We have lots of relative newbies here on Slabbed and so I’d be remiss if I did not point out Slabbed was the Beef Plant blog back in the day, thus the post title, as economic development boondoggles are nothing new in Mississippi. With the Solar pump in full swing I reckon it is no surprise the MDA flushed $26 million taxpayer dollars down the toilet up Senatobia way on a Solar plant that never produced a single solar panel. At best this is the type of MDA incompetence that makes you want to grab a pitchfork and head to Jackson and at worst, well in the Beef Plant case things got far worse.
Since we’ve covered economic development boondoggles literally across the entire North American continent, I reckon Slabbed will follow this one too.
I happened to notice yesterday our old beef plant coverage was getting some attention from a few readers in the Jackson area. I normally don’t spend too much time trying to divine what drives interests in our older posts but in this instance the Clarion Ledger solved that mystery.
Unfortunately the Facility Group way of getting work by employing local pols as “consultants” and doing the pay to play thing continues on to this day. Different contractor and politicians but the game remains the same.
Magistrate Judge Alexandar issued three orders today in preparation for next month’s trial of USA v Moultrie – all fall under what I’d call “housekeeping” and I’m going to summarize rather than link.
- Granted in part. Motion from Carothers to increase the number of pages in memorandum of law granted from 35 to 43 pages, not the 50 requested.
- Granted. Motion from USA for extension of deadline to respond to motions with deadline set on or before 12pm on the 5th of August.
- Granted. Motion from Moultrie to join motions four motions, including, the motion to dismiss count one. Use these numbers to identify the motions involved on USA v Moultrie under legal in the left side bar (124, 125, 126, and 127)
The absence of motions in opposition is noteworthy – so rarely do we see those in adversarial positions making nice and accommodating the needs of others without a hidden agenda.
Rarer still, much to my amazement, is Judge Alexander’s even tone. Continue reading “New orders issued in USA v Moultrie”
As a hungry non-lawyer, I take exception to Rule 3F – file at five Friday.
It’s now past 6:30 and I’ve just finished pulling, reading and posting Moultrie’s response and the two exhibits. (see all on USA v Moultrie under Legal on the left sidebar).
Needless to say, this is going to be short – no talking cows – just the text submitted in response to Carothers’ claim the subpoena was issued ex-parte reported here on SLABBED.
The application for the subpoena was not made ex parte, i.e., “in the absence of the other party,” but in the presence of the other party in this case – the Government.
In all of the cases cited by CCC, the Government is one of the parties who moved to quash the subpoena because the application for the subpoena was made by non-indigent defendants to the court ex parte, without service or notice of the motion for the subpoena being served upon the Government. These facts are clearly different from the instant case. Here all parties were given notice of the motion, the polar opposite of an ex parte proceeding. Rule 17 does not require that the recipient of the subpoena be given notice – that is what Rule 17(c)(2)’s procedures are for, and those are the very grounds for CCC’s motion to challenge the sufficiency of the items requested in the subpoena.
Thus, failure to provide notice to CCC, who is not a party to this case, is not cause to quash the subpoena.
Grab your good reading glasses and whatever you need to get comfortable before you dig into this 29-page response. I’m sure Sop will add comments later and know I will – after dinner.
Citing time spent in court and the time required to obtain information from expert witness living out-of-state, the USA filed two motions – one related to expert witnesses and the other to sever defendants – and requested a 10-day extension of time to respond to those filed by Moultrie’s defense.
By the time I went back to pull the documents for posting, the USA had submitted notice of appearance for an additional attorney, Curtis Ivy, Jr.
Given the time I’ve spent pulling and reading the motions and exhibits filed yesterday, I can only imagine the manpower required to read and respond – and with more motions expected – good move!
Grab your reading glasses and take a look at what Moultrie’s defense filed yesterday. I’ve listed the four motions on USA v Moultrie under Legal on the left sidebar.
The “unnamed public official” figures prominently in this latest round of filings – a good thing Carothers is available as there’s a lot of work to be done.
- Motion to Dismiss Count 1 of the Indictment
- Motion to Require Heightened Standard.
- Motion for Juror Questionnaire.
- Motion to Exclude Evidence of Prior Acts
Moultrie’s attorney, Tom Freeland, has done an excellent job – and killed a couple of trees with the Exhibits that we’ll post as time permits during the day.
Patsy Brumfield’s story posted to the Daily Journal on-line late today – but I’m certain not too late for Sean Carothers to welcome Judge Biggers decked out in a Santa Suit delivering a good news Order reducing Carothers’ sentence to time served.
Sean Carothers will be free even earlier from federal prison to help the government prosecute others accused in the Mississippi beef plant scandal.
Wednesday, U.S. Senior Judge Neal Biggers Jr. changed an earlier order to reduce Carothers’ 21-month sentence to time served, plus 90 days on house arrest.
Monday, Biggers reduced his sentence to 12 months and a day after U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee asked for Carothers’ early release to help in preparing its case against three Georgia executives and their companies. They are accused in another scheme to defraud the state of Mississippi and others related to the defunct beef processing plant.
It was unclear about why he revised his order. Continue reading “Christmas in July? Biggers cuts Carothers sentence again!”
Paul Quinn, a student intern writing from Oxford for the Clarion Ledger, has the story.
A refrigeration company sales representative accused of pocketing funds for equipment at a beef processing plant has been found guilty of charges related to the failed business.
A jury in Oxford this afternoon convicted James Draper of Mount Juliet, Tenn., of money laundering and interstate transportation of money obtained by fraud.
Draper faces up to 30 years in prison and $750,000 in fines on two charges.
It is the first time someone charged in connection with the failed venture in Yalobusha County has gone on trial. Continue reading “Jury finds Draper guilty of charges in beef plant case”
According to today’s Daily Journal, only closing arguments remain before the jury begins deliberation in the trial of James Draper.
Testimony in the federal fraud and money laundering trial of James Draper ended Tuesday after the defendant said he knew nothing of plant owner Richard Hall’s intentions to defraud the state of Mississippi.
Draper’s charges stem from the failed Mississippi Beef Processors plant that the state helped fund in Oakland.
Draper, the refrigeration equipment salesman, deposited a $187,725 check from the state for equipment that was never purchased, then turned over all but $20,000 – an amount he said he was owed for expenses incurred in helping Hall research equipment purchases – to Mississippi Beef Processors. Hall allegedly then converted the $167,725 to personal use. Hall created an invoice to justify the check.
All of that we’ve heard before but it’s what comes next that inspired the title of this post. Continue reading “Latest bull on the beef plant”