The US Attorney indirectly confirmed that Scruggs had a deal like this last summer and turned it down. When a reporter asked if this was the deal that had been on the table before, US Atty Greenlee said “but in this instance Mr. Scruggs was cooperating.”
I’ll post more about this when I get back to Oxford. There was a clear implication that the circuit judge (whose name was not said aloud in court or in the press conference) is not the only defendant. Who else?
Zach and maybe Sid again? Deb Patterson? PL? Trent? Moore? Other judge(s)? Other pols in DC?
Between Dickie and Ed both singing, lawd only knows.
I’m afraid Mississippi’s trauma on this has just begun. If they’ve started, though, they need to get it all.
Just like the bailout and stimulus — if it’s not radical and thorough enough to change the whole status quo, it won’t work.
How about Biden and Waxman. They seemed pretty tight with Dickie throughout the tobacco litigation.
Cori? Kerri? Ma Lobrano? Trailer lawyers?
Guess we’ll know before too long, FL MS.
Good possibilities, 3dS. Nutt&McAlister? Barrett? All that crew?
“Who else?”
Rhymes with “Smallbed”? Could we be so lucky?
What about the one that rhymes with Good? And the one that rhymes with Homer?
And that one that rhymes with “rat-on”!
We got odds? Over/unders?
Hilburn?
Hey Lotus, long time. Just stopped by to say that it looks like I was terribly wrong about Dickey. Sad, really sad, to say that; the guy was always very nice to me. It is pretty ugly as it deconstructs though. You guys are doing tremendous work on this story, and have been since the start.
Hey, bmaz, good to see you! Thanks on behalf of NMC, who’s the powerhouse.
Tic tic tic…..man the lawyers and Judges here in South Mississippi sure are sweating a lot for it being such a cool Spring like day…
Where is that rascal PL Blake btw? Coming soon to a theather by you? CCVZ, man you are smoking hot brother! I was thinking the same thing.
May I be so bold to suggest that they read off the indictments this Friday the 13th, (just in case any of them are Masons) with Jackson Brown’s song “How long has this been going on?” playing in the back ground then maybe fading into Pink Floyd’s Money at the end.
From the man on the street: I mention this to the office staph here in tupelo and get that deer in the headlights look. No emotion, no interest.
NL
Yep, they need the sound of that adding machine arm ratcheting and its total bell dinging in the background. My grandfather had one, and it was such a dinosaur.
Nice soundtrack, i4a, in whichever order.
injustice4all,
I like your scenario (and your name).
Where *IS* P L Blake in all this now? Any WAG’s here , NMC?
If I am not mistaken, when Barrett was the FmHA state director in the 80’s he just might have run into P.L. Blake a time or two. May mean something, may mean nothing. Stay tuned. Some of you out there may recall that Barrett’s tenure at FmHA was not exactly that of a humble public servant .
I haven’t heard from any Bobby DeLaughter supporters out there – not lately anyway. And while I suspect that circle is growing smaller I’d bet they’re still lurking around.
Any supporters of DeLaughter care to comment?
Mr. Scruggs succeeded in securing his millions, as best I can tell, by getting the tobacco companies to pay, and pay, and pay. The pay, as I understand it, would come from future cigarette and other tobacco revenue and revenues from other profits of the tobacco companies. Are we witnessing (in this), a corruption on the surface which may go much deeper — in fact, into the legitimacy, itself, of the settlement in the tobacco cases? Might there be corruption which might reach into every tobacco settlement emanating from the Scruggs – Hood joint effort?
(You might catch my angst, the people who seem to be paying the most for the settlement are the poor tobacco addicts who cannot break the habit. I do not hate these people, as you may guess. And, I am not a smoker — quit in 1981 when I represented an asbestos product producer in some asbestos cases. I have a special concern for those of us who do not make it in our wonderful economy / society.)
But, I would suppose the answer would be that the settlements are safe. And that they are safe because in essence they were political solutions involving the people of Washington, D.C. and the vast money for influence apparatus in Washington D.C. these days. And, of course this is where P. L. Blake must have earned his $50 million.
I am now going to start reading Robert Kaiser’s book “So Damn Much Money: The Triumph of Lobbying and the Corrosion of American Government” which just came out. I know it is not going to be uplifting.
CCVZ
I wouldn’t call myself a supporter but I am affording Delaughter a presumption of innocence until I hear a bit more. From what I can tell is everything still hinges on what Peters told Delaughter. From what I have seen Scruggs and Langston have not admitted to having any direct communications with Delaughter. This would mean Peters is the only person who spoke with Delaughter. My remaining questions are how much did Peters tell Delaughter about the conspiracy? Did Delaughter know about the quid pro quo? Indeed did Delaughter know anything about the scheme? If he did he’s guilty if he didn’t he still should not have sent Peters the order before it was entered but that is on a whole different level than bribery.
While it certainly doesn’t look good for Delaughter I have not seen the evidence which would convict him, and the person who would hold that evidence is the one we haven’t heard from, Peters.
Are you sure the Zachster — the napkin man, himself –didn’t speak to Delaughter? Inquiring minds want to know.
TS – Who was emailing stuff to Judge Delaughter?
SE @ 22, I personally don’t think the tobacco companies are going to open up the settlement because there may be some taint on it. I bet Scruggs had some inside information on just how much big tobacco would pay prior to settling. The numbers look huge to me and you (and they are) but big tobacco doesn’t seem to be hurting as a result.
Did Dickie soften ‘em up more than they would like? Sure. But they don’t want to take a chance today that all those new AGs may be unwilling to settle for anything less than double their previous wins.
RandomThoughts wrote:
>>
Scruggs and Langston have not admitted to having any direct communications with Delaughter. This would mean Peters is the only person who spoke with Delaughter. My remaining questions are how much did Peters tell Delaughter about the conspiracy? Did Delaughter know about the quid pro quo? Indeed did Delaughter know anything about the scheme? If he did he’s guilty if he didn’t he still should not have sent Peters the order before it was entered but that is on a whole different level than bribery.
<<
First, it is clear the focus here is going to be on denial of honest services / mail fraud, not bribery and a quid pro quo. The notion is that there was a scheme to deny litigatns of an honest judge, and it was mail fraud. So ther will be no requirement to prove DeLaughter directly got something.
Second, they are going to say DeLaughter sought and was given consideration for a federal judicial appointment.
Third, Jerry Mitchell has reported (how sourced I do not know) that DeLaughter testified before the grand jury that he knew they had produced the consideration for the judicial appointment when he made the decision. He also testified that he could not say whether or not it influenced him!
Fourth and finally: You are right that the extent of DeLaughters troubles depend on what Peters says he told him (and whether Peters is a believable witness on that), but I recall proof that orders were being passed through Peters for preapproval and editing, and there will be testimony that Peters and DeLaughter worked out scripts for hearings and the scripts were followed. In other words, there’s going to be documents and transcripts and other witnesses corroborating (or not) much of what Peters might say about his contact with DeLaughter.
I’ll agree that we’ve not heard anything about a defense version of all this, particularly given that the facts have emerged either through the 404 hearing last week in Scruggs I and through guilty pleas. There may be answers to this from DeLaughter’s p.o.v. But I think it’s looking worse for him than you do.
I agree that it is looking bad for DeLaughter, I’m just waiting a wee bit longer to pass judgment. I’ve reached the preponderance of the evidence stage but I haven’t got to beyond reasonable doubt yet.
Even with the mail fraud charges the prosecutors will still have to prove Delaughter’s knowledge of the scheme. The emailed orders will all tend to corroborate the existence of a conspiracy, and Delaughter’s participation in it.
However, if a prosecutor wanted to know what I needed to convict as a juror, I am waiting for some evidence that Delaughter had knowledge of the existence of the conspiracy. The Mitchell story, which I didn’t see, comes very close to showing that Delaughter knew about the conspiracy. Possibly there was more said before the grand jury that incriminates Delaughter, I don’t know at this point. The key for me is Peters’ testimony, and possibly Scruggs, Langston, Balducci, maybe Zach maybe others? that tends to show Delaughter knew of the conspiracy.
The is a P.(resley) L. Blake listed in Birmingham with a former residence in Greenwood. I seem to remember an old thread that had P. L. in Birmingham as well.
Right, wc. But I bet he isn’t there now. Somebody suggested yesterday that he’s in witness-protection, but I don’t recall that we’ve ever definitively established that.
why would P.L. Blake be in witness protection? huh?
Who was it that said that? Don’t recall where it came from, but it was just the flat statement, no supporting deets.
Witness protection would be all too conspicuous for P.L. Blake.
I think it was total baseless speculation.
Every once in a while, I see Debbie Patterson’s name crop up. What do we know, or suspect, about her being wrapped up in this mess?
Well, DLM, the classic Deb P story was her squawk to the WSJ at Dickie’s ‘07 Christmas party — right after this started — that she and Steve just didn’t know a thing about it because they’d been off in “the Holy Land gettin’ all edified” (I paraphrase, but closely) when it came down. But then turns out Steve’s on tape telling Balducci that ol’ Deb “was just on the foam with P.L.” . . .
Didn’t recall the phone call. Guess it was so long ago, back in prehistory. One day this will make a great movie.