Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May, 2016

Below is a guest column by retired investigative reporter Ken Booth, formerly of Monroe and KNOE-TV but now living in sun-drenched retirement in Arizona.

A bit of explanation for this column is in order. For some time now, a feud has been brewing in 4th Judicial District Court which includes the parishes of Ouachita and Morehouse.

The dispute, which has been covered extensively by the Ouachita Citizen but largely ignored by other media in North Louisiana, is between Judge Sharon Ingram Marchman and four other judges of the 4th JDC and centers around a clerk for the 4th JDC, Allyson Campbell, whose attendance at her job has been brought into question by Judge Marchman.

Here is a copy of the MARCHMAN LAWSUIT filed in U.S Federal Court, Western District of Louisiana.

 

By Ken Booth

Guest columnist

This is troubling stuff indeed. When the Ouachita Parish court system not only fails to make sure justice is served fairly but goes so far as to allegedly try to cover up destruction of public documents which might prove such failure…. Well, we have more than just irony. Much more.

In what is believed to be an unprecedented move, a sitting 4th Judicial District Court judge has sued four fellow judges and their law clerk in federal court for “cover-up” of law clerk Allyson Campbell’s “history of wrong doing” as well as attempts to expose it all.

Judge Sharon Marchman’s suit grows from a report from the Louisiana Legislative Auditor last year which found some employees of the Court may have been paid for work never performed with time sheets submitted indicating they were there working when in fact they were somewhere else. If that happened that’s payroll fraud, the kind that got former Monroe City Engineer Sinyale Morrison and one of her employees in deep legal trouble.

The relevant part of the audit is found on page 41:

Condition

 Our audit procedures disclosed that some employees may have received compensation when they were not working. It appears that hours reported to payroll on time sheets might have been mis-classified as time worked instead of leave time used. This condition was detected by management and investigated internally before the audit. However, the control system did not detect the condition.

Criteria

Various state statues including, but not limited to, La. R.S. 14:138, govern the payment of public employees.

Internal control procedures must be designed to reduce to an acceptable level the risk that employees could be compensated for time not actually worked.

Cause

Internal control procedures may have failed to detect inaccuracies on time sheets submitted by employees.

Effect

The condition has at least the following effects:

  1. State law may have been violated.
  2. The Court may have compensated some employees for time that they did not work.
  3. If the Court compensated an employee(s) for time that was not worked, that employee also accumulated leave time that was not earned.

41

Here is the full AUDIT report.

State police were reported last June to be investigating the 4th JDC, but no report has ever been issued by LSP on that investigation.

http://www.knoe.com/home/headlines/LSP-investigating-4th-Judicial-District-Court-317689071.html

But it’s the subsequent attempt to squelch any attempt by the public to gain access to these and other related court records that is at the heart of Judge Marchman’s petition who asserts her efforts toward full disclosure have made her a “pariah” in the courthouse, hated and rejected by fellow judges and others.

But that audit and the Marchman suit are but parts of the court saga that seemingly continues to write itself while unfolding like a long-legged crane trying to land in deep soft mud.

If law clerk Allyson Campbell was ever disciplined for misfiling time sheets for leave time taken is not known. Those records have been blocked from release by judicial order of the 4th JDC citing “privacy concerns.” The Ouachita Citizen newspaper had sought these public records and once refused, filed a criminal complaint with the District Attorney.

The Court then sued the newspaper for seeking the release of records which under Louisiana law should be available for public copying or inspection.

A search has revealed nowhere else can be found a case in which a state District Court has sued the news media for seeking to publish public documents. That development, as stunning as it might have been, went completely unreported by other Ouachita Parish media, including two television stations and a daily newspaper owned by Gannett.

In the meantime, District Attorney Jerry Jones requested the Louisiana State Police look into the audit’s finding of possible payroll fraud. Their probe was joined by the state Inspector General. Their findings, turned over to Jones, were forwarded to the Louisiana Attorney General.

Highly partisan scuttlebutt among the higher-ups around the courthouse has it that no wrongdoing was uncovered by the joint investigation but no official report or statement verifying that has to this date been released by the Attorney General.

Whether Judge Wilson Rambo’s law clerk Allyson Campbell got paid for work not performed is but one issue.

Rather, the preponderance of allegations appearing in lawsuits stemming from this mess is that the law clerk involved is demonstrated to have been beyond supervision “let alone discipline, and furthermore defendant Judges were covering up her actions.”

A litigant in matters already before the court, Stanley R. Palowsky, III sued her individually along with five 4th District Court Judges last July accusing Campbell of hiding or shredding filings in his case(s) before Judge Rambo.

Palowsky’s suit alleged the Clerk of Court could not locate as many as 52 different writ applications which had been “missing” for over a year and that Campbell “who was clerking for Defendant Sharp at the time, had used the applications as an end table in her office.”

BROKEN GAVEL?

After the missing 52 writ applications were discovered in Campbell’s office she was reassigned to law clerk duties for Judge Fred Amman who – the Palowsky suit charges—“is her close friend and personal confidant” and Rambo, who was at the time presiding over a Palowsky civil suit before the court, a case in which the missing documents had figured.

Curiously, when your correspondent sought an extra copy of this suit quoted here from the Clerk of Court’s office, the suit had been ‘sealed’ and removed from public view. Fortunately, for the public’s interest, that horse was already out of the barn, so as to speak.

The Palowsky lawsuit asserted that Campbell was apparently the only subject of the Auditor’s report on suspected payroll fraud and that “her office reportedly went vacant for days, if not weeks, at a time.”

The petition went on to allege that Campbell had posted several photos on her Facebook page which “indicated that she…did her job in restaurants and/or bars” while drinking.

Palowsky accused her of identifying her food and drink as having been consumed “at the office.

The ‘sealed’ petition alleged that Campbell “…has a history of destroying and /or concealing court documents and Defendant Judges have covered this up” to protect her.

In one case cited as far back as 2012, Monroe Attorney Cody Rials was said to have complained to Judge Carl Sharp that he had “observed Campbell bragging in a local bar that she had destroyed Rials’ court document” in a case he had pending before Judge Sharp. Although Sharp was said to have found Rials’ story credible, the matter went no further according to the petition.

Campbell, at the time a society columnist for the daily newspaper, wrote a 2014 column called “A modern guide to handle your scandal,” according to the Palowski pleadings.

The court document quoted the Campbell column as having declared that “half the fun is getting there and the other half is in the fix.”

When Rials put his complaint about records destruction in writing, Judges Jones and Sharp interviewed an “unbiased disinterested witness who personally saw and heard Campbell sitting in a bar boasting about shredding Rials’ document so that Sharp would not review it.”

The witness told Sharp and Jones that Campbell told him directly that she had “taken great pleasure in shredding Rials’ judgement” and that she had given Rials a “legal _ _ _ _ ing.”

Courthouse workers have confided that during this approximate time frame they once hauled three roller cans filled with bagged shredded papers to the dumpster located between the courthouse and its annex. There is no way, of course, to know exactly what may have been in those bags which had been retrieved from the basement of the courthouse. However, when the shredding claims surfaced last Summer, the workers discussed whether some or all of it had been what they had disposed of.

That eyewitness to the alleged barroom bragging  has been identified to your correspondent as Monroe attorney Joey Grassi, who was deemed by Jones and Sharp, according to the Palowsky suit, to be “credible.“ However, that investigation also was shut off.

Key fob and in-house videos have reportedly showed that Campbell had not entered the courthouse on any of seven different days in the first part of 2014 even though her time sheets indicated she was there working. Those apparent false time sheets had been approved by Judges Rambo and Amman, which at most private businesses would be considered a firing offense.

THE MARCHMAN LAWSUIT

Judge Sharon Marchman has exposed what she says is a continued cover-up of law clerk Campbell’s actions. To that end she has filed a 33-page federal court civil lawsuit against Campbell, Campbell’s attorney, four fellow jurists and their attorney, and the former Louisiana Attorney-General Buddy Caldwell and his attorney.

In it she claims the named Judges of the 4th District Court, acting under color of law, have retaliated against her because she has opposed their plan to continue their “long-time protection of defendant Campbell,” who has been at the pertinent times mentioned supervised by Judges Rambo, Sharp and Amman.

She calls it a concerted action and conspiracy to hide Campbell “has committed payroll fraud and has destroyed or concealed court documents.” Her suit alleges the defendants have “intentionally withheld information and production of documents from authorities and persons making public records requests.”

Since they were all acting in an administrative capacity, none of them are entitled judicial immunity, she said.

Marchman outlined a pattern of retaliation she says has been carried out against her including “threatening, intimidating, coercing, ridiculing, taunting, harassing, alienating and making false accusations of wrongdoing” against her.

On one occasion last September, according to the Marchman lawsuit, Judge Rambo intentionally walked into her as he as getting off the elevator. The exact words in the petition: “The physical contact was done intentionally.”

By the end of last year after some favorable articles about Judge Marchman appeared, the Judges meeting as a group or en banc ruled the chief judge had to approve all videos and photographs taken in the courthouse. Marchman maintains that was part of a vendetta against her to deny to her any positive press attention, all of this growing out of the alleged unlawful actions of Campbell regarding payroll and documents and its subsequent cover-up.

Shreveport Federal Judge S. Maurice Hicks has been assigned to preside over Marchman’s lawsuit. Whether it will be heard at the federal courthouse in Monroe or Shreveport is not known at this time.

Ironically, Judge Hicks previously presided over a case called “Broken Gavel” in which two Caddo Parish judges were convicted of taking bribes for judicial favors. He sentenced one of them to ten years in the pen and the other five years.

All of this stew of controversies has prompted more than one lawsuit alleging repeated attempts to impede the administration of justice at the Ouachita Parish Louisiana Courthouse. With the exception of the Ouachita Citizen -which until recently was alone in reporting any of it- it all appears to have been too intellectually challenging for other local media.

These developments, however, have attracted newspaper and other coverage outside Ouachita Parish and in some national legal blogs such as ABOVE THE LAW, an American blog that gives news and commentary about the U.S. legal industry, which observed on September 3, 2015:

“Drinking on the job -especially while employed by the taxpayers- is not something you do just because you can. It’s something you do to numb soul-crushing ennui, something that Campbell seems to lack based on excerpts from her famed society column cited in the (Palowsky) complaint.”

Lack of local attention given highly questionable behavior by elected officials is bad enough but when it draws statewide as well as national eyebrows that can trigger potential economic fallout from lack of new investment.

Another 4th District Court Judge in Ouachita, Larry Jefferson, ruled a robbery-kidnap-carjack suspect ‘not guilty’ after a bench trial the other day in spite of DNA evidence which conclusively tied him to his crime against a 71-year-old female victim.

The 24-year-old perp, already a career criminal with an arm-long rap sheet of violent crime had held a pistol to the head of this live-alone grandmother and tried to cash her account out at an ATM where the blood from his cut hand was left and matched a mouth swab taken later, was free again—courtesy of Judge Jefferson—to share the community with his victim.

Certainly, it was not Ouachita Judiciary’s finest hour. Nor was it Jefferson’s first time in an unflattering spotlight. In 1999, the Louisiana Judiciary Commission concluded, “His actions cannot be said to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary” and in fact his actions had eroded both. After Jefferson unilaterally dismissed more than 40 cases before his then-City Court bench, the state Supreme Court suspended him from office for two years.

His ruling in the case of the robbery of the elderly grandmother came within a few days of handing a dirty state police trooper one year and some community service after the man was convicted of stealing drugs from an evidence room and selling about $1-million worth of the dope on the street. The ex-cop could have drawn a maximum sentence of 92 years in prison and fines totaling $76,000.

That non-jewel of judicial behavior reaped headlines across the nation. Veteran Capitol newspaperman Tom Aswell wrote: “If there’s anything dirtier than a rogue cop, it would have to be a rogue Judge.”

“Put the two together,” he wrote, “and an epic miscarriage of justice is bound to occur.”

These glaring cases serve readily to underline the need for public accountability and transparency to which the 4th Judicial District Court should rededicate itself. It’s a standard which sadly these cases suggest strongly has been ignored lately.

 

Read Full Post »

 

Some things are difficult to understand.

Like, for instance, how voters returned State Rep. Nancy Landry (R-Lafayette) to the legislature for another term. Not only was she re-elected, but it was by a landslide. The only plausible explanation was that Bobby Jindal was running against her.

She received 85 percent of the vote in her district, which includes parts of Lafayette and Vermilion Parishes.

Public school teachers and their families alone, voting as a bloc in those two parishes, should have prevented that kind of mandate.

You see, Landry is on a one-person crusade to become Public Enemy Number One among school teachers. She has repeatedly pilloried teachers from her position in the legislature and now she has been named as chairperson of the House Education Committee. (Coincidentally, Denham Springs GOP Rep. Rogers Pope, a retired school superintendent and former Superintendent of the Year for Louisiana, stepped down from the committee about the same time Landry was elevated to the chairmanship.)

Why am I so critical of Landry?

Well, first, let’s go back to March 2012 when she opened proceedings by the committee by introducing a new rule that had never existed in House committee hearings. https://louisianavoice.com/2012/03/14/how-do-you-teague-a-legislator-ask-jindal-to-teague-a-teacher-just-change-the-committee-rules-for-witnesses/

The committee was hearing testimony on HB 976 by committee Chairman Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge) that would impose sweeping changes, including providing student scholarships for Jindal’s Educational Excellence Program, allow for parent petitions for certain schools to be transferred to the Recovery School District (RSD) and charter school authorization criteria.

Before debate began on the bill, Landry said she had received calls from “concerned constituents” to the effect that some teachers from districts that did not close schools for the day had taken a sick day in order to attend a rally of teachers opposed to Jindal’s education reform.

She neglected to mention, of course, that teachers are given 10 sick days per year, so if they want to use a sick day to attend a committee hearing in Baton Rouge, that’s their business and no one else’s. Moreover, if a teacher exceeds her 10 days during a school year, she is docked a full day’s pay at the teachers’s salary rate while the substitute teacher is paid a substitute’s salary, which is less.

Undaunted and undeterred by those facts, Landry made a motion that in addition to the customary practice of witnesses providing their names, where they are from and whom they represent, they be required to state if they were appearing before the committee in a “professional capacity or if they were on annual or sick leave.”

Democrats on the committee were livid. Then-Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) said he had never in his tenure in the House seen such a rule imposed on witnesses.

“This house (the Capitol) belongs to the people,” said Rep. Pat Smith (D-Baton Rouge) “and now we’re going to put them in a compromising position? This is an atrocity!”

Committee member Wesley Bishop (D-New Orleans) said, “I have one question: if we approve this motion and if a witness declines to provide that information, will that witness be prohibited from testifying?”

Carter, momentarily taken aback, held a hastily whispered conference before turning back to the microphone to say, “We cannot refuse anyone the opportunity to testify.”

That appeared to make Landry’s motion a moot point but she persisted and the committee ended up approving her motion by a 10-8 vote that was reflective of the 11-6 Republican-Democrat (with one Independent) makeup of the committee.

Edwards lost no time in getting in a parting shot on the passage of the new rule.

Then-Gov. Bobby Jindal was the first to testify and upon completion of his testimony, Edwards observed that no one on the committee appeared overly concerned of whether or not the governor was on annual or sick leave.

Jindal, who had entered the committee room late and knew nothing of the debate and subsequent vote on Landry’s motion, bristled at Edwards, saying, “I’m here as governor.”

Now fast-forward to yesterday (Tuesday, May 3) and once again we have Landry going for teachers’ jugulars. http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=980632

A substitute bill for House Bill 392 by Landry cleared the committee without objection and will now move to the full House for consideration but there are a couple of points that need to be made about the provisions of the bill that committee members may have failed to consider—or simply ignored.

Landry wants to pile on the 2012 law, Act 1, under which pay for teachers and other employees may be cut. She wants to impose salary cuts when teachers’ and other employees’ working hours are reduced. She said that Lafayette Parish had cases in which educators successfully sued the school board over pay cuts when they were moved from 12-month jobs to nine-month jobs. http://theadvocate.com/news/15675829-64/new-provision-for-teacher-pay-cuts-clears-house-panel

Historically, teachers have had the option of being paid a lower monthly salary extended over 12 months or higher a monthly salary on nine months. The annual salary was the same either way.

In the Lafayette case, two teachers who were displaced by the closure of their charter school for high-risk students sued and won back pay when their schedules were reduced from 244 days to 182 days. One of the teachers saw her salary cut from $80,104 to $60,214 while the second was cut from $74,423 to $56,207. Both cuts of about 25 percent coincided with the fewer number of days. http://theadvocate.com/news/11060641-123/appeals-court-sides-with-teachers

On the surface, the bill makes perfect sense. As is the case most of the time, however, one needs to look beyond the obvious for answers.

And when you do, you will find that no teacher ever simply works 182 days. That is a myth and one that needs to be debunked once and for all.

Landry is an attorney specializing in family law. As such, she likely earns considerably more than the average teacher. But that’s okay; the teacher made a career choice, so that isn’t my sticking point. But like a teacher, she sees all manner of humanity parade through her office and while her hourly fee is the same for all, there are times I’m pretty sure that some clients should be charged significantly more per hour because of the difficulty in addressing their multitude of problems. An amicable divorce, for example, is a much easier case for Landry than one in which the parents fight over every child and every piece of property right down to the pet gerbil.

It’s the same for teachers. The child whose parents are attentive to his or her school work and who see to it that all homework assignments are completed correctly is a pleasure to teach.

The child who comes to school in clean cloths, on a full stomach, and well-rested after a good night’s sleep is not the problem.

The child whose lives in a two-parent household where the parents are not constantly fighting and screaming is generally a well-adjusted student who poses no problems in the classroom.

The child who is respectful to the teacher and who applies himself or herself in class work isn’t the one who causes disciplinary problems.

But that child whose parents are on crack or meth and who comes to school unprepared, unkempt, in filthy clothing, hungry, sleepy and angry at the world is a challenge to the teacher whose job it is to try and help that child keep up with the rest of the class—which, of course, only serves to slow the progress of the entire class.

If Rep. Landry would take the time to volunteer in an elementary or middle school classroom for one week, she would come away from the experience with an attitude adjustment. I guarantee it.

  • When she has to break up a schoolyard fight between middle school students who are just as likely to attack her physically, she will experience a world she has never known;
  • When she has to clean the behind of a first-grader in the restroom who is already wearing filthy underwear, she will get a taste of what elementary school teachers do—for 182 days a year;
  • When she has to attempt to explain the multiplication tables to a child who curses her, she will gain a new respect for teachers;
  • When she sees the hunger in the eyes of a malnourished child whose crack- and meth-addicted parents show up at parent-teacher conferences blaming the teacher for their own shortcomings, she will think about the difference—that abyss—between her fee and the salary paid a teacher;
  • When she has to stay up until midnight grading papers, she will wonder why the hell teachers aren’t paid more;
  • When she has to return to the classroom at the end of the school year to clean up her classroom, throw out old papers, prepare new lesson plans, prepare for the new school year and adjust to the constantly changing dictates of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, tasks that generally extend through most of the summer “vacation,” she will wonder why anyone would ever opt for teaching—without ever once considering that it is a calling, not a job, for those who have an unselfish desire to help children as they grow into adulthood;
  • When she must make that fateful decision, as did that teacher at Sandy Hook, to stand between an armed mentally deranged lunatic and a child so she can take the bullet that will end her life but spare the child in doing so, she will know what it’s like to enter the most honorable profession known to humanity.

When she does all that, maybe, just maybe, Rep. Nancy Landry will gain a new respect and appreciation for the sacrifice, dedication, hard work, and thankless job of educating our children.

Until then, she is just another politician with a kneejerk solution to perceived problems.

But as for me, I can honestly say that I struggled mightily in school and had it not been for at least a half-dozen of my high school teachers who took a direct interest in my well-being, nurtured my potential (what there was of it), and encouraged me to work a little harder, I truthfully do not know where I’d be today. I will carry my gratitude to those teachers to my grave.

Read Full Post »

How much does a legislator cost in Louisiana?

Certainly, that’s a loaded question, an ambush question, if you will.

Some go pretty cheap. Others not so much.

For the record, State Rep. Terry Brown (I-Colfax) says he is not for sale.

Brown, testifying before the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee last Wednesday in favor of House Bill 11, did what few legislators will ever do: he related payoff overtures he said were made by representatives of the target of the bill, Clean Harbors and its efforts to burn some two million pounds of explosives from Camp Minden in Webster Parish.

A massive explosion occurred at Camp Minden in October 2012, creating a mushroom cloud that loomed 7,000 feet over the town. That led to decision to burn 15 million pounds of explosives on open “burn trays” at the site.

That decision set off a firestorm of protests that involved citizens and officials from Baton Rouge to Washington and the plan was eventually scrapped in favor of moving the burn to the Clean Harbors location in Grant Parish where (surprise) the plan was met with an equally hostile reception.

Clean Harbors, Inc. was founded in Brockton, Massachusetts, in 1980 and has expanded to 400 locations, including more than 50 hazardous waste management facilities, in North America. Revenues for the company in 2016 totaled $3.28 billion, according to the Clean Harbors Web site. http://ir.cleanharbors.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=96527&p=irol-news&nyo=0

Clean Harbors in February withdrew its permit request to quadruple the amount it can burn at its facility located about five miles northwest of Colfax, although the company continued its open burning of explosives at the site. http://www.thetowntalk.com/story/news/local/2016/02/19/hb-11-next-battleground-colfax-open-burning/80565032/

HB 11, by Reps. Brown and Gene Reynolds (D-Minden), would prohibit open burning statewide as a method of disposal of explosive materials, such as those burned at Clean Harbors’ Colfax facility.

“…I was asked as a state representative by a person representing Clean Harbors, ‘What would it take for me to pull this bill?’” Brown testified. “They (Clean Harbors) started out by saying they would pay for our sewer system in South Grant Parish, that they would give my schools playground equipment, my Little League ball teams uniforms—and they would make me a part of it.

“Ladies and gentlemen of this panel, I am not for sale,” Brown said.

Here is the link to his testimony: http://house.louisiana.gov/H_Video/VideoArchivePlayer.aspx?v=house/2016/apr/0427_16_NR

It was a long committee meeting, lasting just more than five hours. To get to Brown’s testimony, move the cursor below the video to 3:04:30.

The bill barely made it through the committee by a 9-8 vote and will be debated on the House floor on Wednesday.

Representatives voting against the bill in its amended form were Committee Chairman Stuart Bishop (R-Lafayette), James Armes (D-Leesville), Jean-Paul Coussan (R-Lafayette), Phillip DeVillier (R-Eunice), John Guinn (R-Jennings), Christopher Leopold (R-Belle Chasse), Jack McFarland (R-Jonesboro), and Blake Miquez (R-Erath).

Amendments to the bill http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=998279 included a self-defeating provision allowing the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources to authorize open burning of munitions or waste explosives by the military or by state police and one that would make the effective date of the bill January 1, 2018, which would allow continued burning for an additional 18 months.

Read Full Post »

Thanks to Dr. Kurt Corbello

Bobby Jindal at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner Saturday night

So now that he is no longer governor and now that his presidential aspirations are in the dumpster (for the time being, at least, because his ego will not let him ride off into the sunset), it appears that Bobby Jindal may be embarking on a new career as a White House correspondent which is as close as he will ever get to the White House.

Of course, he has written nearly as many op-eds devoid of substance as Jeff Sadow and is almost as familiar on Fox News as Bill O’Reilly, so perhaps he fancies himself as a real-life correspondent. We wondered why he showed at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner Saturday night. We later learned that he has apparently jumped Fox in favor of writing essays for CNN. Not that his defection would be a great loss to Fox.

A more believable explanation would be that CNN simply lost a bet with Fox News.

Unfortunately for Jindal, he generated about as much interest at the dinner as he did in Iowa while campaigning for the Republican presidential nomination. While many in the audience were targeted in one-liners from President Barack Obama, Louisiana’s erstwhile chief executive was never acknowledged.

The wistful look on his face says he still thinks he deserves to be the one at the dais in 2017. At least he didn’t try to give a Republican response to Obama’s stand-up routine.

For that, Republicans everywhere can be thankful.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts