Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Crime’ Category

Little more than a year ago, on February 15, 2016, Louisiana Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) case worker Kimberly Lee of Calhoun in Ouachita Parish was ARRESTED and booked into jail with bond set at $25,000.

Her crime? She was accused of falsifying entries in her case records showing she had made home visits to foster children when she hadn’t. Her agency had undergone massive budget cuts and the cuts, combined with more children entering foster care, meant an impossible caseload. That, in turn, had prompted a Shreveport DCFS supervisor to tell caseworkers that they could make “drive-by” visits to foster homes, which meant talking to the foster parents in their driveways. Policy says that workers will see both the child and the foster parent in the home, interviewing each separately.

On Thursday, the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC), showing all the backbone of a jellyfish, accepted an agreement reached between Louisiana State Police (LSP) attorneys and former trooper Ronald Picou’s attorney Jill Craft of Baton Rouge.

That agreement called for LSP to rescind its letter of termination in exchange for Picou’s “resignation” for the same offense as Ms. Lee—except where her time sheet falsification was over a relative short time period, Picou’s went on for years.

And where Ms. Lee’s responsibility called for the oversight of the well-being of foster children (certainly a serious responsibility), Picou’s was for the general safety and protection of Louisiana citizens.

Nor was his caseload overly burdensome. He simply went home and went to bed after only two or three hours on his 12-hour shifts.

Craft, addressing the LSPC as if she were arguing a legal case, complete with the obligatory rhetoric, said her client was making a sacrifice for the benefit of his family and his “brothers in blue,” that he loved working “as a dedicated law enforcement officer for the better part of a decade,” and that a lot of “irresponsible reporting” had been done about Picou.

Funny, but when LouisianaVoice did a story about one of her clients winning a big court case, she never breathed a word about “irresponsible” reporting. Guess it depends on whose ox is being gored, eh counselor?

So, bottom line, Picou was allowed to walk away from his transgressions a free man. Unemployed at least for the time being, but free to accept another job in law enforcement for some city or town—or even another state agency as was the case of one terminated State Trooper who ended up policing for Pinecrest State School in Pineville.

“Irresponsible” are the actions of a man who ran a daytime construction business so he would cut his shift short by eight or nine hours so he could go home and sleep so he would be fresh when he did his day job.

“Irresponsible” are the tacit approvals given his actions by his supervisors at LSP Troop D in Lake Charles—Troop D Commander Capt. Chris Guillory and Picou’s immediate supervisor, Lt. Paul Brady.

“Irresponsible” are the sham investigations conducted first by Guillory and then by LSP Internal Affairs until LouisianaVoice published its “irresponsible” stories—backed up by Picou’s very own radio logs that repeatedly showed no activity after the first few hours of his shift. Only then did LSP conduct any semblance of a real investigation and subsequently gave Picou his walking papers. Of course he appealed his firing, which was the basis of Thursday’s scheduled hearing by LSPC until commissioners were informed of, and asked to approve, the settlement agreement. Commissioners went into executive session all of 12 minutes to discuss the proposed agreement before accepting it unanimously—and without comment.

Asked if the agreement precluded Picou’s ever working again as a police officer for another agency, commission Chairman T.J. Doss said the commission had no authority over that matter. Asked if commissioners, who had the power to accept or reject the agreement, could not have insisted on a clause in the agreement to that effect, member Eulis Simien, an attorney, reiterated the position that the commission had no authority over Picou’s future employment.

But the commission did have the authority to accept or reject the agreement. And while the commission has no enforcement authority, it certainly could have refused to rubber stamp the agreement until that wording was included.

The LSPC has evolved into a running joke with the resignations of five of seven commissioners within the past year and the forced resignation of former Executive Director Cathy Derbonne.

Only last month the commission rejected the appeal—with only member Calvin Braxton voting no—of a State Trooper who provided substantial evidence to back up his claim that he was harassed and ultimately suspended by supervisors in Troop F after he issued a traffic ticket to the teenage driver of a vehicle in which the son of Troop Commander Tommy Lewis was a passenger. For whatever reason, the commission apparently saw no reason to call in witnesses or to take statements from those involved.

The powers that be wanted the trooper punished and that was that.

On Thursday, it was determined that a Trooper who took an oath of office to serve and protect and to uphold the Constitution but who instead committed payroll fraud should be allowed to resign and walk away.

Does the term double standard carry any meaning anymore?

Perhaps it would be irresponsible to ask that.

Read Full Post »

“No good deed goes unpunished.”

“Karma’s a bitch.”

“What goes around comes around.”

No matter how you say it, good intentions sometimes bring unjust punishment and sometimes those good intentions result in very bad results.

Just ask Donald Broussard of New Iberia.

Last July 8, Broussard was rear-ended in Lafayette Parish by a hit-and-run driver who minutes later collided head-on with an 18-wheeler in adjacent Iberia Parish and was killed.

Yet it was Broussard who was indicted by an Iberia Parish grand jury last week for NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE.

You are probably thinking about now that there has to be more to this story—and you’re right, there is more to it.

You see, Broussard did the unpardonable: On July 1, a week before the auto accident, Broussard was the impetus behind a RECALL of Iberia Parish Sheriff Louis Ackal.

Broussard was one of the organizers of the Justice for VICTOR WHITE III Foundation which filed a petition last July 1 to force a recall election.

White, you may recall, was the 22-year-old who died of a gunshot wound while in the back seat of a sheriff deputy’s patrol car in March 2014. The official report said the gunshot was self-inflicted. The coroner’s report said he was shot in the front with the bullet entering his right chest and exiting under his left armpit. White’s hands were cuffed behind his back at the time.

Ackal, of course, skated on that issue and was later indicted, tried and acquitted on federal charges involving beating and turning dogs loose on prisoners, proving beyond any lingering doubts that he is a force to be reckoned with. But when you’ve got retired federal judge and family member FRED HAIK helping with the defense, you tend to land on your feet.

All of which brings us to the latest woes to beset Broussard.

The story in Sunday’s Daily Iberian reads, “A New Iberia man who was instrumental in the drive to recall Iberia Parish Sheriff Louis Ackal last year has been indicted for manslaughter in the aftermath of an alleged road rage incident that left a Bossier City man dead in July.”

Here’s the chronology of events:

Moments before the fatal crash, Rakeem Blakes, 24, rear-ended a Cadillac driven by Broussard at the corner of Ambassador Caffery Parkway and U.S. 90 in Lafayette Parish which is just up the road apiece from Iberia Parish.

Broussard said he followed Blakes after Blakes fled the scene when Broussard approached his car but denied that he chased Blakes. “The guy hit me,” Broussard said. “I got within 20 feet of him so I could get his license plate number. I gave it (the license number) to the (911) dispatcher and they told me to fall back, so I fell back.” Broussard said reports that he had a gun were ridiculous. “I don’t even own a gun, he said. “I told the State Police they could search my car. They just handed me my license and let me go on my way.”

Broussard said Blakes was driving erratically, causing a hazard for other drivers.

Sixteenth Judicial District Attorney Bo Duhé said the case involving Broussard was turned over to his office for review in November following completion of the LSP investigation.

In what has to be one of the most convoluted reviews of any investigation, Assistant District Attorney Janet Perrodin presented the case and the grand jury last Friday returned a true bill indicting Broussard for manslaughter and “aggravated obstruction of a highway,” which led to Blakes’ death.

Unexplained in this bizarre episode was how Broussard created an “aggravated obstruction” when it was Blakes who rear-ended him and subsequently fled the scene. Duhé, in some pretty fancy verbal footwork, said state law allows a manslaughter charge to be brought when an offender “is engaged in the perpetration of any intentional misdemeanor directly affecting the person. Aggravated obstruction of a highway is the performance of any act on a highway where human life may be endangered,” he said.

That’s one helluva stretch, Mr. DA. It’s also one of vaguest laws ever cited in bringing an indictment against someone. I mean, go back and read it.

Manslaughter: when one is “engaged in the perpetration of any intentional misdemeanor directly affecting the person.”

Aggravated obstruction of a highway: the “performance of any act on a highway where human life may be endangered.”

And we know that a district attorney can make a grand jury dance a ballet in a septic tank if he so desires. It’s all in what information is provided the grand jury and what is withheld. By those definitions, any one of us could be arrested, jailed, tried and convicted at just about any time for any perceived offense.

But we won’t be. This was tailored just for Mr. Broussard who had the temerity to take on a powerful sheriff who has shown his proclivity to exact revenge against those who would dare stand up to his authority.

Broussard’s bond on the manslaughter charge was set at $75,000 and bond for the aggravated obstruction charge was set at $10,000.

Given any semblance of justice, there’s not a chance in hell of a conviction.

But whoever said there was a semblance of justice in this ludicrous drama being played out in the heart of Acadiana?

Only the most naïve of the naïve would discount a good-ol’-boy, back scratchin’ network within the local power structure, especially if it benefits a powerful sheriff bent on revenge against an adversary. Even if that adversary  is, by all appearances, innocent of any wrongdoing other than making the sheriff angry.

The recall effort eventually failed for a lack of sufficient signatures but that doesn’t mean that Ackal doesn’t have a long memory and the propensity to call in favors from friends in the right places.

And even if the charges are dropped or if Broussard is acquitted, it’s going to cost him plenty in legal fees.

And that’s how you spell revenge when you are a ruthless sheriff who can tweak the so-called justice system to do your bidding.

Read Full Post »

Perhaps it’s time to direct some hard questions to Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPSC) Secretary Jimmy LeBlanc.

LeBlanc, after all, is technically Mike Edmonson’s boss. Besides holding the title of Superintendent of State Police, Edmonson is also Deputy Secretary of DPSC.

LeBlanc only recently came through an intensive investigation into the Corrections, also under the DPSC umbrella. That investigation cost Angola Warden Burl Cain and several of his family members their jobs.

And yet DPSC general counsel Kathy Williams notified retired State Trooper Leon “Bucky” Millet by letter dated last Thursday (March 2) that DPS would not consider his complaint against the Louisiana State Troopers’ Association because Louisiana State Police (LSP) “considers the matter closed.”

She may wish to revisit that decision.

Today, FBI agents fanned out across the state to simultaneously serve federal grand jury subpoenas on 18 State Troopers, LouisianaVoice has learned. Included among those served were officers and directors of that very same LSTA that DPSC refuses to investigate.

One report indicated that the LSTA board of directors was in its monthly meeting Wednesday when federal agents walked in and served each board member with his subpoena.

LouisianaVoice has not learned the date of the grand jury nor was the specific subject readily available. But because troopers from across the state were served, it would seem reasonable to assume that the thrust of the federal investigation is the laundering of campaign contributions by the LSTA through the association’s executive director David Young, a story LouisianaVoice broke more than a year ago.

It was not immediately known if Young was one of those served on Wednesday.

It was also learned that the FBI has already interviewed some of those slapped with subpoenas today.

The LSTA board is comprised of trooper representatives from each of the eight state police troops. The individual troop headquarters are located in Baton Rouge in East Baton Rouge Parish, Kenner in Jefferson Parish, Mandeville in St. Tammany Parish, Lake Charles in Calcasieu Parish, Lafayette in Lafayette Parish, Monroe in Ouachita Parish, Bossier City in Bossier Parish and Gray in Terrebonne Parish.

Neither Edmonson, Deputy Superintendent Lt. Col. Charles Dupuy nor Director of Management and Finance Lt. Col. Jason Starnes were among those handed subpoenas. Only LSTA officers, directors and former officers and directors were served.

Regardless, reports out of State Police headquarters in Baton Rouge say command personnel have been in “full panic mode” all afternoon as they hunkered down in meetings. As my grandfather used to say, you probably couldn’t pull a needle out of their butts with a John Deere tractor. A federal grand jury subpoena, after all, is less welcome than an IRS audit letter—and who knows? That might not be far behind.

LSTA general counsel Floyd Falcon cannot represent any of those served if their legal interests should conflict with those of the association, as they quite likely will. That means that each of those served will have to retain his own legal counsel.

With that many having been served subpoenas, it’s likely that at least one, maybe several, will roll over and give the feds information they’re looking for in order to cut a deal. The scramble will be to see who can give up whom first because that’s will will likely get the best deal. What’s not likely is for any of them to lie because we’re sure they are all keenly aware that lying to the FBI, even if not under oath, can get a quick trip to a federal facility where one can work in the laundry for 20 cents per hour.

One thing you can expect out of all of this: there will be no united front. Targets are almost certain to turn on each other as the cannibalization begins in earnest. Edmonson already has thrown the four men who drove the expedition to California—and his secretary—under the bus.

And make no mistake: the clock is ticking on Gov. John Bel Edwards. Mike Edmonson, Charles Dupuy and Jason Starnes represent baggage he simply cannot afford to carry into his campaign for reelection. That campaign cranks up in less than two years.

Edmonson needs to go and he needs to take LeBlanc with him.

Back to you, Kathy Williams.

 

Read Full Post »

1399909

Bloomberg News Service on March 1 published a STORY that said global megabanks have paid $321 billion in fines for such non-banking-like practices as money laundering, market manipulation and even terrorist financing since the market crash of 2008.

And while $321 billion may sound impressive, Bloomberg failed to mention that because of those same banks, President George W. Bush had little choice but to sign the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 that pumped more than twice that amount, $700 billion of taxpayer bailout funds, into the failed banks that precipitated the Great Recession of 2008.

Most financial advisers would describe that as a negative return on investment.

Adding insult to injury, $1.6 billion of that $700 billion was used to award multi-million dollar bonuses to CEOs of the very firms that got us into the mess to begin with. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/16b-of-bank-bailout-went-to-execs/

Bloomberg also failed to mention that those fines had little effect on those who perpetuated the crimes but did have a significant impact on stockholders and retirees, those, in other words, who had nothing to do with the massive fraud carried out on such a grand scale.

In fact, in 2010, former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo was fined $22.5 million and ordered to pay another $45 million in restitution as his penalty for reaping a profit of $141.7 million from stock sale, according to Mary Kreiner Ramirez and Steven A. Ramirez, authors of The Case for the Corporate Death Penalty (New York University Press, 2017). So, despite the penalties, he walked away with a net gain $74.2 million, or a 52 percent return, sending a clear signal his peers that “crime does in fact pay,” the authors wrote.

There are also two questions Bloomberg neglected to address:

  1. What the total cost of the runaway greed and reckless actions of firms like AIG, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Countrywide, and J.P. Morgan to stockholders, retirees and American taxpayers in general?
  2. How many top tier officers at these firms who condoned, encouraged and/or actively participated in the illegal practices went to jail?

The answer to the first question is an eye-popping $15 trillion, according to Ramirez and Ramirez.

The answer to the second question is just as unbelievable: ONE.

In fact, as of Jan. 28, that last date that STATISTICS were updated by the Bureau of Prisons, there were exactly 555 people serving federal jail sentences for banking, insurance, embezzlement and counterfeiting. That comes to .3 percent (three-tenths of one percent) of the total federal prison population.

By contrast, there were 82,109 in federal prison for non-violent drug offenses (46.4 percent of the total), and 14,853 imprisoned on immigration charges (8.4 percent).

At this point it might be fair to ask just who did the most lasting damage to the nation’s economy?

It would also be fair to question why, if only one Wall Street banker went to jail, how is that there are 555 imprisoned for banking- and insurance-related offenses? The answer to that is those offenders, situated on Main Street instead of Wall Street, lacked the political clout in Washington that the leaders of the megabanks enjoyed.

Is that an over-simplification of the circumstances? Probably, but it’s interesting to compare the actions of different White House administrations in handling financial crises.

President Obama’s first Attorney General, Eric Holder, in his “too big to fail” proclamation, said, “I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications…it (prosecution) will have a negative impact on the economy.”

Obama, for his part, said, “One of the biggest problems about the…financial crisis and the whole subprime lending fiasco is that a lot of that stuff wasn’t necessarily illegal, it was just immoral or inappropriate or reckless.”

Wasn’t necessarily illegal? Both statements stretch credulity to its breaking point and are in themselves, disgraceful because federal laws were clearly broken knowingly and willfully.

It wasn’t always that way. For example, in the wake of the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s, more than 1,100 bankers were indicted and 839 were convicted.

Enron, the seventh-largest company in the U.S. at the turn of the century, is another example of how the feds went after those who played fast and loose with the rules. President George H.W. Bush called on Enron CEO Kenneth Lay to run the World Economic Summit in Houston in 1990 and in 1992, Lay co-chaired the reelection campaign of Bush the First.

Enron and its affiliates also contributed more than $888,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2000, the year that George W. Bush was elected President and another $1.3 million to the Republican Party. Lay and his wife personally contributed $238,000 to George W. Bush campaigns and inauguration celebrations and raised another $100,000 from friends. To the younger Bush, Lay was known as “Kenny boy.”

Still, Enron and its top executives were not immune from prosecution by Bush the Second.

Despite the access to the highest levels of government enjoyed by Enron and Lay, he and Jeff Skilling, his successor as Enron CEO, were indicted by the Department of Justice in 2004 and though the two combined to spend some $60 million on their defense, Lay was convicted on all counts and Skilling on 19 of 28 counts of securities fraud.

George W. Bush’s Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the Enron investigation because Enron and Lay both were major financial supporters in Ashcroft’s Missouri unsuccessful Senate re-election campaign. His chief of staff, David Ayers, also took himself out of the investigation of Enron. That was as it should have been.

Enron’s accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, was convicted of shredding Enron documents and both Enron and Arthur Andersen soon ceased to exist.

The same fate befell CenTrust Savings Bank, Drexel Burnham Lambert investment bank, and WorldCom—all because of flagrant violations of federal securities laws and each was prosecuted by the administrations of the two Bushes. WorldCom, in fact, was the largest bankruptcy in history when it went under in 2002.

Evidently, those firms were not considered too big to fail.

By contrast, Obama’s Attorney General Holder and Lanny Breuer, chief of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division, did not remove themselves from DOJ’s investigation of the investment banks that brought on the Great Recession of 2008. This despite the fact that both men had worked for the same law firm of Covington & Burling which included among its clients such eminent Wall Street banking firms as Bank of America (Countrywide’s successor), Citigroup, and JP Morgan Chase.

In fact, at the time Holder was tapped as attorney general, he was co-chairing Covington & Burling’s white-collar defense unit. Good training in case you’re ever called on to investigate your former bosses.

Breuer returned to Covington & Burling in 2013 followed by his boss Holder in July 2015, giving Holder at least a reason for his strained, if not borderline unprincipled logic for not pursuing criminal indictments against the megabanks.

Following Holder’s departure, Deputy Attorney General Sally Quillian Yates (Remember her? She’s the one President Trump fired after she refused to enforce his illegal immigration order) issued a DOJ memo (turns out she was pretty good at memos that cut right to the chase) on Sept. 9, 2015, that reversed Holder and Breuer’s DOJ policy toward pursuing individual accountability, both criminally and civilly, for corporate wrongdoing. The memorandum said the policy change was to maximize DOJ’s “ability to deter misconduct and to hold those who engage in it accountable.”

The comparison between the approaches of two Bushes and Obama to bankers’ disdain for securities laws to the detriment of the entire country represents a stark role reversal for the perceived political philosophies of the Republican and Democratic administrations.

And now, President Trump has expressed his determination to roll back the Dodd-Frank bill passed after the 2008 recession for the express purpose of preventing a recurrence of the runaway greed that nearly wrecked the world economy.

In fact, he wants to remove all regulation of Wall Street banks, quite possibly the most dangerous single cartel in American society.

Read Full Post »

There are times when, after you break a major story about official wrongdoing and after the requisite denials by those involved, everything gets quiet and the story seems to have hit a dead end. Or at least been placed in a state of suspended animation.

But generally, if you are willing to be patient and wait long enough, the story gets new life with the surfacing of new information.

So it was a year ago when LouisianaVoice and New Orleans Fox8 News investigative reporter Lee Zurik simultaneously broke a STORY that Troy Hebert, former director of the Office of Louisiana Alcohol and Tobacco Control (and furtive candidate for the U.S. Senate last fall—he got one-half of one percent of the vote), was under investigation by the FBI for:

  • Extorting sex from a New Orleans woman, Sarah Palmer, in exchange for approval of a liquor license for the French Quarter restaurant she managed, and
  • Illegally steered applicants for liquor licenses to attorney Chris Young for representation through Young’s sister, Judy Pontin, executive management officer for the New Orleans ATC office.

Now, thanks to a wrongful termination lawsuit filed against Hebert by a former ATC agent, those same issues have surfaced again.

Documents concerning still another issue, the suppressing of an investigation into a Baton Rouge bar following a 2012 accident involving a patron of the bar who had a blood alcohol content of .307 when he struck and killed two cyclists, killing one and injuring the other.

LouisianaVoice wrote in a February 2016 POST that Hebert wrongfully took control of the investigation and personally exonerated the Bulldog Bar from any wrongdoing. Chris Young was legal counsel for the Bulldog.

The only problem for fired ATC agent Brett Tingle, who filed the lawsuit against Hebert, it’s possible that none of Hebert’s repeatedly invoking the Fifth Amendment in a deposition will be allowed into testimony.

Federal Judge John DeGravelles of Louisiana’s Middle District in Baton Rouge, currently has under advisement Hebert’s motion for protective order filed by attorney Renee Culotta which would, if granted, prohibit Tingle’s attorney, J. Arthur Smith, III, from posing any questions at trial about Hebert’s relationship with Palmer and/or Young.

In Hebert’s deposition taken in December in preparation for trial in the Tingle matter, Hebert repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment when Palmer’s name was brought up by Smith, as illustrated by the following exchanges:

  • Smith: “Do you recognize this (redacted) document?”
  • Hebert: “I’m going to exercise my Fifth Amendment right.”
  • Smith: “Do you know a lady by the name of Sara (sic) Palmer?”
  • Hebert: “I’m going to exercise my Fifth Amendment right.”
  • Smith: “Have you engaged in any infidelity during your marriage to Dawn Vick?”
  • Hebert: “I’m going to exercise my Fifth Amendment right.”
  • Smith: “That’s not a Fifth Amendment matter.”
  • Smith” I’m going to show you Exhibit No. 9 (redacted). What is this document, sir?
  • Hebert: I will exercise my Fifth Amendment right.”
  • Smith: “So with respect to Exhibit No. 9, you’re exercising your Fifth Amendment right”
  • Hebert: “I answered the question.”
  • Smith: “I’ll show you (exhibit) No. 10 (redacted). Do you recognize the Exhibit No. 10?”
  • Hebert: “I will exercise my Fifth Amendment right.”

While the exhibits were redacted in Hebert’s Memorandum of Support for obvious reasons, the motion did note that exhibits eight and nine were “documents concerning” Louisiana Oyster House, dba Star Steak and Lobster (the restaurant managed by Palmer), notably a notice of violation and renewal applications. Exhibit 10, Culotta said, “concerned Chris Young documents previously attached to Hebert’s deposition as Exhibit 10-12.”

Interestingly, in his Memorandum in Support of his Motion for Protective Order, Hebert said that while he has not been indicted and there is “no active criminal case” against him… “It is clear Hebert has been under investigation by the FBI, and should he provide answers to these questions, he could face indictment and criminal prosecution.” (Emphasis added.)

And this memorandum, we should point out, was written by Hebert’s attorney, Renee Culotta, who is being paid thousands of dollars while under contract to the Attorney General’s office as a contract attorney—just as she was in a previous lawsuit against ATC, that of Lisa Pike, a former ATC employee who also sued Hebert. The terms of that settlement have been held confidential by the court.

LouisianaVoice has made a public records request for Culotta’s billing for legal representation in the Pike matter. Her billing in the defense of the Tingle lawsuit would not be made available because the case is ongoing.

Culotta said in the memorandum that allegations by Palmer against Hebert “occurred in January 2016, well after Tingle’s work for and termination from the ATC. Tingle did not participate in any issue concerning Sarah Palmer and/or Steak and Lobster, and no facts about Palmer or Steak and Lobster are contained in (Tingle’s) complaint.

“Likewise, the issues concerning Chris Young (i.e., whether Hebert gave preferential treatment to Young and/or referred clients to Young as part of an illegal scheme) are also not a part of this lawsuit and are not relevant to and have no bearing on whether Hebert allegedly retaliated against Tingle because of Tingle’s participation in the race discrimination charges and lawsuits filed by three African-American employees.

Tingle’s counsel’s questions and discovery concerning Chris Young and/or Sarah Parker were only meant to embarrass and harass Hebert,” Culotta said in her memorandum.

“Hebert cannot fully defend himself in the civil case (i.e., by explaining his position concerning Young, Palmer and (t)he Star Steak and Lobster license renewal) while the threat of criminal prosecution is looming.

“Plaintiff cannot have it both ways: if he intends to pursue this evidence, he then must agree to a stay in order that Hebert can defend himself without threat of criminal prosecution.

“Defendant Troy Hebert respectfully requests (that) this court issue a protective order forbidding plaintiff’s counsel from discovering, asking any questions about or referencing Chris Young, Sarah Palmer and/or the Star Steak and Lobster restaurant going forward in this litigation. To the extent plaintiff claims these issues are relevant, then Hebert respectfully asks the court to stay the proceedings until the statute of limitations has run on any criminal charges that could be brought in connection with these matters.” (Emphasis added.)

Now I don’t pretend to be a legal scholar. Journalism schools (or at least the one I attended) sadly do not require any courses in law even though any career journalist is going to be covering courtroom procedure at some point during his career.

That said, it appears to me that someone is one helluva lot more concerned with potential criminal exposure than any civil liability.

But then, that’s understandable. If a public official is convicted of criminal wrongdoing, he is the one who is penalized. If, on the other hand, a civil verdict is returned against that same individual, it is the taxpayer who ultimately pays whatever judgment is assessed.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »