Louisiana Voice

Those who believed political controversy in Iberia Parish would dissipate with the retirement of longtime sheriff Louis Ackal and the jailing of a few of his deputies may wish to reboot that somewhat premature assessment.

Any observers who harbored hopes of tranquility along the Teche probably forgot to factor the 16^th Judicial District Attorney’s office into the equation.

The 16^th JDC is comprised of the parishes of Iberia, St. Mary and St. Martin and District Attorney Bo Duhé, like the sheriff, exercises considerable power as evidenced by what would seem to be REPRISALS taken against INNOCENT PEOPLE by his office.

Of course, with the local DA orchestrating investigations, grand jury proceedings and trials, innocents and even those with questionable or minimal guilt can find themselves in the crosshairs of so-called justice. To that end, Duhé will issue appropriate PRESS RELEASE when he scores a courtroom victory – never mind that occasionally those victories can be somewhat TAINTED.

Sometimes, it can even appear there might be a conflict of interests in a case, but such circumstances have done little to deter Duhé or First Assistant DA Robert Vines from plunging ahead full-bore with QUESTIONABLE PROSECUTIONS.

That last one has now resulted in a 29-page COMPLAINT filed with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel in Baton Rouge against Vines for the manner in which he prosecuted Chitimacha Tribal Chairman O’Neil Darden, Jr. in 2016 while simultaneously serving as a contract attorney for the tribe.

(To read the full complaint, go HERE.)

When the U.S. Attorney’s office declined to intervene in a State Gaming Commission investigation into alleged manipulation of the Cypress Bayou Casino’s employee and payroll databases, Vines undertook the prosecution of the case even though he was at the time in negotiations over renewal of his contract with the tribe.

This is the same Robert Vines who in 2019 made national headlines when he rashly FILED TO RECUSE retired Judge Lori Landry from all criminal cases in the 16^th JDC, accusing the judge of being biased and prejudiced against the DA’s office because the judge had criticized the office for acting with racial bias including “improper motivations and ‘trickery’ in inconsistent plea offerings and selective use of the state’s habitual offender law.”

In October 2016, Darden’s attorney was given notice by Vines that Darden was a target of a grand jury hearing scheduled for Oct. 5 and 6 even though 16^th DC Judge Anthony Thibodeaux had already ruled that he found “no crime of computer fraud or theft” and that he found Darden “not guilty on unauthorized use of a movable and not guilty of misdemeanor theft.”

At the time, Vines offered Darden a plea deal that called for his resignation as chairman in exchange for dropping all charges. Darden rejected the offer and Vines proceeded to arbitrarily formally charge Darden by filing a bill of information on Oct. 7 rather than follow through with the grand jury proceedings.

That’s another power a prosecutor has which can be easily abused. If he thinks he can’t get a grand jury indictment, he simply bypasses the grand jury and charges a defendant with a bill of information. The whole process underscores the validity of the expression that a district attorney can indict a ham sandwich if he wants to.

Vines eventually reduced the charges to a misdemeanor but even then, could not get a conviction as Darden was subsequently found not guilty.

But the most serious charge against Vines was Darden’s contention that Vines withheld exculpatory evidence from him and his first formal complaint was that Vines was in violation of Rules 3.4 and 3.8 when he “intentionally, knowingly and deliberately concealed exculpatory Brady materials and documents with evidentiary value.”

Brady is the rule that says defendants are entitled to all evidence in the possession of prosecutors, including exculpatory – evidence that might benefit the defendant.

“Rule 3.8(d) is not ambiguous,” Darden says in his complaint. “It clearly provides a prosecutor “shall … make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that the prosecutor knows, or reasonably should know, either tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense. Application of Rule 3.8 is not limited to intentional violations,” he says.

In this investigation and prosecution, Mr. Vines intentionally, knowingly and deliberately withheld. several items of Brady material. Mr. Vines had first-hand knowledge of the existence of significant written statements that were “material” under the standard established in Brady, and he had actual possession of this evidence. But Mr. Vines never disclosed this information and instead chose to hide the evidence” that included written statements and affidavits and written notes from interviews Vines conducted.

Darden also lodged a specific complaint of conflict of interests on the part of Vines, who was simultaneously working as a contract attorney for the Chitimacha Tribe (even consulting with Chairman Melissa Darden – no relation to O’Neil Darden – during the latter’s trial) even as he led O’Neil Darden’s prosecution from te DA’s office and as he simultaneously was renegotiating his contract with the tribe.

This is the same DA’s office that relentlessly went after perceived political opponents, including Clerk of Court Michael Thibodeaux for infractions that would go unnoticed anywhere else, Judge Lori Landry, DONALD BROUSSARD (an innocent citizen who had the temerity to launch a recall effort against DA ally Sheriff Ackal over the death of prisoner

The only one in the parish who was untouchable, it seems was Ackal. Duhé & Co. just couldn’t seem to find reason to prosecute the sheriff or his deputies over abuses of prisoners or the death of 20-year-old VICTOR WHITE, III, who deputies said obtain a gun and shot himself in the chest – while his hands were cuffed behind his back. Even the coroner’s office got in on the act, ruling White’s death a suicide.

Of course, State Police, prone as they seem to be to enforce their special brand of justice on African-Americans, also went along with the charade – just as they and Duhé did when deputies turned VICIOUS DOGS on defenseless prisoners, seemingly just for the sport of it.

Nor was Duhé or Ackal particularly aggressive in pursuing the investigation into the 2010 murder of a New Iberia orthodontist, allowing a motion detector camera that may have contained valuable clues into the death of Dr. Robert Chastant to lie in the bed of his pickup truck for a year at the sheriff’s office until it was finally discovered by Chastant’s estate’s attorney – submerged in water – and useless – in the bed of the truck. You can read my book about that case by clicking HERE to order a copy from Cavalier House Books.