I’ve made a number of posts about last weeks hearing in Scruggs II, involving Dick Scruggs’s effort to set aside his guilty plea for corruptly influencing Bobby DeLaughter. The issue in the hearing was whether Scruggs could prove that he was innocent of the charge of bribing the judge.
One major post was a summary […]
Here are my notes, with minimal comment, about three of the witnesses who testified today.
Dickie Scruggs is not a gatekeeper for judicial nominations.
Lott and Cochran have a clear relationship about judicial nominations. Scruggs never had influence on Lott’s selection of judges. Lott and Scruggs had different backgrounds and perspective. He was not someone I consulted. He knew his weighing in might have reverse effect, based on philosophy and what I looked for.
Lott described what Lott looked for.
In DeLaughter’s instance, letters and faxes would come in and be filed. He’s not sure how much. He was aware he received a letter from DeLaughter, but wasn’t aware of it, then later got another letter after Lott talked to DeLaughter.
John Corlew, a lawyer friend of Lott’s faxed DeLaughter’s resume to Senator Lott. Corlew is the kind of person Lott would consult about judges.
Lott did not depend on Scruggs for recommendations for federal judges.
Ex. 17 is a 3/10 letter from DeLaughter to Lott. Ex. 18 is a 3/30 letter from DeLaughter.
Lott doesn’t recall the 3/10 letter; it may have gone to the Jackson office.
Continue reading Scruggs II hearing, first day testimony (part one of two)
This morning, the hearing consisted of opening statements and Trent Lott on the witness stand. Butter would not melt in his mouth.
More in a bit.
At the start of the day, lawyers for the Government and Scruggs went into chambers along with Larry Little, who is local counsel for Bobbie DeLaughter. It appears […]
For instance, she writes:
It also puts Lott’s replacement, U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker of Tupelo, in a pivotal maneuver for private lawyers to get future contingency fees when they represent the state.
Scruggs needed the approval in his 1994 plans to use Mississippi’s Medicaid program to sue Big Tobacco for medical bills of heavy […]
There’s an interview with Trent Lott in the Sun Herald, about Chip Pickering and that particularly mess-in-Washington, the judicial bribery scandal, and some general platitudes about the state-of-the-Republican-party. I think he may like the opportunity to talk about DeLaughter now that he’s not going to be called as a trial witness. When he talks […]
In November, 2007, Tim Balducci decided to come clean, and told the prosecutors that Jones v. Scruggs had not been his only rodeo. He told the prosecutors that there was this other case in Jackson involving Scruggs where he’d been directly involved in the corruption of Judge Bobby DeLaughter.
So December of 2007 was […]
In a prior post I suggested that Judge DeLaughter’s decisions in Eaton v. Frisby suggest a possible defense– that DeLaughter wasn’t doing Peters’s bidding in exchange for anything DeLaughter got. The real qeustion, though, is why DeLaughter was doing the dance with Peters and the devil. Somslawyer responded in comments:
I find it […]
Tonight, while I was eating at the Mayflower and driving back from Jackson, Judge DeLaughter’s lawyers unleashed their first fusillade of motions. I’ll post some thoughts tonight and more tomorrow.
The first motion Judge DeLaughter filed raises an issue near and dear to me: That Count One fails because it omits “the required exchange […]
In my Monday various post, I linked a story in Maine about a criminal prosecution that pointed back toward Mississippi, defense contracting, and earmarks, yet failed to dig out a prize. I was duly chastised by NotZachScruggs in comments:
Come on, NMC, you left out this gleaming gem from the Portland Press story: “Cantrell […]