Paul Quinn on Judge Davidson’s order to turn over the Eaton evidence

Yesterday, I wrote (the link includes the opinion) about the decision by Judge Davidson to turn over Eaton-related evidence from U.S. v. DeLaughter to Judges Barbour and Yerger, who have different parts of that prosecution.  Paul Quinn writes about this at length in today’s Clarion Ledger:

A document filed by U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee before DeLaughter’s plea said Peters would have testified at trial that he had been able to influence DeLaughter, who had worked for Peters in the DA’s office, in the Eaton v. Frisby case.

“It does appear to the Court that the production of statements and/or testimony of Mr. Ed Peters as well as government investigative material and grand jury material might possibly relate to the civil action Eaton vs. Frisby,” Davidson wrote.

Frisby attorneys maintain DeLaughter’s rulings started going in Eaton’s favor after Peters was secretly brought into the case. Eaton attorneys have said if anything improper happened it was without their knowledge.

An attorney for Frisby, Rob McDuff, said he didn’t mind having Peters’ information given to the judges first but would not comment further on the case because much of it is under seal.

Don McGrath, a spokesman for Eaton, said his company is in favor of sharing the material. “We feel our case is very strong, and the sharing will add clarity to the relationship regarding Peters and DeLaughter,” he said. “At no time did we hire Peters to influence DeLaughter in any way. We are anxious and we feel the facts surrounding the stealing of our secrets is strong. The federal prosecution … is very detailed and very strong.”