Tag: Sid Backstrom

BREAKING NEWS: Y’all Come, door’s open! – Biggers’ Order responds to Zach Scruggs’ Motion for Depositions

As folks here say, Judge Biggers “just outdid himself “with this Order!

In resolving the issues raised by the petitioner, the court is going to consider evidence in open court from live witnesses in accordance with the Rules of Evidence.The petitioner has presented to the court the names of witnesses he wants to depose, and the government has responded as to why some of the potential witnesses are not relevant to issues in the upcoming hearing. The court will not pre-judge what testimony potential witnesses may give and therefore will not disallow the petitioner to call some witnesses and allow him to call other witnesses; but the court will take up any objections made to questions of witnesses as they may come up from either party in open court based on the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Oxford is definitely the place to be on the 24th of April. Expect standing-room-only if you’re planning to attend the Hearing on Zach Scruggs’ Motion to Vacate! Dick Scruggs, Sid Backstrom, Steve Patterson, Tim Balducci, Judge Lackey, Tom Dawson, Bob Norman, Anthony Farese, and Dick Scruggs, Sid Backstrom, Steve Patterson, Tim Balducci, Judge Lackey, Tom Dawson, Bob Norman, Anthony Farese, and FBI Agent William Dulaney will all be there with Zach.

Slight of hand – Government playing trick on Judge Biggers with Response to Zach Scruggs’ Motion for Depositions

Hopefully, Judge Biggers will catch the slight of hand trick when he reads the Government’s Response to Zach Scruggs’ Motion for Depositions – admittedly, I missed it on my first read and only read it again after catching Patsy Brumfield’s story on NEMS360.com this morning: Feds insist Scruggs request ‘reckless’ to question key figures under oath.

Prosecutors say Zach Scruggs’ request to take sworn statements from 11 key judicial-bribery case witnesses is “reckless, speculative and legally ineffective.”

Their motion filed late Friday argues that the only people the court should subpoena for live testimony should be Scruggs’ four original co-defendants in the 2007 judicial bribery case that rocked Mississippi’s legal community…

Here’s the trick – the Government wants to substitute affidavits given to counter Zach’s Bar Complaint against his former attorney, Anthony Farese, for the depositions Zach requested in his Motion for Depositions.  While the names may be the same – Langston, Dawson, Sanders, and Norman – Zach’s Motion goes much further than his complaint against Farese.  Not only that, the Government tosses in the affidavits of Oxford attorney Kenneth Coghlan and former Langston law partner Ron Michaels – both supporting Farese in the matter before the Bar, to make the slight of hand trick more believable to Judge Biggers.

However, there are far more significant issues before the Court than those addressed in Zach’s Bar Complaint against Farese – and the Government’s response ignores those issues all but in total.  For example, the Government’s position is Judge Lackey should be given a free pass (another one!): Continue reading “Slight of hand – Government playing trick on Judge Biggers with Response to Zach Scruggs’ Motion for Depositions”

Zach Scruggs files the mother of all motions – Motion for Deposition of all Scruggs defendants and key players UPDATED

Update: Patsy Brumfield reports on Zach’s motion in the Sunday edition of NEMS360 – What may they say, if Zach Scruggs questions key players?

Skipping the legal argument of Zach’s Motion for Depositions (below in Scribd format) and going straight to what everyone has always wanted to know:

“The following states the name of each person whose deposition is requested, along with illustrative (but not exhaustive) information explaining the discoverable information that person is likely to provide. For the sake of brevity, each entry incorporates the knowledge stated for prior witnesses”.

Sidney Backstrom:

Mr. Backstrom was a co-defendant in this case, who worked in the Scruggs Law Firm across the hall from the Petitioner. Mr. Backstrom has discoverable knowledge concerning the Scruggs Katrina Group and their assessment of the Jones case, whether Petitioner ever knew about an alleged bribery scheme or whether there was any such bribery scheme. This Court has previously suggested that Mr. Backstrom would surely have discussed a bribery scheme with Petitioner (see Petition, D.E. 303 at 33), and Mr. Backstrom will put such speculation to rest. Specifically, Mr. Backstrom can provide context to the November recording, testifying as to whether Petitioner was present during key moments. Mr. Backstrom is also a witness regarding the existence of certain alleged conversations and emails, about which Timothy Balducci has testified falsely.

Mr. Backstrom can also testify to whether Petitioner ever did anything to join the conspiracy, in support thereof, or to conceal the same, along with the state of mind of the Petitioner regarding Judge Lackey’s order compelling arbitration. Mr. Backstrom also has knowledge of exculpatory discussions he had with federal authorities concerning Petitioner both before and after he became a cooperating witness, as well as about the existence or absence of any documentation of such discussions, which should have been disclosed to Petitioner. Mr. Backstrom will also impeach testimony and representations previously given to this Court by both Government witnesses and the Government itself. Mr. Backstrom presently resides in Texas, outside the civil subpoena power of this Court, making a deposition the only practicable way to get his testimony for this Court…(citations omitted)

Richard Scruggs

Mr. Scruggs was the primary defendant in this case, and has discoverable knowledge about the foregoing issues. Mr. Scruggs is also in the best position to testify about who created the alleged bribery scheme, when, and how, and most importantly, whether Petitioner was ever told about that alleged bribery scheme. In addition, Mr. Scruggs knows whether Petitioner was ever informed about the $40,000 and $10,000 payments to Mr. Balducci, or whether Petitioner was informed that the legal work assigned to Mr. Balducci on a Hurricane Katrina case was a mere sham, as the Government alleges, to provide cover for reimbursing the alleged bribery funds.

Mr. Scruggs can also testify to whether Petitioner ever did anything to join the conspiracy, in support thereof, or to conceal the same. This testimony will also serve to impeach testimony and representations previously given to this Court by both Government witnesses and the Government itself. Mr. Scruggs resides in a Federal Correctional Institution in Ashland, Kentucky, outside the civil subpoena power of this Court, making a deposition the only practicable way to get his testimony for this Court…(citations omitted)

Zach also seeks to depose Steven Patterson,Timothy Balducci, Judge Henry Lackey, William Delaney, Joseph Langston, Anthony Farese, Tom Dawson, Judge David Sanders, and Robert Norman – specifics below the jump. Continue reading “Zach Scruggs files the mother of all motions – Motion for Deposition of all Scruggs defendants and key players UPDATED”

No surprise, little substance – not much thinking evident in Government’s cognitive map – USA opposes Zach Scruggs’ Motion

Hardly the “breaking news” it was several days ago – and even then not a surprise:

“The government respectfully differs” with Scruggs’ view that he was forced to plead guilty to a crime he didn’t commit and that his former counsel was secretly working with the government for another client…”

Although SLABBED was otherwise engaged when Patsy Brumfield broke the story of the Government’s Response in Opposition to Zach Scruggs’ Motion to Vacate, “Unbelievable” was the reaction on bellesouth’s blog and even the blogging lawyer of north Mississippi was taken aback by the government’s mention of polygraph tests:

“Sid Backstrom attempted to corroborate the petitioner’s denials, but failed an FBI polygraph.  David Zachary Scruggs also failed an FBI polygraph showing deception when he said he knew nothing about money changing hands”.

Others found it “unbelievable” that the Government’s Response made mention of the polygraph tests.  In her day-after story, Patsy Brumfield had comments from Scruggs’ attorney, former Missouri Supreme Court Justice Edward “Chip” Robertson:

“Robertson said he’s surprised they breached a confidentiality agreement about the polygraph, saying its results aren’t reliable or admissible as evidence. (emphasis added)”

Clearly, the Government needed an argument that would likely cause Judge Biggers to flip his wig and deny Zach’s motion.  The reliability of the 404(b) “wig” the Government put in Judge Biggers’ “ear” when the case appeared headed to trial was refuted by the recently obtained documentation incorporated into Zach’s motion – and the Government had little choice but to include a related admission in its opposition response: Continue reading “No surprise, little substance – not much thinking evident in Government’s cognitive map – USA opposes Zach Scruggs’ Motion”

Welcome back Zach!

Patsy Brumfield has the story for the Daily Journal.

Zach Scruggs, convicted for his part in the scheme to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey of Calhoun City, is out of federal prison and assigned to a community re-entry facility in Tupelo. An earlier report, which said he was in Montgomery, Ala., was not accurate. Inmates in the Tupelo center technically are under Montgomery’s jurisdiction, and that’s why on the Bureau of Prison’s web site it shows him there. His custody location is noted on www.bop.gov. Aug. 19 is his projected release date, the site shows.

Cheryl Dennings with BOP in Atlanta said Scruggs was moved Tuesday from a low-security prison in Forrest City, Ark. to Tupelo as he prepares to “transition” back into society. As soon as he finds a job and gets various other details approved, like driving a car, he will work away from the center and return each night.

Although an Internet site speculated Scruggs may have been seen in Oxford on Tuesday, Dennings said that wasn’t likely since she believes he was brought to Tupelo directly from Arkansas.

The just-us justice of north Mississippi challenges the meaning of “likely” on a regular basis.  Today, for example, the Clarion Ledger is reporting the previously unlikely move of Judge Delaughter’s April trial to Oxford.  Late yesterday, the Ledger reported the even more unlikely, but long suspected, grant of immunity to former Hinds County District Attorney Ed Peters.

So, while Peters and his immunity were lunching with the current DA, Sid Backstrom and his integrity remained confined in Arkansas – and some dare call it justice when it’s just-us.

Stone walls do not a prison make nor iron bars a cage.

In that light, true justice emerges as those guilty of  just-us justice serve a life sentence – forever confined by the limits of their small and narrow minds.   Continue reading “Welcome back Zach!”

Mississippi’s just us justice – final

Patsy Brumfield of the Journal reports on today’s events in the just-us-justice system of Mississippi.

Timothy Balducci and Steven Patterson will do prison time, despite their cooperation into the infamous conspiracy to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey of Calhoun City.

Their sentences were set today by Senior U.S. District Judge Neal Biggers Jr. today at the federal courthouse in Oxford.

• Balducci, formerly of New Albany, will serve 24 months in prison. Balducci was given no fine, because records showed he could not pay one.

• Patterson of New Albany will serve 24 months in prison. Patterson was also given a $150,000 fine.

Justice or just-us-justice?  It’s really hard for me to say –  not for lack of thought or thought-provoking comment from others here on the blog and off-blog as well.  However, there often is a difference between justice as commonly defined and the sometimes just-us-justice here – a difference that is one of the many that make Mississippi the “State of Paradox”.

We’ve birthed the blue; performed the first successful heart transplant: and, bottled the firt coca-cola – but even considering USA v Scruggs and all its implications, we are better people in a better place with a better legal system than that of our past. Some would disagree but none could argue the point with fact.

Lack of fact has never been a barrier for the low-literate but language-rich story-telling population of the “State of Paradox”.   Here, the direct descendants of the first Mr. Right (fn:Always) and his Mrs. (nee Promise you-won’t-tell-another-living-soul But) have informed and entertained  for generations. In doing so, these story-tellers have defined and devined how the outside world views Mississippi and distorted the outside world to those here.

Just-us-justice established the practice of  selective disgrace during a period in the history of the “State of Paradox” when it was not disgraceful for one man to own another – just doing business. As the then wealth of the State evolved into generational poverty, people began to trade on favor – a transaction that makes one man’s word another man’s bondage with the ever present threat of public disgrace from a legal flogging. Continue reading “Mississippi’s just us justice – final”

Just the pleas, please – Scruggs, Scruggs, Balducci, Patterson, Langston

Judging by what I’ve read today, with at least one additional indictment expected this week, there is confusion about the exposure those with plea agreements in USA v Scruggs have to “other charges” following the recent plea of Dick Scruggs.

The Plea Agreements of  Zach Scruggs, Tim Balducci, and Steve Patterson contain terms that specifically address the possibility of other charges with similar, if not identical, language:

OTHER CHARGES: The United States agrees not to charge the defendant with any other offenses arising from or related to the charges in the indictment.

Only the Plea Agreement of Dick Scruggs did not contain this exclusion; but, reportedly, Scruggs entered his plea this week under a Plea Agreement that excludes other charges from any testimony he gives on a case.  It should also be noted that, while his name has not been mentioned in conjunction with the attempt to influence Judge DeLaughter,  Sid Backstrom’s Plea Agreement contained language on “other charges” similar to that found in the agreements of Zach Scruggs, Balducci and Patterson.

Joey Langston however, managed to come up with what one might call “a sweetheart of a deal” in his Plea Agreement:

OTHER CHARGES: The United States agrees not to charge the defendant with any other offenses, related or unrelated, as of the date of this Agreement.

Because it seems appropriate, I’ll add that there are many in Hinds County who hold Judge Delaughter in high regard similar to that reserved for Judge Lackey in Lafayette County.

Biggers recommends Arkansas for Zach UPDATED

Anita Lee reports Judge Bigger’s has responded to Zach’s request to serve his sentence in Arkansas – but the news that caught my eye was mention Dick Scruggs would serve his sentence there as well.

U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr. is now recommending that former attorney Zach Scruggs be sent to prison in Ft. Smith, Ark., where his father, former attorney Dickie Scruggs, also is expected to begin serving a five-year sentence Monday.

Kentucky, I gather is out. (see update at end of post)

Biggers said he was recommending the Arkansas prison for the convenience of Scruggs family members who want to visit. Both Scruggses initially requested that they serve their time at a minimum-security prison in Pensacola, but the Bureau of Prisons would not send Dickie Scruggs there because he has a pilot’s license and an airfield is located nearby.

A third defendant in the judicial bribery case, former attorney Sidney A. Backstrom, also is scheduled to begin serving his 28-month sentence Monday at the minimum-security prison in Ft. Smith.

h/t to justme for letting us know the Sun Herald is now reporting Dick Scruggs will serve his sentence in Kentucky. The quote above was copied from the earlier version of the story and pasted in FYI but the link now goes to different story with Biggers recommendation in pdf posted but no mention of correction. However, when you go to the link in this story, you can see the quote in the clip.

Backstrom to report to Arkansas facility August 4

Anita Lee has the story along with a pdf of the letter of assignment.

Attorney Sidney Backstrom has been notified that he should report to a low-security prison camp in Arkansas to spend 28 months in prison for conspiring with Dickie Scruggs to bribe a state court judge.

Backstrom had asked when he was sentenced to serve his time in Arkansas because he will be near his wife’s family. His attorney was notified by federal court officials that he should report by 2 p.m., Aug. 4 to the Federal Correctional Institution Satellite Camp in Forrest City, Ark.

There’s bound to be something appropriate to add but I can’t think what it might be and so I simply offer Anita’s story with nothing else said.

The $50,000 question about the downfall of Dickie Scruggs

The amount of the bribe – small potatoes to a man with the wealth of Dickie Scruggs and, as it turned out, sweet ones at that – accounted in large part for the stunned reaction to his indictment captured in the Wall Street Journal interview with author John Grisham.

This doesn’t sound like the Dickie Scruggs that I know. . . . When you know Dickie, and how successful he has been, you could not believe he would be involved in such a boneheaded bribery scam that is not in the least bit sophisticated.”

The juxtaposition of his wealth, the small amount of money involved in the bribe, and a needless crime created a picture that remained out of focus even as he was sentenced.

…the amount of the bribe, in this case, that was paid, $50,000 – – 40,000 actually delivered and $10,000 more written, transferred to Balducci to supposedly give to Judge Lackey…The Court does not feel that $50,000 is – – is a reasonable figure to use in calculating the seriousness of this crime.

While reading around this morning, I found a comment that sharpened the picture a bit. Continue reading “The $50,000 question about the downfall of Dickie Scruggs”