folo

folo header image 2

News at the end: The rest of the defendant(s?)

February 10th, 2009 @ 4:14 pm - by NMC · 13 Comments

The Government asked that Scruggs be dismissed from the pending (not yet public) indictment, which the cause number makes clear has been pending since the first week of January (obviously while there were negotiations). In a post-hearing press conference, U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee stated that the indictment would become public shortly. It was clear from context (though not said out loud) that it’s sounding like this week.

Tags: ,
Filed Under: Herald & Examiner

13 Responses so far ↓

  1. lotus says:

    Oh, these pins ‘n’ needles!

  2. ccvz says:

    What was Scruggs’ demeanor?

  3. barfly says:

    Do what?? I can’t make sense out of your last 2 posts, NMC. Unnamed circuit judge not the only “DEFENDANT.” Do you mean not the only one ‘under indictment?’ You must be in the thick of things without enough time to proofread what your posting. I understand and hope you can clear this up. Especially, the statement that the U.S. Attorney is asking that Scruggs ‘be dismissed from the pending indictment.’ Did I get that right? He gets a ‘freebie’on this one? That’s bulls***.

  4. NMC says:

    Scruggs pled to an information not the original indictment. He does not get a free. Ump be gets 7 years.

  5. lotus says:

    NMC, if you’re trying to type and drive, STOP. We can wait for you to get home.

  6. NMC says:

    I hate commenting from an iPhone.

    Bart I’m not sure what is bothering you about the post. Today we had confirmation there has been an indictment under seal since early January and that there was at least one defendant I addition to Scruggs. The strong implication was that the other defendant is the judge and even that there may be more than one other defendant

  7. MSPolitical says:

    Geez, Barfly, think of the judge we’ve been talking about in here. Then have a LAUGH, get it?

    I think you’re reading some iPhone lawyer version of “alleged”. :-)

  8. barfly says:

    MSPol: No, man, it’s just that I hadn’t read the long version NMC posted earlier…(shackles, cooperation, blah, blah). I was on my way back over here to tell NMC ‘NEVERMIND.’ Did I get a LAUGH? Don’t know. You tell me. LAUGH, pronounced like “law,” as as in the middle syllable, the stressed one, in a 3-syllable last name that starts with ‘D’ and ends with ‘r’?

    Need to know if I’m still reading Iphones upside down.

  9. MSPolitical says:

    That’s what I took it as, Barfly.

  10. injustice4all says:

    Expect more pleas deals to be announced soon.

  11. barfly says:

    NMC, my bad. sorry. i had missed that whole other post where you explained everything. I found that, then jumped over here to send you a NEVERMIND (it’s buried in something to MSPol.} Here’s a NEW QUESTION: With all the ‘cooperation’ from scruggs, how misplaced would an assumption be that 1-2 elected state officials might be having high blood pressure and anxiety attacks about now? if scruggs is all of a sudden singing, are we in for a real good scrubbing kinda house-cleaning, or just pretend and don’t look now while we sweep the crumbs (crums) under the rug?

  12. barfly says:

    NMC: 7 yrs. Concurrent, no? That’s his current sentence, is it not? He won’t do 1 day more – or less – or will he?

  13. lotus says:

    Huh-uh, barfly, his Scruggs I sentence was five years.

    And I just saw over at LNL that “Davidson said he would recommend Scruggs be transferred to Forest City, Ark., where his son is incarcerated.” That right, NMC?