And it all comes tumbling down…..

In late 2008/early 2009 the Nation was captivated by the judicial bribery prosecution of Dickie Scruggs, his son Zach plus the greedy stooges in Tim Balducci and Steve Patterson among others. In a way the genesis of Slabbed lie in those events as Team Insurance, through various shills such as Portland Oregon Lawyer David Rossmiller that took the opportunity to screw over folks down here on the coast whose only “crime” was losing their homes to a hurricane and expecting their insurer to honor their contracts.

There has been a  fair amount about the Scruggs prosecution documented on these pages, mainly by the now on hiatus Nowdy who used the term Just Us justice to describe the behind the scenes crushing of Zach Scruggs in particular and indeed before she departed she wrote of Zach Scrugg’s attempt to have his guilty plea overturned based on the case facts and an intervening Supreme Court decision.

I’ve never had much of an interest in the carrying on of a bunch of power lawyers 300 plus miles away in North Mississippi before the folks down here on the coast got used as cheap props in the Scruggs scandal and believe me I come not to defend Dick Scruggs as he represents the worst of the legal profession in how he conducted himself professionally. That said I’m now beginning to wonder how much company he should have in the federal pen because it is becoming very clear some of Scruggs’ loudest critics aren’t much better people and this includes the US Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Mississippi which even tried to eat its own young in the bogus prosecution of FBI Agent Hal Neilson last year.

I’ve been sitting on information about the Scruggs saga for well over a year.  Frankly with the revelations that the US Attorney’s office in Oxford seemed more interested in cashing via writing a book than doing justice in USA v Scruggs, the more recent revelations of prosecutorial misconduct in the case comes as no surprise. This is a topic that is beginning to call me, especially with news today that AUSA Bob Norman was disqualified by Judge Biggers from USA v Zach Scruggs for withholding information from the court salient to the case.

I personally think Zach knew about the bribe just as surely as the senior folks at Nutt and McAllister did, but I do not think the government had the evidence to prove it.  When things slow down a bit I’m going to review this case. It is becoming too compelling not to take a second look.

Edited 2/19/15

AUSA Bob Norman loses his grip – throws Tom Dawson under the bus and rolls over Judge Biggers in Government’s Response. Zach’s Reply calls for Government’s backup!

After it took one Court order, one 30 day-extension, and a total of 77 days for the Government to respond to Zach Scruggs’ Motion to Vacate, Judge Biggers ruled on Zach’s Motion for Discovery before the Government filed any Response at all.

However, haste makes waste – and in its haste to produce the one-day-wonder filed today, the waste was former AUSA Tom Dawson who went under the bus as the Government rolled on.

Dawson is co-author of the “impeccably researched” Kings of Tortsa “true story…”.  Zach Scruggs’ Motion for Reconsideration claims:

Only with the publication of these facts in 2009 did Petitioner Zachary Scruggs learn that the Government induced his own attorney to procure a witness that the Government assured the Court and Petitioner would testify against Zachary Scruggs, a witness that created an “insurmountable” challenge to his defense, and undermined his rights to effective counsel and fair trial. The purpose of the requested discovery is to probe those murky depths, to determine whether the Government affirms or denies those facts provided by Mr. Dawson. If the Government now concedes that Mr. Dawson’s account is true, then these questions can be dispatched quite quickly.

Chief among those facts cited by Scruggs is that “Mr. Dawson’s 2009 book further explains that the Government proceeded with nearly a month of secret negotiations, using Mr. Farese to secure Mr. Langston’s plea and agreement to cooperate with the Government, all without notifying the Petitioner, the other defendants, the other joint defense counsel members, or the Court about the conflict the Government had created.

In the Government’s Opposition brief (below in Scribd format), ND Mississippi AUSA Bob Norman refutes the truth of Dawson’s account:

Let us be clear. There were no month-long secret negotiations preceding Joey Langston’s plea. There has been no “adverse testimony” from Mr. Langston. There is therefore no conflict.

By all means, “let’s be clear”- and for clarity we turn to Zach’s Reply (below in Scribd format), filed before the ink was dry on the Government’s Response: Continue reading “AUSA Bob Norman loses his grip – throws Tom Dawson under the bus and rolls over Judge Biggers in Government’s Response. Zach’s Reply calls for Government’s backup!”