with his attorneys” for misdeeds. That’s interesting.

Injustice, in my (painful, bitter) experience, RICO allegations have a pretty high specificity hurdle. Defendants have good luck getting them dismissed. The “we’ll amend later” assertion doesn’t go over so well with RICO complaints.