I am Tom Freeland, a lawyer in Oxford, Mississippi. The picture in the header is my law office. I'm on Twitter as NMissC

Missing Posts: If you have a link to a post that's not here or are looking for posts from Summer of 2010, check this page.

BlogRoll

Judge DeLaughter to Change Plea to Guilty to Count 5 (lie to the FBI) of the Indictment

Change of plea set before Judge Davidson on Thursday in Aberdeen Mississippi, according to PACER.  Here’s the Notice of Change Plea Hearing.

Also on PACER, there’s a notice that there was a short conference call with Judge Davidson, Bob Norman, and Tom Durkin this afternoon.  It was pretty clearly connected.  Here’s the docket entry on the conference call.

42 comments to Judge DeLaughter to Change Plea to Guilty to Count 5 (lie to the FBI) of the Indictment

  • Ben

    Shazam!

    So all we’re left with are lotsa unanswered questions, and Ed Peters will be gone fishin’. Gotta hand it to Peters: he outfoxed both the good guys and the bad guys.

  • pamagnolia

    Why would you make that assumption?

  • juriscribe

    one of you crim experts please shed some light on this; what’s it mean?

  • wilbur

    it is not clear whether this is to just count 5 or is an all encompassing plea.

  • BlackBear

    Any chance the plea deal will be written on a napkin?

    http://www.folo.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/delaughter-indictment.pdf

  • DeltaLawMama

    wow as opposed to WOW (just like Scooter Libby)

  • NMC

    The headline says it– count 5– it’s in the notice of change of plea hearing that is linked above.

  • meanderline

    Guess that just leaves P.L. Blake. Wonder what – if anything – Peters had to say about P.L. One hopes he gave good value for the immunity he negotiated, he doesn’t appear to have contributed much to the DeLaughter case.

    If P.L. decides to talk in exchange for a plea things could still become interesting, otherwise they appear to be ending with a whimper. Certainly the civil litigants aren’t going to be happy with this resolution, if it is a resolution.

  • slingblade

    So, does this mean that he walks on the other 4 counts; i.e. does this “change of plea” really mean “plea deal”

  • BoynamedSioux

    this has been rumored for a while, waxing and waning, and finally advanced from rumor to probability. [it wouldn't shock me if Delaughter got cold feet at the last minute.]

    of all people who should have known to tell the FBI to urinate up a rope…

    well, this allows Delaughter to cling to the illusion that he ruled correctly I suppose.

  • Anderson

    I just want to know if it’s (1) a felony and (2) requires that he be disbarred.

  • Ben

    I haven’t checked the text of Ct. 5, but I’m assuming it’s a charge of violation of 18 USC Sec. 1001 … false statement to federal agent. Felony. Disbarment is up to the Miss. Bar and supreme court.

  • juriscribe

    BoyNamedSioux – your statement “of all people who should have known . . .” is too true; it oughta be in the Adult Homo Sapien Survival Manual, Chap. 1, Rule 1, “never, ever so much as fart in the presence of the FBI or US Attorney without counsel, PERIOD, NO EXCEPTIONS.”

  • jaxrelief

    i’ve heard it’s a felony and that he absolutely will do jail time for it.

  • What’s a possible sentence for such a plea as this?
    If I recall this is a felony isn’t it?
    As for remaining causes will there still be a August 17th, start of trial or is everything on hold pending these changes, anything on that?

    DeLaughter was a small part of a many big events.
    Mr. Ghost of Ms.and all.

  • Commentor

    Is it possible that if DeLaughter pleads guilty, he could then testify against Ed Peters in cases unrelated to his own bribery, thus allowing prosecution of Peters for other crimes?

    FYI, disbarment is summary for any attorney who is convicted or pleads guilty to a felony. There are not supposed to be any exceptions.

  • Anderson

    Disbarment is up to the Miss. Bar and supreme court.

    Pragmatically, yes. Legally, they would seem bound by the Rules of Discipline, 6(a), which makes a guilty plea to any felony (“other than manslaughter” — ??) an automatic disbarment (well, suspension then disbarment), unless I’m misreading.

  • Ben

    Commentor: Peters is walking on water. The US DoJ granted him transactional immunity — in return for his truthfully answering all investigators’ questions, he has been whitewashed with immunity from prosecution. I don’t like it and I wish it weren’t so, but the deed has been done.

    “Forget it, Jake … it’s Chinatown.”

  • Plexix

    Is immunization just against your own testimony? Or is it immunization from
    being prosecuted at all? Could Delaughter reveal things that the Feds didn’t
    know about and get Peters in trouble?

  • meanwhile

    Does the transactional immunity extend to anything for which he has not provided information?

  • Ben

    The difference between transactional and use immunity is that transactional immunity protects the witness from prosecution for the offense or offenses involved, whereas use immunity only protects the witness against the government’s use of his or her immunized testimony in a prosecution of the witness — except in a subsequent prosecution for perjury or giving a false statement.

    So Delaughter cops a plea to the false statement count in exchange for the govt’s not prosecuting him on the remaining counts. Delaughter goes to prison. Peters goes fishing.

    What’s left? I dunno. Maybe a prosecution of the Blake guy. Maybe not. I’d guess not.

    Ok … move along, people … nothing to see here. Move along.

  • In a previous post there were questions of possible secret endeavors of monetary gains. Is anyone aware of some event other than the fact the FEDS felt they had DeLaughter for certain on count 5? Additionally, has anyone studied possible time-lines connecting DeLaughter to certain events as suggested by JDBerry?

    There seems to have been a hell of a lott of tort reform around the beginning of all this, wasn’t there? If I remember correctly even George Bush was in on it. Tort Reform Act of 2005, Diversity Jurisdiction.

  • WantedToBeALawyer

    Is it possible that we have just witnessed the turning of DeLaughter against Peters in some case unknown to us?

  • Ben

    WTBAL: I’ve long thought Peters was the guy on the grassy knoll. I’m just saying ….

  • For like of better words. And I hope ya’ll can understand, me thinks we have just seen the milking of DeLaughter. The civil era big house cost of moving and that really expensive attorney, balloon note etc. Now down to final dealings huh? How much will be left. DeLaughter against Peters? There’s a lot of bodies buried. I kinda figured out the judicial system awhile back and I said DeLaughter would walk he’s well connected and as happy as a tornado in a trailer park. It’s a done deal. HA!

  • Ben

    You can say that again, Robert.

  • PostHoleDigger

    Wow!,

    That was a slick move by Fast Eddie – what a deal. Will the Ed and Bobby show now play the Southern District (Reference Peters 404B admissions regarding Eaton v. Frisby posted the other day)? Does his immunity save him in another jurisdiction or is it just time to sweep everything else under the rug and move on?

  • MississippiHoya

    What is the sentence range under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for a conviction under 18 USC 1512(c)(2) (Count 5 of the Indictment)? The statute provides, whoever otherwise corruptly obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not more than 20 years or both.

    What sentence is DeLaughter likely to receive?

  • wilbur

    the heading of the plea does say change of plea – 5th count. but look at criminal minutes. they say conf. call started at 1:30 and ended 2:45 (in conflict with “total time – 30 minutes”). if call lasted an hour and fifteen minutes they were talkin more than 5th count. like i said earlier: not clear at all.

    if it is a limited plea, i am trying to see the tactical atvantage to the defense. plead guilty to the charge you can’t win and go to trial being a convicted liar. and gain automatitic disbarment. somebody who does criminal / judicial performance law tell me why Delaughter would do this if not all encompassing.

  • wilbur

    robert – what’s your beverage of choice?

  • Coffee about 4:00 am. And yours? Hey Ben I’ll not repeat due RRO’S but it did take awhile to get up off the floor with that, OK…move along, people nothing to see hear. Move along. Kinda like that deal in star wars. these aren’t the droids your looking for. Bobby’s words were probably close to the same.I think you guys misspelled the place of the fishing camp though. My dad huh, SOB owns a camp down there, wouldn’t be surprised if he knew them. I say this because he’s very well off and he has placed a lot of stuff on other peoples names. He hangs with the political power down that way. I don’t know of everything, but the auto parts, savage corporation in Houma seems to be a major money maker for him. He’s my dad we share the same name but I don’t know him any better than any of you.
    What a world. Huh?

  • BoynamedSioux

    this is not a piece-meal deal; if he pleads to Count 5, they won’t proceed on Counts 1 – 4; his sentence will guideline out to some amount of months [24 give or take is a wild guess without looking at the base offense level which I don't know off the top of my head], but the Judge is not bound by the guidelines and could max him out, but that’s unlikely and possibly part of the plea deal for the guidelines to apply.

    really not much utility in sending Delaughter away for years and years. He will lose his judgeship, his law license, and probably the worst for him, will go down in history as a crook rather than a crusader.

  • Phantom

    Proclamations of innocence? Declarations of guilt? I’m more confused than Steve Patterson at a bar convention.

  • Disgusted

    Perhaps DeLaughter can tell them about the shenangins going on in the Eaton/Frisby case between him and his old boss and get a break, and then it would be up to the Southern District U. S. Attorney’s Office to file charges, but they aren’t quite as brave as the attorneys in the Northern District U. S. Attorney’s Office, obviously.

  • Looking at this, you have behind the scene deals. Unknown amounts of money and all that is known is that criminal activity was had regarding all of it.

    Really no utility in sending DeLaughter away for years and years. He will lose his judgeship, law license and be known as a crook.

    I just don’t know BNSioux.How many millions would be worth a little time as some folks really don’t care what is said about them. Depending on how much money was involved a few years might be a sweet deal. All this is based on passing money around to get what you want unlawfully. Money had in part by some criminal activity. That money may applied for those behind bars as well regarding good care. In which case a few years could be a heck of a deal. Just how sweet now remains to be known. If he gets close to what Dicky got may be he’ll have more to say. Some partners in crime sometimes take the rap for others. It isn’t perhaps a modern day thought, however these boys are old school. Back in the day I think there was a Lott of that going on.

  • “More confused than Steve Patterson at a bar convention” may be my new favorite expression.

    BNS @ 5:51 a.m. – I’ll go with 6 months less than 24.

  • NotZachScruggs

    Mine, too, Matt (more confused that Steve Patterson at a bar convention), but I keep wondering how confused Mrs. Patterson must have been, with Steve, lapping up all that edification in the Holy Land.

  • a friend of the law

    “Proclamations of innocence? Declarations of guilt? I’m more confused than Steve Patterson at a bar convention.”

    That is hysterical. Classic.

  • [...] Scruggs judicial influence scandals. Coverage: Patsy Brumfield/Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, Tom Freeland and more, guestblogger S. Todd Smith (Buffalo lawprof) at Point of [...]

  • Phantom

    Thanks guys. I was encouraged by Lotus to copyright the phrase and have “more confused than Steve Patterson at a bar convention” t-shirts printed for the DeLaughter trial…so much for that I guess.

  • WantedToBeALawyer

    Don’t give up on that idea, yet, Phantom. I suspect another business opporunity will present itself in the very near future.

  • Does anyone know when DeLaughters replacement will take DeLaughter’s place in Hinds county?

    This is where it’s hard to understand Robert. As I do enjoy blogging and wish it was from a different perspective. I sometimes believe some folks understand the facts to the criticism that’s had when I write. Not all but, some do. Then there’s the political aspects as well involved for the cause of their parties but let me give this a try.

    It’s hard to discern an intent to stop the good ole boy system of government that wrecks the lives of good people over those with self severing interest. Still try and follow my lead.

    IMHO there is a force as stated unseen causing havoc or is it simply as all other actions by the GOB network to have it all their way. childish to say the least but very profitable by unified oppression.

    Boss Hog has attorneys. Attorneys involved in an issue before DeLaughter but not in accordance to law. A matter possibly involving more money than I care to mention. Bobby get’s nailed with others over the Scruggs event, yet the issues involving DeLaughter and those attorneys and all that money have been portrayed as something from Roswell or area 51. No doubt boss hog is aware of all this. Boss Hog’s Katrina cash may have lessen the issue’s of money in the DeLaughter matter. However DeLaughter cuts a deal and the very attorneys involved with other questionable monetary issues before DeLaughter choose his replacement ??? Come on. Is It me or Mississippi Ala GOB network? And yes I do expect someone to say it’s me.

Leave a Reply