folo

The DeLaughter indictment

February 12th, 2009 @ 4:50 pm - by lotus · 11 Comments

Tags: Bobby DeLaughter
Filed Under: Herald & Examiner

11 Responses so far ↓

1. Justice says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:20 pm

   It’s important to note that the indictment uses Peters’ name, while not designating him some form of “unindicted co-conspirator.”

   AUSA’s are very careful about naming people in indictments that they don’t intend to charge. It leads to Dr. Steven Hatfill type judgments for damage to reputation, etc.

   It leads me to believe that Peters’ head will roll in some form or another.

   I know Lott’s name is in the indictment, however, he was not named alongside the participants in the conspiracy.
2. injustice4all says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:22 pm

   Lott will not be indicted.
3. ThirdSouth says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:27 pm

   I don’t see Lott “named” in the indictment.
4. Justice says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:34 pm

   To clarify, his name is referenced in the indictment.
5. ThirdSouth says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:36 pm

   Which paragraph, Justice?
6. Justice says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:41 pm

   Paragraph 9(h)

   Disregarding the issue of whether Lott is named, the point I was attempting to make was the Peters IS named.

   NMC, I’m sure you are more familiar than me with the US Attorney’s manual and the rules on naming subjects/targets/witnesses in an indictment.

   j
7. ThirdSouth says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:49 pm

   9(h) doesn’t reference a name, Justice. It references a political office. Lott’s name is nowhere referenced or included in Delaughter’s indictment.
8. Justice says:

   February 12, 2009 at 5:58 pm

   Again, whether Lott is named or not has no bearing on the point I was attempting to make.
9. lotus says:

   February 12, 2009 at 6:00 pm

   This is too weird. I don’t think Patsy‘s reading the same indictment we are:

   DeLaughter, who pleaded innocent to all charges in a Thursday morning arraignment, is charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States, three counts of “frauds and swindles” and another count of harrassment of a witness.
10. ThirdSouth says:

    February 12, 2009 at 9:50 pm

    Harrassment of a witness? Is that what you call lying to an FBI agent?
11. Ashton R. O'Dwyer, Jr. says:

    February 13, 2009 at 9:22 am

    What strikes me as so extremely interesting is the fact that one could substitute for the names Scruggs, DeLaughter, Hughes, etc. a veritable “host” of names from the “Victims of KATRINA” litigation pending in New Orleans, including at least one Federal Judge and a long “laundry list” of plaintiffs’ lawyers. When are the Feds going to begin to “clean up” the CORRUPTION which is “multiplying” exponentially right under their very noses here in New Orleans? Anyone who may be interested can pull up the Civil Complaint in Civil Action No. 08-4728 on the docket of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, which is available on PACER.