No financial “benefit” from successful bribe of Judge Lackey – Presentencing report is total bullshit!

Someone needs to find the wizard that calculated the financial benefit of a successful bribe of Judge Lackey and give him a crash course in basic addition and subtraction.

The sonofabitch ought to be easy to spot – he’s the on wearing a Dunce cap!

Backstrom’s atorneys have filed a 16-page objection to the presentencing report submitted to Judge Biggers to consider at sentencing according to news stories here and here.

WTF is so hard to understand about calculating “gain” when 0 – 0 = 0? The bribe (sic) was to compel arbitration – Lackey’s only legal option with or without a bribe (sic).

Financial benefit to Backstrom was calculated at “about $5.3 million dollars – roughly 20% of total fee in dispute!

Presentencing reports are not made public but this one doesn’t need to be for anyone to read between the lines – Under the terms of the plea agreements, Backstrom’s punishment must be proportion to that given Scruggs.

If there was no financial benefit, what was the incentive to bribe Judge Lackey? None, none at all – except that he asked for money to do what the law required him to do under the terms of the joint venture agreement.

Hopefully one of the “perks” available to Judge Biggers is a trash can!

2 thoughts on “No financial “benefit” from successful bribe of Judge Lackey – Presentencing report is total bullshit!”

  1. There is more bs according to the article in the Journal. I’m really shocked by the claims in the report. I’m betting these reports alone are enough to get this case on the list for Congressional investigation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *