Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Courts’ Category

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 »

How would a public official, say a parish president, manage to skirt the Louisiana public records laws and ignore votes of the parish council and get away with it?

Well, if you’re Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser, and if you had 18 writs of mandamus pending against you for non-compliance, you would simply ride out the storm until your newly-elected, hand-picked council takes office and have a friendly council member move to rescind any pending adverse action.

That’s precisely what Nungesser did in late 2010. He blatantly ignored the law and waited out his adversaries. And it apparently worked.

No wonder he thought he could do an end run around Gov. John Bel Edwards by conspiring with State Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere in that completely embarrassing Iraqiscam-super tanker-proposal-to-cure-Louisiana-of-its-fiscal-problems that left him—and Villere—with a little something more disgusting than egg all over their faces.

With ample evidence of his contempt for the law prior to becoming lieutenant governor and his willing violation of protocol since becoming the second-highest elected official in the state, can there be any reasonable expectation of significant change in his conspiring makeup during the rest of what is almost certain to be a single term.

Probably not. He is what he is: an underhanded politician fully capable of any action, legal or otherwise, that will enhance the career and burnish the public image of William Harold “Billy” Nungesser.

He is Bobby Jindal without the charm. He is Chris Christie without the finesse. He is Scott Walker, Rick Scott, and Sam Brownback rolled into one, but without their compassion. In short, he is Billy Nungesser, yet another electoral accident visited upon unsuspecting—or uncaring—Louisiana voters, a man worthy of the scorn of Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell before it was cool to be scornful of the man. But that’s a story for another day and it will have to wait.

Right now there is his record as Plaquemines Parish President—a job he won by a large majority, by the way—that begs closer examination as a clue into what we expect of him as lieutenant governor, a peek already provided by that ridiculous Iraqi oil tanker scam blunder.

Actually, Nungesser’s defiance of the parish council began way back on July 23, 2009, when the council voted to direct the council attorney to enforce a parish ordinance by “shutting down the operations of all unpermitted borrow pits located within the parish.” That was followed on Dec. 10, 2009, by a council resolution to authorize and direct the council attorney “to take any and all legal action, including but not limited to the filing for injunctive relief and/or mandamus” to obtain and examine “all transactions (including but not limited to any and all construction contracts, capital projects, professional contracts, cooperative endeavor agreements and intergovernmental agreements) entered into by and all expenditures incurred by the parish through the office of the Parish Presidents (or any of its departments or agencies) since January 1, 2007.”

Res 09-253 Mandamus-borrow pits, seal, parish decal

Res 09-533 any and all legal action by Council Attorney or Designee

A writ of mandamus is Latin for “we order” and is defined as a writ which “orders a public agency or governmental body to perform an act required by law when it has neglected or refused to do so.” http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1203

Each of the 16 subsequent similar actions by the council were taken in 2010 in the months leading up and immediately following the October 2, 2010, elections for parish council and parish president.

Seven of the 18 resolutions passed by the council were for the purpose of forcing Nungesser to comply with public records requests.

Besides the 2009 resolutions cited above, subsequent resolutions passed by the Plaquemines Parish Council during 2010 directing:

May 27—Nungesser to turn over copies of any “and all contracts, cooperative endeavor agreements or memos of understanding…from April 15, 2010, related to the effects of the Deep Water Horizon Incident, through the effective date of the resolution…” and a second calling for Nungesser to submit to the council copies of “any and all contracts, financial records, cooperative endeavor agreements or memos of understanding…from January 1, 2007 through the date of the resolution.

Res 10-199 All contracts etc from Pres since 4-15-10

Res 10-198 All contracts etc from Pres since 1-1-07

July 8—Nungesser to sign all revenue bonds approved by the council on Feb. 11, 2010, in the amount of $18 million. Res 10-251 Directing Pres to sign $18M bond documents or Mandamus filed

July 22—Nungesser to produce documents “previously requested by the…council Audit Committee and the parish council pursuant to” one of the May 27 resolutions “to compel him to produce any and all documents pertaining to all of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) expenditures.

Res 10-273 Mandamus for records requests

August 12—The council’s legal department to initiate legal proceedings if necessary in order to obtain a copy of the agreement for council fiscal agent from June 1, 2008, through May 31, 2010 pursuant to the council’s first request for the document made on June 29, 2010. Res 10-294 Fiscal Agent PRR

October 28—The council’s legal department to initiate legal action to compel Nungesser “to enter into and execute a purchase agreement with two realty companies for six acres to be used for a recreation park, athletic fields, walking track and picnic area pursuant to the council’s approval of the purchase on June 26, 2008. Res 10-463 Resol mandamus to execute purchase agree with White Oak

November 11—The council’s legal department to initiate legal action to compel Nungesser “to assist with and finalize all plans for design and engineering as needed for the raising of an East Bank levee; the council’s legal department to initiate legal proceedings to compel Nungesser to honor a contract with a New Orleans law firm and to issue payment for services rendered by firm attorney Robert Barnett; the council’s legal department to take legal action to force Nungesser to transfer $3 million in funds to a parish levee project; Nungesser to provide “any and all documents, pleadings, emails, facsimiles, correspondence, letters, memorandums, interoffice documentation and intra-office documentation generated by Stephen Braud” as an attorney for the parish from Jan. 1, 2010, to date of the resolution.

Res 10-486 Mandmaus to assist with plans for raising EB levee

Res 10-485 Res No. 10-485 authorizing Mandamaus to pay Guste, Barnett

Res 10-482 mandamus transfer LRA EB Consolidated Complex Project to EB Non Fede

Res 10-481 Braud Pub Rec Request and mandamus

December 9—Nungesser to provide “any and all project worksheets, contracts, agreements, memoranda of understanding, etc., relative to FEMA funding executed by Nungesser” from Jan. 1, 2007, to the date of the resolution; Nungesser to provide a copy of “any and all professional services contracts” between the parish and All South Consulting Engineers from Jan. 1, 2007, to the date of the resolution; the parish legal counsel to initiate against Nungesser in order to force him to begin a resurfacing/striping project on LA. 15; the council legal department to initiate legal proceedings to compel Nungesser to remove “all movables” from the Ft. Jackson Port. Res 10-512 directing pres to submit all documents for FEMA funding from 1-1-07

Res 10-511 Mandamus directing pres to submit all contracts with AllSouth from 1-1-07

Res 10-514 Authorize Council legal dept to file mandamus to resurface hwy 15

Res 10-520 Ft Jackson Port MSRC Building-file Mandamus

December 31—Nungesser to enter into a contract with Deep South Associates; Nungesser to sign “any and all documents” with Fenstermaker & Associates for the engineering and the hiring of a surveyor to identify parish right of way and levee footprint for a levee lift in the parish.

Res 10-521 rober’t draft Deep South Associates

Res 10-524 Fenster Maker

Failure by Nungesser to comply with council actions regarding infrastructure work and contracts, provided such action was legal, could conceivably have been construed as malfeasance.

But the question of what is and what is not considered public record is clearly defined in L.S. 44:1 et seq. LOUISIANA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT

So what did Nungesser do?

Nothing, absolutely nothing—except perhaps to conspire with allies on the council to let the clock run until new members on the council would give him a majority to do as he pleased, including having the 18 resolutions rescinded.

And that’s precisely what happened.

Consider an email from Stuart Guey, Jr., a council member firmly entrenched in Nungesser’s camp. The email, written on April 8, 2011, was written to Assistant Parish Attorney Michael Mullin and copied to other council members, including Nungesser, said:

“I received a letter from (retired Baton Rouge State District Judge) Frank Foil regarding his appointment as ad hoc judge on the remaining Mandamus suits. It would be wonderful if the suits all can be resolved. I asked that resolutions be prepared for introduction to dismiss all writs but all Council members will have to know that the requested information has been compiled and where to view the information before it would be voted upon. I understand all the requested information may be on a disc that can be sent to everyone. If the information, in any format, is not provided to all Council members in a timely manner we will have to solicit legal counsel and proceed with the litigation. I hope this can be prevented. Please let me know what can be done.”

And, of course, once the resolutions to dismiss were put to a council vote, the writs conveniently went away.

Such is the type of ruthless control Nungesser exercised in Plaquemines Parish—somewhat reminiscent to the way old Leander Perez once reigned supreme in Plaquemines.

But such tactics aren’t going to fly in Baton Rouge.

LouisianaVoice currently has public records requests pending with Nungesser’s office and we aren’t going to wait much longer for a response. We requested—and received—his appointment calendar since taking office but we have yet to receive a response of any description on our requests for emails and other correspondence.

Nungesser may think that he’s omnipotent and that a little ol’ pissant writer out in Denham Springs doesn’t have a chance against the clout of the lieutenant governor’s and the Louisiana Attorney General’s offices, should the latter be called in to defend him.

But we have taken the state to court on three occasions over the non-production of public records and we will not hesitate to do so again. That’s because we have that one very important thing on our side: the Louisiana Constitution and we aren’t afraid to smack Nungesser upside the head with it.

And if we do, there won’t be a Plaquemines Parish Council to bail him out.

 

Read Full Post »

As much as we would love to take credit, the three-count federal indictment of Iberia Parish Sheriff Louis Ackal and Lt. Col. Gerald Savoy was in the works long before our initial story on March 2. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/03/02/iberia-sheriff-burning-hotter-than-tobasco-on-a-fever-blister-after-beatings-deaths-political-payoffs-fight-with-reporters/

Our story, after all, was about one incident, that god-awful video of the deputy beating a prisoner and then turning a vicious dog loose on the man as he lay on the floor helpless to defend himself.

There were others, in the prison chapel, of all places, because there were no video surveillance there.

If the charges contained in the grand jury indictment are true, Ackal would have to be considered something of a sadist with a penchant for meting out—or at least condoning—particularly harsh punishment to black prisoners. http://www.katc.com/story/31430512/iberia-sheriff-indicted-for-their-parts-i

In a related issue, Roberta Boudreaux has yet to receive a response from the Louisiana Board of Ethics over her official complaint against Ackal. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/03/03/between-beating-guilty-pleas-sexual-harassment-lawsuit-and-ethics-complaint-iberia-sheriff-louis-ackal-has-his-plate-full/

Ackal defeated Boudreaux in the general election last November after giving a job to the third place finisher who subsequently endorsed him for re-election—the second consecutive election in which he hired the third place finisher in exchange for an endorsement in the general election. Giving anything of value in exchange for a political endorsement is against state law.

Boudreaux, contacted by LouisianaVoice, said it has been 60 days since she lodged the ethics complaint but the commission has been strangely silent in its response. That apparently is the legacy left us in Bobby Jindal’s “gold standard of ethics” about which he was so quick to boast in his ludicrous quest for the Republican presidential nomination.

“This is a sad day for law enforcement and for Iberia Parish,” Boudreaux said, adding that it was her understanding that there will be “more to follow” she said, adding, “I just hope the good guys at the department stick around.”

LouisianaVoice will continue to monitor the Ethics Commission to determine if it is actually staffed by warm bodies or Jindalesque see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil monkeys.

But back to the INDICTMENT, which brings to 10 current and former Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office (IPSO) employees who have been charged in the federal investigation of the department.

It was the plan and purpose of the conspiracy that Ackal, deputies and supervisors “would punish and retaliate against inmates and pre-trial detainees by taking them to the chapel of the (Iberia Parish Jail), where there were no video surveillance cameras, to unlawfully assault them,” the indictment said. “It was further part of the agreement that the officers and supervisors who witnessed these unlawful assaults would not intervene to stop them.”

The document charged that deputy Byron Lassalle, “understanding that Ackal wanted him to assault the detainee to retaliate against him for (a) lewd comment, Lassalle, in the presence of Ackal and Savoy, asked (Wesley) Hayes where there was a place at the jail without cameras, and Hayes responded, ‘the chapel.’”

The indictment said while the prisoner was being hit “multiple times with a baton, he “was compliant and not posing a threat to anyone” and no officer in the chapel attempted to stop “the unlawful assault.”

It said that up learning another prisoner was in jail for a sex offense, “Lassalle took his baton, held it between his own legs as if it were a penis, and forced it into (the prisoner’s) mouth,” causing him to choke.

As first and then another prisoner, while being beaten, blamed the lewd comment on someone else, deputies would bring the newest accused into the chapel to be beaten, apparently without making any real effort to determine who actually made the comment. In short, punishment, not seeking the truth, seemed to be the top priority.

If convicted, Ackal and Savoy could face up to 10 years in prison, plus fines of $250,000 for each count.

As further evidence of the complete deterioration of law and order in Iberia Parish, LouisianaVoice has obtained additional documents that show unrestrained lawlessness on the part of the Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office.

In that case, which will be laid out in greater detail in a future post, LouisianaVoice will chronicle how deputies not only raided the home of an Iberia Parish Teach of the Year on the basis of an informant who was paid $45 by a deputy, but one of the deputies later pleaded guilty to stealing jewelry, a gun, money, and knives from the teacher’s home during the raid.

In perhaps the most implausible thing to come out of that raid was a list of evidence found in the teacher’s home that included “counterfeit five dollar bills,” prompting a retired state police officer to simply shake his head in disbelief. “Who makes counterfeit five dollar bills?” he asked rhetorically. “I’ve never seen counterfeit bills in denominations smaller than twenties.”

There is probably no more interesting sight than seeing the expression on one’s face the moment he realizes he is wrong. That look most surely crossed the face of the district attorney at some point in time.

The raid and the ensuing charges against the teacher, which cost him his job, are so egregious in nature that the district attorney’s office has offered him the opportunity to plea to a misdemeanor with no jail time, no probation, and complete expungement of his record. No such deal would ever be offered if prosecutors weren’t fully aware they had laid an egg.

The significance of that move was not lost on the teacher, Darius Sias, who has a civil lawsuit pending against the sheriff’s office. He rolled the dice in turning down the plea offer so that he could pursue his civil suit. “I want to go to trial on this,” he said.

Read Full Post »

The hiring of David “Spike” Boudoin by Iberia Parish Sheriff Louis Ackal to the newly-created position of director of community relations, while prompting an official complaint with the State Board of Ethics, would appear to be the least of Ackal’s problems.

Boudoin finished in third place behind Ackal and parish jail warden Roberta Boudreaux in the October 24 primary election and on Oct. 30 Boudoin was hired and simultaneously announced his endorsement for Ackal’s re-election.

And though Boudreaux fired off a three-page letter to the ethics commission in filing an official complaint of a possible felony in connection with the hiring/endorsement, Ackal has plenty other matters on his plate.

For starters, a half-dozen current and former Iberia Parish deputies recently entered guilty pleas to five felony charges and one misdemeanor in Western District Federal Court in Lafayette in connection with inmate beatings. http://theadvocate.com/news/acadiana/14969306-123/three-former-two-current-iberia-parish-sheriffs-employees-plead-guilty-in-beating-inmates-at-the-par

This, of course, was after a prisoner allegedly managed to shoot himself in the chest, according to a coroner’s report, as he sat in a sheriff’s department patrol car with his hands handcuffed behind his back.

Five of the six, former deputies Wade Bergeron, 40, of Milton, Wesley Hayes, 36, of St. Martinville, and Jesse James Hayes, 36, of St. Martinville and current employees Ben LaSalle, 34, of Erath, and Brett Broussard, 35, of Broussard, face up to 10 years in prison and fines of $250,000 each while former deputy Robert Burns, 46, of Youngsville, could be sentenced to up to a year in prison and fined $100,000.

Along with Boudreaux’s ethics complaint and the federal indictments and resulting guilty pleas, Ackal also has just been hit with a federal sexual harassment lawsuit by a former female employee who says one of Ackal’s protégés made repeated sexual advances even though Ackal was aware of the problem but did nothing to stop it.

In her ETHICS COMPLAINT, Boudreaux, who said she intends to seek the sheriff’s office again, cited a Louisiana statute which addresses election offenses involving bribery, threats or intimidation of election officials or candidates.

The section referenced by her says “No person shall knowingly, willfully, or intentionally:

“Give or offer to give, directly, or indirectly, any money or anything of apparent present or prospective value to any person who has withdrawn or who was eliminated prior or subsequent to the primary election as a candidate for public office, for the purpose of securing or giving his political support to any remaining candidate or candidates for public office in the primary or general election.

“When such person is a candidate for public office who has withdrawn or was eliminated prior to or subsequent to the primary election, accept(s) or offer(s) to accept directly or indirectly, any money, or anything of apparent present or prospective value that is given for the purpose of securing or giving his political support to any remaining candidate or candidates for public office in the primary or general election.

“Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be fined not more than $2000 or be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than two years, or both, for the first offense. On a second offense, or any subsequent offense, the penalty shall be a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment at hard labor for not more than five years, or both.”

What makes this particularly knotty for Ackal is this is his second trip down that same road. The good news is no complaint was filed when he did the same thing four years ago. In the 2011 election, he hired third place finisher Bobby Jackson as an intelligence analyst but never gave him working space, equipment or any direction as to his duties, said Jackson, who quit after only two months on the job because he said he had no desire to walk around “with my thumb in my rear.” As for Ackal’s most recent hire of third-place finisher Boudoin, Jackson said he sees “history repeating itself.”

Boudreaux said she believes that Ackal violated the provisions she cited by offering Boudoin the captain’s position at a salary of $50,658 “in exchange for Mr. Boudoin’s endorsement in the Nov. 21, 2015, runoff election.

Boudoin signed his oath of office as Iberia Parish deputy on Nov. 2, 2015, only two weeks after the primary election and less than three weeks before the runoff, records show. DAVID BOUDOIN OATH OF OFFICE

(CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

            The SEXUAL HARASSMENT LAWSUIT, filed by former employee Laurie Segura, said Bert Berry, Chief of the Criminal Department began in 2012 and lasted for 10 months. She said she attempted to avoid Berry when possible but did not report him for 10 months because she feared retaliation, a fear she said was realized once she did complain.

Segura, who began working at the sheriff’s office in July 2008, resigned in January 2015 when the work environment became intolerable, she said.

She says in her petition that Berry, who moved into her suit of offices in 2012, rubbed his hands and crotch against her body and that he would sneak up on her and kiss her and that he made “inappropriate inquiries” about her sex life. She said he talked “graphically about his fantasies of having sex with her, (tried) to convince her to engage in phone sex with him,” and that he simulated sex acts in her presence and talked about his penis.

She said he ignored her repeated requests that he leave her alone, so she began evasive tactics. “When the security cameras showed he was coming into the office, she immediately picked up the phone and pretended she was in the middle of a phone call,” her petition says.

“In order to intimidate her from taking action,” the suit says, “Berry constantly brought up his relationship with Sheriff Ackal and how the sheriff had practically raised him.”

After she finally reported him to Human Resources, “retaliation was swift and sustained,” the petition says. She said that Ackal “sanctioned” Berry’s behavior even though Berry admitted to Ackal that he had committed the harassment.

Instead of reprimanding Berry, Ackal instead met with the sheriff office’s legal counsel, Ackal’s chief deputy and Berry (by telephone), and prepared a letter of accusations against Segura in an effort to get her to drop her complaint.

Ackal met with Segura the following day, the petition says, and accused her of exposing her breasts in public and of bragging about her sexual activities. “Even though Segura had anticipated retaliation, she was shocked at this letter and asked who had made these false allegations,” the lawsuit says. While Ackal refused to reveal his source, he did tell her that he would communicate with Berry that she denied the allegations, “making clear that Berry was involved with the letter,” she said.

“Instead of taking action and dismissing a man who had admittedly engaged in egregious harassment, the sheriff tried to make Segura guilty for making the complaint,” the petition says. “He talked about how hard this situation was for him because he basically raised Berry. He would not even put a reprimand in Berry’s file after he learned it would be part of Berry’s public record.” She said Ackal refused to move Berry, claiming there was nowhere to put him, “which was absolutely untrue,” she said.

She says Ackal gave raises totaling $35,000 a year to three subordinates who immediately “tried in a variety of different ways to intimidate Segura into dropping her complaint” and that the sheriff’s legal counsel tried to pressure her to quit her job.

She said Ackal approached the situation not as her problem but one that might hurt his chances of re-election “and he needed four more years on the job.”

She said that Berry ordered an audit of her computer following her filing of an EEOC complaint against him.

After the retaliation reached the point of physical threats, she said, she finally left her job in January of 2015. “But even then the retaliation did not cease,” she said. Instead Ackal began “falsely accusing her of stealing his campaign funds.”

When Ackal failed to respond to her EEOC complaints, she finally resorted to her federal lawsuit.

 

Read Full Post »

Though it is probably far too late, Louis Ackal would be wise to take the advice of an adage steeped in indisputable wisdom of the ages.

The sheriff of Iberia Parish, however, apparently has never heard the expression attributed to a host of well-known politicians, amateur philosophers and gifted writers: “Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel.”

We’ll get to Ackal momentarily, but first a little background on that famous quote.

Mark Twain didn’t say it, though he is often cited as the one who coined the phrase. Neither was the quote original with publicist William Greener, Jr., as quoted in the September 28, 1978, Wall Street Journal.

The phrase of uncertain origin has also been attributed to the late Louisiana Congressman F. Edward Hebert, who served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1941 to 1977. A former newspaper reporter and editor for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Hebert, who died in 1979, covered the Louisiana Hayride scandals of 1939 that led to the convictions of Gov. Richard Leche and LSU President James Monroe Smith. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Edward_H%C3%A9bert

Hebert, according to legend, added to the phrase when he said, “I never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel and paper by the trainload.” (Emphasis added.)

The quote was intended to illustrate just how futile it is to pick a fight with a crusading newspaper. Some clarification is needed here for our younger readers: the term crusading newspaper is passé, long gone from the vernacular used to describe the style of journalism depicted in the classic movies The Front Page (the 1931 original starring Pat O’Brien and Mae Clark or the 1974 remake starring Walter Matthau, Jack Lemmon, Susan Sarandon, Charles Durning, and Carol Burnett); 1940’s His Girl Friday, starring Cary Grant, Rosalind Russell and Ralph Bellamy; or of course, All the President’s Men, the 1976 movie about Watergate and the fall of Richard Nixon, starring Robert Redford, Dustin Hoffman, Jason Robards, Jack Warden, Hal Holbrook, Martin Balsam, Ned Beatty and Jane Alexander.

No, sadly, those days are long gone. Newspapers have felt the impact of the perfect storm of shrinking ad revenue and declining circulation along with waning influence as reflected in inverse proportion to the explosion of the Internet and the fourth estate. Once the epitome of independence, newspapers now find themselves subjected more to corporate pressure than to any need to inform its readership. The same gots for television news, of course, only if anything, to an even greater degree.

That famous and once chillingly accurate phrase could now be replaced by any one of several similar but equally relevant versions currently floating around out there in cyberspace:

  • Never pick a fight with someone who buys their bandwidth by the gigabyte.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who has a camera and a Twitter following.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who knows how to use the Internet better than you.
  • Never pick a fight with someone who has access to Google to prove you wrong immediately.
  • Never pick a fight with someone when your own video cameras or those of witnesses may contradict you.

To those might be added another pearl of wisdom: Never underestimate the intelligence of your constituency (the emergence of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz notwithstanding).

Ackal previously served as a Louisiana State Trooper where he served for awhile as a captain and Commander of Troop I. He retired abruptly in 1984 after being placed in charge of the narcotics squad of Region II which covered all of Southwest Louisiana.

He later resurfaced as a private investigator before running for High Sheriff of Iberia Parish in 2007. Now, not even four months from winning re-election sheriff, he seems not to have absorbed an iota of any of that advice about picking quarrels with those possessing generous supplies of ink and paper—and online access.

Even before he beat challenger Roberta Boudreaux last November in a runoff election, Ackal was already fighting a public relations disaster that culminated in his choosing to pick a fight with the Acadiana Advocate, sister publication of the Baton Rouge Advocate.

In March of 2014, a 22-year-old black man, Victor White, III, died after being shot while handcuffed in a sheriff’s department patrol car. Deputies said he pulled the gun and fired one round, striking himself in the back. The Iberia Parish coroner, however, ruled he was shot in the chest, immediately raising the question of how he could shoot himself in the chest with his hands handcuffed behind his back. The Iberia Parish district attorney, following a State Police report that the wound was self-inflicted, has declined to pursue criminal charges against deputies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/da-charges-handcuffed-man-police-car-shooting_us_56b8f75de4b08069c7a8548b

The U.S. Attorney’s office likewise concluded an investigation of more than a year with the announcement that it would not pursue charges against the sheriff’s office. http://www.iberianet.com/news/feds-no-charges/article_087eda70-9e8f-11e5-a1e6-03aa54a2fd19.html

None of those findings, however, kept the Advocate group from publishing a May 6, 2015, story revealing that eight prisoners had died in Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office custody over a 10-year period. http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/12248374-123/8-die-in-custody-of

The family of one of the victims, Robert Sonnier, settled its resulting lawsuit with the sheriff for $450,900 and the family of Michael Jones was awarded $61,000 in his wrongful death. There were other incidents, all of which prompted U.S. Rep. Cedric Richmond’s May 19, 2015 LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL LORETTA LYNCH requesting an investigation “into alleged civil rights violations of members of the Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office.”

Moreover, incriminating video of beatings of and dog attacks on prisoners were reported on by the Acadiana Advocate https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/05/04/disturbing-video-surfaces-highlighting-pattern-of-abuse-and-death-in-louisiana-jail/

Easy to see why Ackal may not be too enamored with the Acadiana Advocate, but to declare the paper and its reporters as “persona non grata” is foolish at best. http://theadvocate.com/news/acadiana/13886833-37/iberia-sheriff-mum-on-salary

It’s a war he can’t possibly win. As much adverse publicity as LouisianaVoice has given to the Louisiana State Police administration, Superintendent Mike Edmonson has never gone that far.

But, as those cheesy late-night TV commercials say: wait, there’s more.

First, there was his re-election campaign last fall.

He nearly won in the first primary, pulling in 47 percent of the vote. Parish Jail Warden Roberta Boudreaux got 25 percent and Spike Boudoin received 18 percent. Joe LeBlanc and Bobby Jackson won 7 and 3 percent, respectively.

That was on Oct. 24. On Oct 30, just six days later, Ackal hired Boudoin as something called director of community relations at a salary of $50,658 a year. http://theadvocate.com/news/14013818-123/iberia-sheriff-to-pay-defeated

Coincidentally, Boudoin announced at the same time his endorsement of Ackal in the runoff against Boudreaux. But other than the distribution of a news release announcing Boudoin’s hiring, Ackal said he would not entertain questions about the newly-created position.

Ackal won the runoff election on Nov. 21, receiving 56 percent of the vote against Boudreaux’s 44 percent.

To Jackson, it was déjà vu all over again. In 2007, he finished third with 11 percent of the vote behind Ackal and David Landry, both of whom got 42 percent. LeBlanc, who also ran in 2007, got the remaining 5 percent. After that primary, Jackson endorsed Ackal and was rewarded with a job as intelligence analyst, a role he had held in the U.S. Army. The difference with the sheriff’s department was he was denied working space, equipment and any direction as to his duties, all while being paid. He quit in disgust after little more than two months walking around “with my thumb in my rear,” he said, adding that he now sees “history repeating itself.”

Public servants are prohibited from using their positions to “compel or coerce any person or other public servant to engage in political activity,” according to the Louisiana Code of Governmental Ethics. Political activity is defined, in part, as “an effort to support or oppose the election of a candidate for political office in an election.”

It is also illegal for anyone to give money or anything of value “to any person who has withdrawn or who was eliminated prior or subsequent to the primary election as a candidate for public office, for the purpose of securing or giving his political support to any remaining candidate or candidates for public office in the primary or general election.” (Emphasis added.)

Robert Travis Scott, president of the Public Affairs Research Council, told the Acadiana Advocate that Ackal’s simultaneous hiring and endorsement raises questions of whether taxpayer money, i.e. Boudoin’s salary, was used to secure an endorsement.

Tomorrow: ethics complaint, sexual harassment lawsuit and guilty pleas over beatings and dog attacks are beginning to clutter embattled Louis Ackal’s desk.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »