Louisiana Voice

I’ll be the first to admit that I know precious little of the details of the alleged BID-RIGGING INDICTMENTS of two Baton Rouge officials and an Arizona company’s executive.

But I am going to stick my neck out and suggest that when the dust has settled, there will be no convictions or plea bargains in this little matter.

Why do I feel this way? Simple.

Attorney General Liz Murrill is the one bring the charges and if you remember, she once worked for one Bobby Jindal when Jindal attempted—and failed—to similarly prosecute then-commissioner of the Louisiana Office and Tobacco Control (ATC).

That was way back in 2013 when I PREDICTED that Jindal was attempting to frame Painter as a way of reprisals against Painter for not bending the rules of his agency to conform to the wishes of the governor and one of his major contributors, New Orleans Saints owner the late Tom Benson (gee, does that tactic sound familiar today).

Turns out I was correct. Not only was Painter subsequently FOUND NOT GUILTY on all counts, but the state had to pony up a couple hundred thousand dollars to pay his legal fees for the wrongful prosecution.

The Jindal administration not only blew that case, but the state completely mishandled another case involving a state contractor who won a $20 MILLION LAWSUIT against the state over attempted shakedowns by state employees only to have it overturned by a questionable ruling by an appeals court that would later come under a serious ethical cloud.

As I pointed out above, Murrill worked in the Jindal governor’s office before moving over to the attorney general’s office and eventually getting herself elected to succeed Jeff Landry as attorney general. It now seems that she is taking dead aim to be Landry’s successor a second time when his time is up as governor.

Look for history to repeat itself in the current legal soap opera. She’s even admitted she went after one of the local individuals only as a means of getting to Sustainability Partners’ Jason Hewitt. First of all, a good prosecutor should never admit such strategy openly. Second, it illustrates a weak case against the locals and a waste of state resources. Thirdly, and most important, if a prosecutor goes after a minor figure, aka a small fish, and if there is actually evidence of wrongdoing, that’s one thing. But if you, as a prosecutor, are simply grabbing headlines without tangible evidence, you’re just another political hack who doesn’t care who you hurt so long as it advances your career.

Time will determine which Murrill is.