However, as Chris Joyner makes plain, the jurors in U.S. v. Melton agreed on zilch. “It was rough,” one who identified herself as “Martha from Hattiesburg” tells him.

“We did all we possibly could. … I read the jury instructions so many times, my eyes were bleeding. I felt very strongly about the decision I made. I believe we’re all sorry we couldn’t give the people of Jackson more.”

She said the jurors were split by votes that varied on the different counts. She said there was no 11-1 vote on any count.

Frank Melton allows,

“It’s nothing to play with. There’s no room for arrogance. I felt very humble. I’m never going to put myself nor this city in that position ever again.” …

“I’m so sorry the people of Jackson have had to go through this, but I appreciate their prayers,” he said. “I’ve learned a great lesson. I’m just used to being Frank. I’ve had to come to the reality that every decision I make affects a lot of different people.”

It’s taken him close to 70 years on earth to learn that? Ya think he’s got it yet? I’m rather more inclined to buy what Evans “Bubba” Welch says:

“I feel like they let a criminal continue to walk the streets. They shouldn’t convict anyone in the state of Mississippi until they convict him,” he said. “I don’t want to hear any more about this trial until he is convicted.”

Hold no breath for that one, Bubba, according to the C-L’s sidebars:

• Few people in support of another Melton trial
• Mistrial, possible retrial complicate politics
• Mayor vows to keep serving amid calls for resignation
• melton timeline
• Analysis: If Feds opt for retrial, expect more of same
• The mayor’s trial ultimately was a long, winding road to nowhere

Plumping up our “Forget it . . . it’s Mississippi” file, dmwriter points out the AP story reporting that

… [d]uring a telephone interview Tuesday, [Hinds County District Attorney Robert Shuler] Smith initially wouldn’t say why he met with [his predecessor] Ed Peters, who has been called an unindicted coconspirator in the biggest federal bribery investigation in Mississippi in years.

“It’s nothing sinister,” Smith said, adding there is nothing improper about meeting with a witness who has been “granted immunity” in a federal case.

After initially declining to say what they discussed, Smith later called The Associated Press to say the two were talking about a letter Smith wrote to Hinds County judges about race issues. Smith said the letter was published in the media last month and Peters called him to discuss the way different issues arise for white district attorneys as opposed to black ones. Peters is white and Smith is black. Smith said they decided to meet at a restaurant in Brandon in Rankin County owned by Peters’ son. Both men live in neighboring Hinds County.

Peters’ attorney did not immediately respond to a message. …

Doggone your recognizable mugs, boyz. But “the way different issues arise for white district attorneys as opposed to black ones” — oh, what we’d give to hear Ed Peters’ disquisition on that, right? Do any wait-staffers at the Peters boy’s restaurant read folo?

And yes, Habeas porpoise, as a matter of fact, I did hear that Zach Scruggs was home in Oxford yesterday, spotted walking around the Square. Also that he’s being sent to a halfway house to get ready to re-enter society and has lined up a post-release job in DC as a lobbyist with Uncle Trent. Further, that he showed up at a service at Judge Lackey’s Calhoun City church before he went off to Arkansas, the putz.

Dickie’s still in jail in Oxford too. Seems mighty early into Zach’s 14-month sentence for this kind of activity (if true), but I suppose Daddy’s New Deal could include an early out for him — which, given the Zach Scruggs we’ve seen, I won’t count as a social good. He’s the kind that something‘s liable to land back in an orange jumpsuit before he’s through — others having more hell to pay on his way to it, of course.

Now, a commenter on the Shuler-Peters story surmises at the C-L, “… with Dickie talking and perhaps PL, our [state] AG is probably just hoping that federal marshalls [sic] don’t appear in his office with an indictment.” We’ll see about that, and not only as to the current MS AG. Everything depends on who’s decided to say what for how much leniency.

Anyhow, to sum up: be it literally visible or no, all this crapola argues that Mississippi is under the fullest moon it’s suffered in many a year. Look sharp, everybody.

UPDATE: Patsy Brumfield:

Zach Scruggs, convicted for his part in the scheme to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey of Calhoun City, apparently is out of federal prison and assigned to a community work facility in Montgomery, Ala.

His custody location is noted on the U.S. Bureau of Prisons’ web site, www.bop.gov.

Recent speculation was for him to reside at Tupelo’s Bureau of Prisons half-way house and commute daily to Oxford for work.

Work? What work?

Former Mississippi state auditor Steve Patterson (right) with attorney Hiram Eastland as he enters U.S. District Court for sentencing this morning. Patterson appeared light-hearted before being sentenced, asking the photographers taking his photo: “Where were you when I was running for office?” Photo by Bruce Newman.

2/13/09 – Last two judicial bribery defendants sentenced
Alyssa Schnugg
Staff Writer

The last two defendants in what’s been branded the Scruggs I judicial bribery case were sentenced to spend 24 months in federal prison for their roles in the scheme to bribe a circuit court judge.

Timothy Balducci and Steven Patterson both appeared before U.S. District Court Judge Neal B. Biggers this morning at the Federal Courthouse in Oxford.

Both men pleaded guilty a year ago to a charge of conspiring with Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, his son and attorney Zach Scruggs and his law partner Sidney Backstrom to bribe Circuit Court Judge Henry Lackey with $40,000 for a favorable ruling in a lawsuit against the elder Scruggs involving legal fees in Hurricane Katrina related litigation.

During Balducci’s sentencing hearing, U.S. Assistant Attorney Bob Norman told the judge that his department had never seen such “complete cooperation” from another defendant. He said Balducci’s help has opened the doors to other investigations of corruption and that the Scruggs case got as far as it did because of Balducci’s assistance.

“His cooperation was immediate,” Norman said. “He’s doing the best he knows how to do to right the wrong he has done.”

Biggers agreed but reminded Balducci he was the “bag man” in the case.

“You carried the money,” he said. “You talked the judge into going along with what you wanted to do.”

Balducci told Biggers and the court that he was “profoundly sorry” for what he had done.

“All I can do now is try to make things as rights as I can,” Balducci said.

Norman also reported that Patterson has cooperated with the government, albeit to a lesser degree than Balducci.

Patterson was called a “minor” participant in the case, although he received the same sentence as Balducci.

Before he was sentenced, Patterson said he was embarrassed and humiliated.

“If God gave me a choice to live carefree in paradise the rest of my life, or to choose to go back two years ago and change my actions, I would not hesitate to enlist to do the latter,” he told Biggers.

Both men will report to prison on March 25. The government asked for the later reporting dates because their testimony may be needed when the grand jury meets in the March.

The saga began on Nov. 27, 2007, when FBI agents raided Scruggs’ office on the Square. The next day, the five men were indicted.

On Dec. 5, 2007, the day of his arraignment, Balducci pleaded guilty to the bribery charge.

It was later learned that Balducci had been working with the government in building its case against Scruggs and the others.

But it was also Balducci who got the ball rolling. In trying to gain favor with Scruggs, during a meeting with the other defendants in March 2006, he told the famous trial attorney that he could use his friendship to corruptly influence the judge to find in favor of Scruggs in the lawsuit Jones v. Scruggs.

After Balducci approached Lackey and suggested that if Lackey would find in favor of Scruggs, he would give Lackey a place in his law firm after Lackey retired. Appalled, Lackey told the FBI about the conversation. For six months, Lackey allowed his office and telephone to be tapped. In September 2006, in another meeting with Balducci, the subject of money came up and Balducci offered Lackey $40,000. It was later discovered Scruggs was providing the funds.

Balducci was approached by the FBI in November 2007 and he began cooperating with the government and wore a wire tap himself on the day the money was given to Lackey.

Scruggs was sentenced in June to spend five years in a federal prison in Kentucky. His son is serving a 14-month sentence in Forrest City, Ark., and Backstrom is serving 28 months in Forrest City.

Earlier this week, Scruggs was sentenced to seven years in prison for his role in a bribery case involving Hinds Circuit Court Judge Bobby DeLaughter, which came to light during the Lackey case and through testimony of Balducci. The sentence will run concurrent with his original five-year sentence.

AP – Rogelio M. Solis

“When Scruggs was sentenced on the first corruption charge on June 27, he appeared badly shaken, at one point needing help sitting down, in response to getting a five-year sentence. This time a shackled Scruggs calmly accepted his fate.” And after court, he changed out of his nice suit into something more uncomfortable.

Bruce Newman – Oxford Eagle

Elsewhere, Jerry predicts that Dickie isn’t the only one in for change:

That’s because Dickie Scruggs could become a key witness in future corruption cases. … Scruggs originally was charged with the wrongdoing in a still-sealed indictment, and prosecutors said Tuesday that others are named in that indictment. … Scruggs’ cooperation could lead from the legal world into Mississippi’s political world.

Into Mississippi’s political world? Where feed such creatures as Trent Lott, Mike Moore, and Jim Hood?

“The system needs purging,” Bob Wilson’s lawyer Charlie Merkel told Jerry. “I would hope any leads developed through Scruggs’ cooperation that implicate other public officials or others who tried to influence public officials will be followed up and prosecuted to the fullest.”

Starting with whom? Jerry focuses on P.L. Blake, “the man who bizarrely earned $50 million from the state’s tobacco settlement by clipping newspapers and assessing political activity for Scruggs, who championed that settlement. …” Dickie has had and will continue to have much to explain about P.L. and his errands, no doubt.

Because of his continuing cooperation, Assistant U.S. Attorney Bob Norman asked that Scruggs be moved from the federal prison in Ashland, Ky., to one much closer so that prosecutors can talk more readily to him. Scruggs’ lead counsel, John Keker of San Francisco, asked U.S. District Judge Glen Davidson to recommend the prison in Forrest City, Ark., because of its proximity.

Under the plea bargain, prosecutors have promised Scruggs immunity in exchange for the incriminating information he divulges. Prosecutors also have promised not to have Scruggs turn over any other money.

Forrest City’s prison camp, you’ll recall, counts Zach Scruggs and Sid Backstrom among its inmates. Maybe the three of them can help refresh each other’s memories . . . say, of jokes about filing briefs on cocktail napkins before one of the smaller fish in this net. Of him, Sid Salter writes,

The questions are rather obvious: Was Hinds County Circuit Judge Bobby DeLaughter the innocent target of a judicial bribe like Lafayette County Circuit Judge Henry Lackey? Or was he somehow a player in a backroom scheme to protect Dickie Scruggs’ money? …

While DeLaughter hasn’t been charged with anything, the parade of plea bargains and subsequent cooperating witnesses can’t bode well for the Hinds County jurist.

Player or pawn? DeLaughter’s judicial career now depends on the answer to that key question.

I rather doubt that, don’t you? For a year now, Hinds County has seen the name “Bobby DeLaughter” only in company with “Ed Peters,” “Dickie Scruggs,” “Trent Lott.” For him, the ch-ch-ch-change has already come.

Now to see who else risks walking with a clank . . .

UPDATE: Patsy Brumfield just filed U.S. ATTORNEY: EXPECT ‘SCRUGGS II’ INDICTMENT SOON:

Answers may be public by the end of this week about whether anyone else will be indicted in the judicial bribery scandal named “Scruggs II.” …

Specifically, the shadow falls on scheme participants as described Tuesday by Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Norman: former New Albany attorney Timothy Balducci and former state Auditor Steven Patterson, plus DeLaughter, former Hinds District Attorney Ed Peters and former U.S. Sen. Trent Lott. …

Coincidentally, Balducci and Patterson will be sentenced Friday for their guilty pleas in “Scruggs I,” the conspiracy to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey of Calhoun City. …

At Norman’s request, Davidson also dismissed the indictment in this case, but only for Scruggs – clearly indicating at least one other person is named in the sealed document.

Details of the indictment will be revealed “very shortly,” U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee said at a news conference outside the Aberdeen federal courthouse.

UPDATE II: From a second Brumfield story:

… Although Scruggs entered the downtown courthouse wearing an orange prison jumpsuit, he wore a business suit and tie for the afternoon hearing. He also wore metal shackles.

But he appeared more physically fit than at his June sentencing, and he smiled broadly when he saw his wife, Diane, in the courtroom.

Also in the courtroom with media and the curious was W. Roberts Wilson Jr. and his family, who have attended many of the proceedings related to Scruggs.

Davidson declined to order Scruggs to make restitution in this case, saying Wilson’s civil lawsuit seeks to settle that score.

Outside, Wilson’s attorney, Charlie Merkel of Clarksdale, predicted Scruggs’ plea will move their civil case along.

“The question about whether or not a bribe took place has been laid to rest,” he said.

Prominent attorney Richard “Dickie” Scruggs leaves the federal courthouse in Oxford, Miss., Nov. 28, 2007, after being indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly bribing a judge. His son Zach Scruggs is seen in the background. (File photo/The Clarion-Ledger)

The Clarion Ledger reports:

Dickie Scruggs, once one of the nation’s most powerful trial lawyers, is on his way back to Mississippi from federal prison in Kentucky, prison officials said.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Oxford requested the U.S. Marshals Service return the 62-year-old former lawyer in time for a Tuesday hearing, where documents show Scruggs is expected to appear before U.S. District Judge Glen Davidson and plead guilty to corruption charges related to a second judicial bribery scheme.

Roberts Wilson, victim of the Ed Peters/Joey Langston scheme in Wilson v. Scruggs before Judge DeLaughter, has sued Scruggs in a civil case in the federal court in Northern Mississippi. He’s also sued Peters, Steve Patterson, Tim Balducci, Zach Scruggs and a series of John Doe defendants.

The case has been assigned to Judge Biggers, who handled Scruggs I. I have to assume the plaintiffs lawyers will be pleased by this.

But more amazingly, his complaint names Judge DeLaughter and a “former United States Senator”– which can only be Senator Trent Lott– as participants in a conspiracy to defraud Wilson in the Wilson v. Scruggs case.

The complaint alleges that Scruggs’s law firm and the conspiracy were racketeering enterprises– essentially alleging that Judge DeLaughter and the unnamed senator were part of a racketeering organization.

To understand the suit, you have to understand the Wilson cases–his claim ended up being split between multiple courts. There was a claim before the state court (and Judge DeLaughter) for asbestos fees, and a claim before the federal court for constructive trust, that the non-paid asbestos fees were used by Scruggs to fund his tobacco litigation, and therefore Wilson was entitled to a share of the tobacco fees.

Since all of these cases are called Wilson v. Scruggs, as is the new one, it’s going to be hard to keep them all straight.

I suppose we are lucky that the other lawyer who sued Scruggs over asbestos fees was not named Wilson.

First interesting issue is that Zach is sued. When the facts in Wilson were to be 404b (other crime) evidence in Scruggs I, there was an argument made by Zach’s lawyers that the evidence should not come in or Zach should get severance because he had nothing to do with the bribe in that case. While the US Attorney seemed to accept that in responding, I noted at the time that he’d written Johnny Jones (one of his father’s lawyers) an email that they could win the case with a brief written on a napkin.

Second interesting thing is that Joey Langston is not sued. It was noted in the government’s 5K motion for Langston, I think, that Wilson had settled with Langston.

The complaint notes that Balducci resides in Monroe County (where I think his wife’s family lives).  The case is in federal court because of diversity jurisdiction (Roberts Wilson lives in Tuscaloosa).

Some nice language:

Wilson relied on the words, verbal and written, of the Hinds County Circuit Court to have been rendered by an officer sworn to impartiality and wholesomeness and not a corrupted, bribed individual. …

Wilson relied on the robe and seat behind the bench as a representation by the Hinds County Circuit Court that the judicial officer sitting there was impartial and not a corrupted, bribed individual…

It’s signed by Charles Merkel and includes as counsel Vicki Slater and Bill Kirksey, all lawyers who represented Wilson during the last stage of his case before DeLaughter.

Here ’tis.

1. Ed Peters has cut a deal with the prosecutors   80%

2.  Dickie Scruggs and Judge DeLaughter are getting indicted in the next 2 days   70%

3. Ed Peters is going to be a witness against Judge DeLaughter   70%

4. Ed Peters is not going to get indicted about this, at least at this point, and possibly ever.         52%

5.  Zach Scruggs is not getting indicted on this one.  51%

6. Sid Backstrom is either going to be a cooperating witness under his plea agreement or he’s going to get indicted again.   20%

7.  The prosecutors are taking this a step at a time, as they have in the past, and this one is about DeLaughter only.  20%

8. Kirk v. Pope is not in play at this point.  25%

9. Dickie Scruggs and Bobby DeLaughter are the sole indictees.  15%  (The problem with this is implied by prediction #6)

Things I can’t tell about: Will there be RICO charges? (I think not but have very low confidence in that guess. The threat to Scruggs from this would be huge, but the burden it places on prosecutors is equally huge). Will Eaton be part of this round? (again, I think not but have low confidence).

The first is a strong inference from confirmed information. The second and third are based on that inference. The fourth is more guesswork based on reliable rumor. The fifth is based on things said in the motions and sentencing hearings in Scruggs I. The sixth is more of a wild card. We know Sid agreed to cooperate in his plea agreement, but there was a strong implication in his sentencing he had nothing of value. But we also know that he was working with Scruggs when the deal went down with DeLaughter and Peters (but then we also know that Zach was around and wrote that suspect brief-on-a-napkin email). The seventh is based on a relatively reliable rumor. The eighth is based on the fact that Kirk v. Pope co-counsel to Peters, Cynthia Stewart, signed the pleading surrendering Peters’s bar license in December.

It is now your turn, dear readers.

• The Clarion Ledger’s top stories are done slideshow style, starting with a picture  showing John Keker, Zach Scruggs, Dickie Scruggs, and Diane Scruggs outside the federal building in Oxford.  It goes from there to Melton’s indictment, state unemployment, bad weather (Spring tornadoes and flooding, mostly), the state auditor and Tom Meredith and Mississippi State interim president Vance Watson, the debate in Oxford, the executions of Earl Berry and Dale Bishop, the reversal in James Seale’s case, and a scandal involving a Jackson crematorium.
• David Hampton runs a year-end roundup on the Clarion-Ledger editorial page that starts with the election (Obama, and then locally, Wicker, Chiders, Harper), with the Democrats gaining a seat and the three Supreme Court justices being defeated.   He doesn’t say how remarkable that last was.  He notes the shallowness and meanness of campaigns, particularly the Senate campaign and the destructiveness of the Supreme Court races (on which he comes out for appointed judges, which I’m not sure is the right lesson from this particular race).
• The Daily Journal blends in its own and the AP list (Scruggs and the immigraiton raid), adding  the Mississippi state scandal, the presidential debate, the November elections (both presidential and Congress), the Supreme Court elections, the removal of Hayne, the reveral in James Ford Seale’s case, the lawsuit to stop the use of federal housing dollars for the Port of Gulfport, and the opening of the B.B. King museum in Indianola.
• The Sun Herald stays completely focused south of Hattiesburg (unless you count Scruggs), with mentions of Micheael David Graham, Hurrican Gustav, Billey Joe Johnson, Jr., the Richton Salt Dome among stories we’ve been following.

Oxford has had its fair share of being in the limelight this year, such as hosting the first presidential debate in September on the University of Mississippi campus.

But just a few months prior, it was the rise and fall of prominent attorney Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, often referred to as the “Tort King,” that turned all eyes on Oxford in 2008.

On Nov. 28, 2007, Scruggs, his son Zach Scruggs, law partner Sidney Backstrom, former attorney Timothy Balducci and former state auditor Steven Patterson were indicted on federal charges for trying to bribe Circuit Court Judge Henry Lackey with $40,000 for a favorable ruling in a lawsuit — Jones v. Scruggs —against the elder Scruggs over Hurricane Katrina litigation.

After several months of motions, rumors, months-long bouts of silence, guilty-plea agreements and about 400 letters asking for leniency, Scruggs was sentenced in June to spend five years in a federal prison in Kentucky.

His son is serving a 14-month sentence in Forrest City, Ark., and Backstrom is serving 28 months in Forrest City.

Balducci and Patterson have not been sentenced. The lawsuit has since been settled.

National attention

The case received national attention with news articles appearing in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal — as well as daily headlines in local and regional newspapers.

Local attorney and legal blogger Tom Freeland followed the Scruggs case extensively on www.folo.us.

“The case involved a lawyer who had been as high profile as possible, and allegations — that turned out to be true — of an attempt to actually bribe a sitting trial judge,” Freeland said. “Both parts of that sentence make for an attention-grabbing case.”

Freeland said the story has a “live by the sword, die by the sword quality.”

“The defendants had used and benefited from the use of publicity in their cases for some time, and now had that hurting them in their own case,” he said.

Law offices raided

The saga began on Nov. 27, when FBI agents raided Scruggs’ office on the Square, which is now closed and up for sale.

The next day, the five men were indicted.

On the day of his arraignment, Balducci pleaded guilty to the bribery charge on Dec. 5. It was later learned that Balducci had been working with the government in building its case against Scruggs and the others.

In the middle of all clamor about the famous trial attorney’s fall from grace, his own attorney, Joey Langston of Booneville, was arrested and pleaded guilty to conspiring with Scruggs and others to engage Ed Peters — a “close personal friend” of Hinds County Judge Bobby DeLaughter — as a “consultant” to assist them in the case of Wilson v. Scruggs. That case involved a dispute over attorneys’ fees which was pending before DeLaughter at that time.

Langston represented Scruggs in that case along with Balducci, according to court documents.

DeLaughter has denied any knowledge of the conspiracy. Meanwhile, Langston’s sentencing is scheduled for Dec. 16.

No other indictments have been handed down in that case as of this morning — although Assistant U.S. Attorney Bob Norman said there could be new developments in the case in the next month or so.

“The investigation is continuing,” was all Norman would say on the future of the Langston case.

Some courthouse observers wonder if the fact that Balducci and Patterson have not been sentenced yet is a sign of more indictments to come, while others theorize that the setting of a specific sentencing date for Langston may indicate the investigations could be coming to an end.

“That means little or nothing,” Freeland said. “It may be personal preferences by the judges as to docket management.”

The aftermath

While it’s been a year since the five men were indicted, Lackey’s role in the case started much earlier, and he couldn’t be any happier it’s over.

“I’m happy my part is over,” Lackey said recently. “I’m just saddened it happened at all because of the impact it had on so many bright young lawyers.”

After a meeting in March 2007 between Balducci, the Scruggses, Backstrom and Patterson, Balducci told the others he thought he could influence Lackey because of their friendship.

Balducci went to see Lackey shortly thereafter and suggested to Lackey he could give him a place in his law firm after Lackey retired, if he would grant Scruggs a motion to send the lawsuit to arbitration.

After the meeting, Lackey reported the conversation to the FBI. He began working with the FBI and allowed his phones and office to be wired. Eventually, those conversations led to Balducci offering Lackey $40,000, and to the arrests of Balducci and the others for their roles in the scheme.

“I’m saddened on the impact on the reputation of our bar,” Lackey said. “But I am happy to know our system works. It’s not perfect; nothing I know of is perfect. But it does work, and it worked because of cooperation between the bar and the bench.”

Lackey said he’s been able to move on and didn’t even realize it’s been one year since the arrests, although it has made him more cautious about his conversations with attorneys.

“Even though it may be as innocent as it can be, appearances of impropriety can cause a problem in itself,” he said.

The Mississippi Bar and local attorneys are still reeling from the hit the legal profession took this year.

“The case hurt the reputation of the bench and bar, and will likely continue to do so,” Freeland said. “The only thing that can be done to mitigate that damage is a demonstration to the public that these problems — and solving them — are taken seriously. A perception that there has been a reform effort — based on reality — I think matters.”

Telling the tale

Author and University of Mississippi journalism professor Curtis Wilkie has been hired by Kneeriam-Williams Literacy Agency to write a book about the rise and fall of Scruggs. The manuscript is due September 2009.

Wilkie, a friend to Scruggs, said he’s corresponded with the Scruggses during their incarceration.

“Dickie has kept his sense of humor up in his letters to me,” Wilkie said. “I think with all things considered, the family is holding up well and handling things as well as possible.”

Wilkie said the elder Scruggs battled some health issues when he first arrived in prison.

“I think he was hospitalized briefly,” Wilkie said. “But he’s healthy now and exercising a great deal.”

While the Scruggs case may have divided the legal community for a short time, Wilkie doesn’t believe the reputations of Oxford or the Ole Miss School of Law have been blemished.

“I don’t think it reflected badly on the school or the community,” he said. “But it obviously causes people in the legal profession to reflect more seriously on what all this has meant — not just the indictments and charges, but how the case has been handled.

“There’s an awful lot of questions that haven’t been answered.”

—alyssa@oxfordeagle.com

Alyssa Schnugg

Staff Writer

Oxford Eagle

662-234-4331 Ext. 245

Hmm, November 28 . . . you know, that rings a bell. On this date one year ago, certain activity in Oxford (pdf) turned Dickie Scruggs’ — and Zach Scruggs’, Sidney Backstrom’s, and Steve Patterson’s — worlds upside down (we didn’t know then that Tim Balducci’s already had been and Joey Langston’s was about to be). The event’s effect on this brand-new little blog wasn’t immediately apparent either, but to say “changed everything” is mere approximation. Don’t know about you, but this one feels more like five years to me — and I’m not even Trent Lott, Ed Peters, Bobby DeLaughter, or PL Blake! As Patsy Brumfield has a look back and forth, I say Happy Anniversary, Scruggsiana.

From Mumbai, with the attack apparently over, the Times of India puts the death toll at 195 (at least 22 were non-Indian; five were Americans or had lived in the US, two were Canadians); eternal peace to them all. Though Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari promised Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to send his intelligence chief to help in the investigation, such opposition to that arose in Pakistan that now only a “representative,” not the ISI chief himself, will go. (What’s Urdu for “Psych!”?) As The Guardian‘s Richard Norton-Taylor and sources discuss the difficulty of spotting terrorists such as these in time to stop them, WaPo describes the focus on Pakistani militants, and Juan Cole and Pat Lang advise that resolving the Pakistani-Indian standoff over Kashmir needs Obama Administration commitment equal to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian one (Lang recommends partition).

Kevin Drum, posting about Samantha Power’s return to Camp Obama (on the transition team analyzing State Department personnel, operations, and policy), notes that

If we accept the conventional wisdom that Obama’s choice of Clinton as Secretary of State is a generous gesture meant to help unify the party, then there would be few more forthright ways for Clinton to reciprocate than by nominating Power for some kind of meaningful position at Foggy Bottom.

Then he adds the sentence italicized in this comment:

It would be a good sign that those hatchets have been well and truly buried.

Oh no, no, no. We’re not giving up that easily. If Hillary’s involved, there’s drama! There’s intrigue! Maybe some backstabbing! And sex!!

And even if there’s not, that’s our story and we’re going to tell that way.

Posted by: The Cable Yakkers on 11/28/08 at 6:07 PM

Hee.

Wiggle a paw if you’ve been stuffing it in like Mocha here:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Amy Scruggs is the first family member to speak publicly about the legal troubles of her husband and father-in-law, Dickie Scruggs.

She disagrees with numerous Republican attack ads attempting to link disgraced trial lawyers with Democrat Ronnie Musgrove. Democratic groups attacking Republican Roger Wicker also have mentioned the families’ legal woes.

The most visible attacks, however, have come from the GOP, and Amy Scruggs said the “final straw” was receiving campaign fliers in the mail recently.

“I think it just got to the point where you couldn’t ignore it anymore. There’s no pity-party going on, … but at some point, somebody’s got to say, ‘OK, if they’re going to use our name, at least get it right,’” she said in a telephone interview from her Oxford home.

Musgrove accepted money from Dickie Scruggs in a 1999 bid for governor.

Wicker took money from Zach Scruggs in 2004 and 2006 bids for Congress. The candidates have not received money from either Scruggs in the current race to replace Trent Lott.

A spokesman for Wicker said he donated Zach Scruggs’ contributions to a charity after his March 2008 guilty plea.

Zach, a former assistant on Wicker’s congressional staff, contributed $1,000 after Wicker and his staff requested it.

Other details here include Amy’s plans for voting (or not), how Diane Scruggs is bearing up, and how Zach’s passing his time in prison. Quoth Amy, “I’ve never once doubted Zach’s complete innocence in this matter. There are a lot of emotions I feel about this, but shame or humiliation is not one of them. From day one, we knew that this is just not right.”

I find this a great time for an ellipsis, so “. . .”