Slabbed takes a trip down memory lane and visits with Judge Frederick Heebe in USA v Marcello

HEEBE, District Judge:

We are faced with a very unusual problem in this case. The events leading to this unique situation, though, are quite simple. On June 1, 1967, a one-count indictment, alleging that the defendant, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ? 111, forcibly assaulted and intimidated an FBI agent engaged in the performance of his official duties, was filed against the defendant, Carlos Marcello. Defendant pled not guilty at his arraignment on June 14, 1967, and was given thirty days in which to file pleadings. On July 3, 1967, defendant filed a motion for a change of venue along with ten other motions. *fn1″ All eleven motions were originally scheduled for oral argument on August 4, 1967, but were continued to September 13, 1967, in order to accommodate defense counsel. At that time the motion for change of venue was heard first at the Court’s suggestion. It was readily apparent to the Court from the memorandum and exhibits submitted in support of the motion for change of venue, from the oral argument thereon, and from the exhibits offered into evidence at the hearing, that extensive prejudicial publicity existed which would deprive the defendant of a fair and impartial trial in this district. Consequently, the motion for a change of venue was granted, and the hearing terminated.

Not more than ten minutes after the conclusion of the hearing, defense counsel entered the Court’s chambers and, to the complete surprise of the Court, made an oral ex parte request for the Court to withdraw its order granting the change of venue which had just been entered. It was somewhat astonishing to the Court, to say the least, for the defendant to move for a change of venue, to argue the motion, and after the motion was granted, to urge the Court to withdraw its order granting the defendant’s motion. Nevertheless, the Court suggested that the defendant file a written motion requesting the desired action together with a memorandum in support thereof. On September 14, 1967, the defendant filed the present motion entitled “Motion to Reconsider Order Directing Change of Venue” which was followed by a supporting memorandum. This motion came on for hearing on September 22, 1967, and because of the unique problem it posed, was taken under submission after oral argument………..

We now turn to the facts of this case which compelled us to grant the defendant’s motion for a change of venue. Carlos Marcello, the defendant and resident of neighboring Jefferson Parish, is a well-known figure throughout the New Orleans area. His notoriety is due in large part to the nefarious publicity he has continuously attracted in this locale for many years. The newspaper exhibits which were submitted in support of the motion for change of venue are only samples of the substantial and constant publicity Marcello has received over the years. An examination of these exhibits will serve to illustrate the sinister image of Marcello which has been conveyed to the public via such publicity. On September 23, 1966, a local newspaper, the Times-Picayune, featured a front-page story describing a raid in New York and the arrest of Marcello and twelve others. The article was boldly titled: “Marcello Arrested; N.Y. Gathering Raided.” The article stated that Marcello and the others who were arrested were high-ranking members of the infamous Cosa Nostra, and described the meeting which precipitated the arrests as a “Little Apalachin.” The paper stated that such raids were a useful device “in keeping tabs on underworld activities.” Photographs of Marcello and his brother, Joseph, also appeared on the front page in connection with the article. On the same day another local newspaper, the States-Item, published an editorial cartoon depicting Marcello’s arrest in New York and indicated that Marcello has successfully avoided deportation for thirteen years. While Marcello and those arrested with him were waiting to testify before a grand jury in New York, the courthouse was evacuated while the police investigated a report that a bomb was planted in the building. This incident was described on the front page of the States-Item on September 26, 1966, under the broad title: “Bomb Scare Delays Marcello’s Quizzing.” Characterizing the group as “underworld leaders,” the article specifically referred to Marcello as “the Jefferson Parish rackets figure.” The newspaper quoted the New York District Attorney as saying that the 1966 meeting “overshadows the Apalachin meeting,” and also stated that an internal struggle for power within the ill-reputed Mafia was thought to be the reason for the meeting. An article in the September 30, 1966 edition of the Times-Picayune was titled: “U.S. Grand Jury Probe To ‘Rock Country,’ View-Organized Crime Involved, Says LaCour”; and it quoted another government official working closely with U.S. Attorney LaCour as saying that the arrest of Marcello in New York “makes it obvious that there is organized crime in this area [Louisiana] and that Marcello was there in the interests of this area.” This quote was repeated in the leading editorial of the October 1, 1966 edition of the States-Item wherein the editor implored the local district attorney to ferret out the local underworld elements and bring them to justice.

How interesting that Carlos Marcello’s lawyer felt free to enter the judge’s chambers and open ex parte communications.

I wonder how such an action would be seen today in the LAED?

sop

25 thoughts on “Slabbed takes a trip down memory lane and visits with Judge Frederick Heebe in USA v Marcello”

  1. Sop:

    In answer to your last question: I am sure that would depend solely on the identities of the judges and attorneys involved.

    Regarding Judge Heebe and Marcello’s attorney; how in the fuck did a Fed. judge permit the lawyer even to begin talking about the merits of a case pending before him and why did the judge not stop him? And then, did Judge Heebe sanction Marcello’s lawyer for having an ex parte communication? More stench.

  2. Sop, this brings back memories. In the 70’s I would travel to NOLA and stayed at the Downtowner on Tulane Ave. The location was known as a meeting place of some of “the boys”. My wife accompanied and it was summer on one trip. I advised her not to worry if she saw some “interesting” people around the hotel as she was by the pool. I told her she was in the safest place in NOLA. This was during the “Godfather ” days. One thing about the city in those days is it was much safer as whoever was controlling the city did not need out of control violence.

  3. The magic 8-ball strieks again.

    If you look up info on Marcello’s attorney, G. Wray Gill, you will come across a 4/11/07 story, “Life term has shady beginnings,” by James Gill (he’s from the UK, folks, no relation of course) about a guy named John D. Populis who apparently got railoraded by JPDA Frank Langridge and his “chief investigator, Joseph “Zip” Chimento, doubled as a strong-arm man for local mafia boss, Carlos Marcello.” Populis was represented by G. Wray Gill….. he took a the fall, got sent up the river and years later is ably represented by….. Julian Murray who of course is with the Chehardy Sherman law firm. Well, I guess he just got lucky and that’s just pure coincidence.

    http://www.chehardy.com/attorney_page.php?id=15

    ************************************************

    Heebe:

    “He received an LL.B. from Tulane Law School in 1949, and was in private practice in Gretna, Louisiana from 1949 to 1958. He was a Parish councilman and vice chairman, Parish of Jefferson, Louisiana from 1958 to 1960. He was a judge on the Division B, 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson, Louisiana from 1961 to 1966.

    On February 16, 1966, Heebe was nominated by President Lyndon B. Johnson to a seat on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana vacated by Frank B. Ellis.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Jacob_Reagan_Heebe

    That JP period of the 50’s and early 60’s was something. That was the age when Chehardy came in, right at that 1958 juncture when JP took on its council structure. That’s two guys who came into JP council politics starting right at the top in 1958, Chehardy and Heebe.

    1965 McKeithen (who had alleged ties to Marcello, partly discussed in the Life articles referenecd in the case) appoints Chehardy assessor; a few months later Heebe is appointed US federal judge.

    But Heebe was nominated by which LA Senator at the time, Russell Long or Allen Ellender? Ellender was a Tulane grad and from Terrebonne so my money’s on him. I don’t know if Ellender had mob connections, just that he was a racist.

    *****************************************************

    So 1967 Marcello comes up for hearing before a guy who comes out of his very backyard, JP. What luck.

    From Heebe’s opinion:

    Heebe says he was surprised (! – “Hello Wray, come on in!”) and astonished (! – “You want to what?!?”) “Nevertheless, the Court ****suggested**** that the defendant file a written motion requesting the desired action together with a memorandum in support thereof.”

    Having wrested the court of its jurisdiction, we then have an off the record discussion, a “suggestion” from the judge, and a hearing from the judge.

    Gotta say that opinion is pretty harsh (“The defendant would be in a better position if his action could be elevated even to the dignity of strategy or trial tactics. But his Janus-faced behavior falls miserably short of this mark.”) but even so what was sought – getting the court to essentially reassert its jurisdiction after surrendering it and creating appealable issues – was indeed gained, Marcello got his appeal.

    http://openjurist.org/423/f2d/993/united-states-v-marcello#fn21_ref

    “Judge Heebe holds, clearly correctly, that the oral granting of a motion for a change of venue completes the determination process on that motion so that the granting is effective even though no written order has been issued.”

    “…it would have been utterly absurd to believe that if the motion had been denied and if Defendant had been convicted, a higher Court would then preclude the Defendant from arguing on appeal that the lower court had erred in denying the motion for change of venue on the basis that it had been abandoned.”

    “The Judge was entitled to find as he did that Marcello’s silence was approval of all that was going on. Both through counsel and personally Marcello had made, and was making, the choice to forego trial in a biased locale. The fact that Defendant did not withdraw his motion and his waiver before the motion was granted does not mean that the Trial Judge could not rescind his order. He clearly has the power to vacate at Defendant’s request an order granting a change of venue. Whether or not he should do so is left to his sound discretion. In weighing the competing interests at that juncture, the Judge was nowhere near an abuse of discretion.”

    —- This all amkes sense, but granting the motion to reconsider would have resulted in the case being in New Orleans where everyone knew the score. Marcello speaking up during the motion would have killed the motion. But attempting to go into the judges chamber and withdrawing the request “within 10 minutes” of the motion and then having the judge actually ***document*** that in his opinion means that Marcello would both get a change of venue AND an appeal on the basis that Marcello had made his desire to withdraw known quite quickly… but before the order was signed.

    Dunno, just a theory.

  4. Judge Heebe’s son Freddy and son of Chehardy, Lawrence, are running buddies. HMM both Dad’s and NOW both SONS. Judge Heebe is now a senior LAED Judge whose son Freddy is under criminal investigation. Lawrence retired. NO THEORY, JUST FACT.
    A great friend (now deceased) was an assistant U. S. atty for LaCour. Great friend practiced years later with Jones Walker. Great friend reviewed public records filed in LAED court before Judge Feldman. Great friend knew and had dated to be Judge Heebe’s girlfriend and watched Bankruptcy officials hang out inside the LAED courthouse. One who hung out was made a U. S. Bankruptcy Judge at LAED court. Great friend reviewed LAED court records and advised from years inside the LAED court building, “never trust Martin Feldman.”

  5. Motherload : I’m beginning to feel the way many here at the Slabbed Nation have expressed in their past posts- Judge Berrigan connected to Judge Heebe,Sr.- Heebe, Sr.to his son Fred – Attorney for Fred Heebe, Schonekas, connected to Heebe, Sr- Heebes’ connection to Judge Feldman ?

    Said in the same commanding voice as President Regan told the Russians to ‘ tear down this wall’-

    WASH.,DC : MOVE ALL RIVER BIRCH SUITS , CRIMINAL and CIVIL , TO ANOTHER FEDERAL DISTRICT

  6. ALL N. O. Federal Judges are NOW recused from Broussard, et. al. 33 count criminal indictment EACH.
    45 YEARS AS A N. O. FEDERAL JUDGE AND BIOLOGICAL SON NOW UNDER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION IN SAME LAED; COME ON MAN,
    RECUSE ALL AGAIN AND BRING IN ANOTHER FEDERAL JUDGE FOR THE CRIMINAL STUFF AND AGAIN BRING IN ANOTHER OUTSIDE FEDERAL JUDGE FOR THE WASTE MAGT. CIVIL RICO NOW BEFORE JUDGE LEMELLE.

    1. This comment is profound in light of the the recent rulings by Judge Jolivette-Brown.

      FIRST Judge Brown stays Waste
      Management’s RICO lawsuit insinuating that River Birch indictments are imminent. How would she know? …THEN she denies WM’s motion to subpoena River Birch records because it is part and parcel of her previous ruling to stay the matter.

      What is obvious now is that Judge Brown, should have recused herself relating to these Waste Management matters due to the fact that she had close personal and professional relationships with the Phelps,Dunbar Law Firm. The same law firm who was retained by Jefferson Parish to counsel former and now indicted Parish Attorney Tom Wilkinson in filing suit to prematurely breech the Waste Management contract; Phelps,Dunbar was paid fees in excess of $130,000 Taxpayers’ Dollars for this jackassary blunder.

      Now that Susie Morgan is on the EDLA bench, and having been a partner at the ethically challenged Phelps, Dunbar law firm … I wonder if she is going to recuse herself from the Jefferson Parish matters concerning Broussard and Wilkinson.

  7. Of course there is, and I will take the liberty of editing … a Heebe Butler woodpile … that Heebe being a Senior Judge of the EDLA, Fred Heebe, Sr. … along with his collegue and long standing friend Peter Butler, Sr. and his protege Peter Butler, Jr. … the connection to the Heebe(Jr.) Schoenekas woodpile is undeniable…

    What do you people think ? That this Senior Federal Judge, whose has immense influence in this arena, would not do any and every thing he could to protect his son? …The same son, Fred Heebe, Jr., who was publicly humiliated when it was disclosed that he beat up women, then subsequently withdrew his name from being nominated US Atty for the EDLA …God forbid that travesty of Justice being consummated … now only to have his current nemesis, Jim Letten, who was appointed US Atty in his place, being humilated as it concerns his, Heebe, Jr.

    1. LAED Judge Heebe law clerks: Peter Butler, Sr., Aubrey B. “Copper” Hirsch, Jr., Kyle Schonekas, Peter Butler, Jr. and ALL represent Judge Heebe’s son, Fred Heebe. Fifth Circuit is presently investigating these connections and their connections to LAED Judge Feldman for obstructing Justice with above connections to protect and cover up obstruction by other LAED Judicial Officer’s. Chief Judge Edith Jones now has LAED records proving known no time limit fabrication’s with cover up obstruction.

  8. I wanted to comment, but damn wouldn’t know where to start. I’ll just say about a re-visit to the past and the FBI. The abused kids in Marion county have grown up and THEY want some ass to bite on.That town which uses the FBI to bully and others to their low bidding. It would seem Jim Hood wanted to tie up some lose ends of his criminal past and the entire thing is turning to a nut roast,HIS. Marie v. Vicksburg 251-98-1061 settlement awards the $tuff that binds state actions. So who all are being murdered for cash in Louisiana? Was that dude shot in the head you posted the only one? The last Sheriff had threaten to kill someone for selling his dope and ran off with the money. HEY RIP, Ha, ha!!! See what you get with plaintiffs attorney for the defense, magical horse shit jurisdictions and the fucking monetary insane.

    1. I brought this post up to set up the next as we explore if Fred Heebe the Younger really does come from a long line of corruptors as Henry Mencken1951 alleged.

      sop

  9. I honestly have NOTHING to say NEGATIVELY about the man. He was always a “straight arrow” with me. I would call him “old school”, and of a type that are few and far between today. Ashton O’Dwyer.

  10. Personally I think any time an opposing attorney is in the office of a judge in any particular case, especially Federal Court, and you are the opposing attorney waiting in the hallway it should be reportable as an ethical breach.

    What Motherload and others above have exposed above in the USA vs. Marcello case is ex parte B U L L S H I T and it needs to be ended now.

    The “Great Tomato Salesman” of NOLA:

    [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gdgwpci-ZI&w=420&h=315%5D

  11. Gate’: Don’t force the old timer to resign that’s cruel. Just offer Heebe, Sr. a life long supply of tomatoes, Creoles I mean not the new genetically changed ones, to leave “The Wisdom Building” for good.

    Tomatoes can move mountains, just remember the accomplishments of “The Great Tomato Saleman”!

  12. Sop … sometimes the level of pedestrian ignorance of Times-Picayune reporters astounds me … such as the quoted assumption by Ms. Maggi cited below … maybe someone should clue her in and suggest that she read Slabbed … particularly in light of your most timely sticky post !!!

    And I quote Ms. Maggi:

  13. Sop … sometimes the level of pedestrian ignorance of Times-Picayune reporters astound me … such as the quoted assumption by Ms. Maggi cited below … maybe someone should clue her in and suggest that she read Slabbed … particularly in light of your most timely sticky post !!!

    And I quote Ms. Maggi:

  14. This is turning into a mini civil war here. The fed’s go after the mafia and now the mafia strikes back. Part 2. My guts say the feds will strike back harder now and to after the real owner of the dump. Time to put the entire gang in chains like it is done for the people of New York. Why should we suffer under mafia assholes and not get the same legal protection as they do in places like the North East. Time to take out every mafia person operating the waste disposal business in Louisiana and Mississippi for that matter. Lock them up.

    As for the posting of comments on any place other than slabbed—

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2wSLRHLM7Y

    1. Filed LAED court records now in Chief Judge Edith H. Jones of the U. S. Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit’s possession naming LAED Judicial Officer’s: prove NO time limit fabrications for Al Copeland, et. al. attorney’s Frederick Heebe, Butler, Sr., Hirsch, Jr., Butler, Jr., Schonekas for and with Al Copeland, et. al. Estate and with Copeland former CFO Fazzio and Al Copeland accountant’s and Chairman Richard Talluto’s knowing participation. Marty protected a LAED court Bankruptcy Judge dismissing filed proceedings using Fifth Circuit cases as cover. Edith H. Jones can void all of those J’s by law. December 2011 Fifth Circuit in Turner v Pleasant opened a ten year old J. due to LAED court Judge Porteous corruption with LAED court attorney’s.

  15. Motherload :Are a few more details available for absolute clarity:

    Marty protected bankruptcy judge___________ by dismissing __________proceedings.

    The bankrupt person was________; the bankruptcy petition was a Chapter_________filed by bankruptcy attorney___________.

    And finally, the bankruptcy U.S.Trustee who monitored the case was_______________.

    1. Fifth Circuit requested confidentiality while investigation is on going. I do not agree but I will comply. LAED court “public records” are not sealed. I can say : 1- NO Trustee just an “examiner” was appointed; 2- Corporate chapter XI; 3- chapter XI with adversarial proceedings led to Feldman civil Rico LAED court filing which was dismissed using by law NO time limit fabricated Judge known chapter XI opinion as “preclusive effect,” to grant Summary J. Copeland two principal chapter XI partners confessed to Mover and AUSA Al Winters after Winter’s prosecuted the two partners for Federal drug crimes, which both confessed to Winters and Mover in Winters office prior to both being incarcerated for years. Confessions led to LA disciplinary investigation with Heebe, et. al. written signed mailed known no time limit fabrication denials, obstruction.

Leave a Reply

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