Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

LouisianaVoice submits FOIA request for communications from Vitter on parameters of Thursday night’s TV debate

Posted in Corruption, Elections, Ethics, Governor's Office, Media, PACs, Politicians, Public Records, State Agencies, Transparency, TV News, Vitter on October 16, 2015| 23 Comments »

Complaints and protests had no effect on the decision by Louisiana Tech David Vitter to restrict access to Thursday night’s gubernatorial debate on the Ruston campus, so LouisianaVoice has submitted a formal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request under Louisiana’s Public Records Law (R.S. 44:1 et seq.) for any documentation revealing Vitter’s thumbprints on the unprecedented decision to bar access to the debate to students, the public and the media.

It is as obvious as that great big elephant in the room that Vitter is Bobby Jindal reincarnated as far as his unwillingness to take unscripted questions or questions not approved in advance. His propensity for appearing only in tightly controlled venues is doing little to blot out the ugly memory of eight years of Jindal’s avoidance of unpleasant questions.

All politicians, of course, would prefer to appear at events that evidence overwhelming support and if a politician is willing to take the risk, he will encounter hostile crowds or, at least an enterprising journalist who isn’t afraid to ask the hard questions. Vitter, however, has taken his aversion to such risks to a level at which even Jindal would be envious.

His reasons are quite obvious. He refuses to entertain, let along answer, the BIG question: “Senator, did you break the law?”

Ask Edwin Edwards that and he would likely say, “Sure, but you’re going to have find out for yourself which one it was.”

Ask Paul Newman in his lead role in The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean that, and he would simply tear that page out of the law book and say, “That’s a bad law. I just repealed it.”

Ask Jindal that and he’d probably hire Jimmy Faircloth to file suit against the law.

But you just can’t ask Vitter that. Plain and simple, he’s not going to put himself in that position, which presents a conundrum of sorts or, as the late Johnny Carson might say, “A sticky wicket.” The problem I have with that is this man is asking us to place our trust in him and to elect him Governor when he is not willing to accept questions about his moral character.

Moral character. An interesting term and one might justifiably ask what that has to do with his ability to govern. After all, Woodrow Wilson, LBJ, JFK, FDR, Bill Clinton, Warren Harding, and 14 other presidents are rumored to have carried on affairs in the White House—some with male partners.

For the answer, I will only point to the fact that Vitter ran as a family values candidate and in 1998 Vitter opined that Clinton “should resign…and move beyond this (Monica Lewinski) mess.” http://cenlamar.com/2010/08/21/can-we-be-honest-about-david-vitter/

But now, after being linked to prostitutes in Washington and New Orleans, doesn’t have so much to say on the subject of infidelity. As a candidate for Louisiana’s chief executive officer, he has instituted his very on “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

And he’s making damn sure no one gets to ask that. Hence, the controlled venues, including barring the media and the public from a “public debate” in a public facility on the campus of Louisiana Tech University Thursday night.

Which must beg the question in the minds of any citizen of Louisiana who can get past the latest exploits of those wild and crazy Kardashians: what else might he refuse to share with the electorate of this state? Will he, like Jindal, shut off the governor’s office from all outside inquiries, including those about legitimate state business? Will he invoke the “deliberative process” as did Jindal for eight long years?

He was uncomfortable enough at Thursday night’s debate when the question of his attack ads against fellow Republicans Jay Dardenne and Scott Angelle arose. Of course, he denied his hand in the attacks, saying that he didn’t buy the ads; that The Fund for Louisiana’s Future did.

Well, The Fund for Louisiana’s Future just happens to be his very own Super PAC and while federal law dictates that candidates not involved themselves in the decision-making process of plotting strategy and ad buys with Super PACs, never doubt for a nano-second that it was his hand stirring the pot. After all, Vitter gave a quarter-million dollars of his own money to The Fund for Louisiana’s Future.

So, in a sufficient state of outrage over Vitter’s exclusion of the very public he is asking to elect him, I, Tom Aswell, on behalf of LouisianaVoice has submitted the following public records request of Louisiana Tech President Les Guice:

Pursuant to the Public Records Act of Louisiana (R.S. 44:1 et seq.), I respectfully request the following information:

Please allow me to review all communications, including text messages, twitter messages, emails and any other written correspondence between any representative of Louisiana Tech University (including any member of the university’s administration and/or the university public information office from U.S. Sen. David Vitter and/or any member of his Senate and/or campaign staff or representative/spokesperson for David Vitter, including aides, public relations firms, advertising agencies, Fund for Louisiana’s Future, or anyone else serving in a capacity to promote his gubernatorial campaign. Such request is limited to any and all discussions of the gubernatorial debate of Thursday, October 15, 2015 at Louisiana Tech University, including, but not limited to any and all parameters, restrictions, and/or criteria of said debate, including any advance questions submitted or to be submitted to such spokespersons and/or David Vitter, any demands, suggestions and/or stipulations as to who may or may not be allowed to attend said debate and any reasons and/or justification given to support such demands, suggestions and/or stipulations.

Just so there are no misunderstandings about what information I am entitled to, below are some major requirements of the Louisiana Public Records Act (R.S. 44:1, et seq.) and remedies that are available to us for non-compliance with the law:

LOUISIANA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT, L.R.S. 44:1 ET SEQ

WHAT ARE PUBLIC RECORDS UNDER THE ACT?

To be “public,” the record must have been used, prepared, possessed, or retained for use in connection with a function performed under authority of the Louisiana Constitution, a state law, or an ordinance, regulation, mandate, or order of a public body. This definition covers virtually every kind of record kept by a state or local governmental body. La. R.S. 44:1(A)(1). In Louisiana, a “public record” includes books, records, writings, letters, memos, microfilm, and photographs, including copies and other reproductions.

WHO CAN REQUEST PUBLIC RECORDS?

In Louisiana, any person at least 18 years of age may inspect, copy, reproduce or obtain a copy of any public record. La. R.S. 44:32. The purpose for the document request is immaterial, and an agency or record custodian may not inquire as to the reason, except to justify a fee waiver.

HOW TO MAKE A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST

A request to review or copy a public record is made to the custodian of the records. The custodian is the public official or head of any public body having custody or control of the public record, or a representative authorized to respond to requests to inspect public records.

You may also make an oral request in person to inspect a public record. At that time, the public record must be immediately presented to you, unless the record is not immediately available or is being actively used at the time. If the public record is not immediately available, the custodian must promptly notify you in writing of the reason why the record is not immediately available and fix a day and hour within three days (excluding Saturday, Sunday, and legal holidays) when the records will be made available.

Enforcing The Public Records Law

A custodian who determines a record is not public, must provide written reasons, including the legal basis, within three working days. If a requester is denied a public record by a custodian or if five business days have passed since the initial request and the custodian has not responded, the requester may file a civil suit to enforce his right to access. The custodian bears the burden of proving that the record is not subject to disclosure because of either privacy rights or a specific exemption. The law requires the courts to act expeditiously in such suits and to render a decision “as soon as practicable.” If the requester prevails in the suit, the court will award reasonable attorney’s fees and other costs. If the requester partially prevails, the court may, at its discretion, award reasonable attorney’s fees or an appropriate portion thereof. (The custodian and the public body may each be held liable for the payment of the requester’s attorney’s fees and other costs of litigation; however, the custodian cannot be held personally liable for these fees and costs if he acted on advice from a lawyer representing the public body.) The court may also award the requester civil penalties of up to $100 for each day the custodian arbitrarily failed to give a written explanation of the reasons for denying the request. In addition, if the court finds that the custodian arbitrarily or capriciously withheld a public record, it may award actual damages proven by the requester to have resulted from the custodian’s action. (The custodian may be held personally liable for the actual damages unless his denial of the request was based on advice from a lawyer representing the public body.)

In addition to civil remedies, the law also provides criminal penalties. Anyone with custody or control of a public record who violates the law or hinders the inspection of a public record will be fined $100 to $1,000, or imprisoned for one to six months upon first conviction. For a subsequent conviction, the penalty is a fine of $250 to $2,000 or imprisonment from two to six months, or both.

We amended this request about five minutes after we sent it after we received additional suggestions from a reader. The amended requests reads thus:

Any and all documents related to the Louisiana gubernatorial debate held on the Louisiana Tech campus on October 15, 2015.

Requesting specifically any and all e-mails, documents, audio files, digital files, and printed matters related to the debate rules, venue choice, reasons for not allowing an audience and press to be able to watch the event.

Requesting specifically any and all e-mails, documents, audio files, digital files, and printed matters from or to David Vitter, his office, his staff, including Luke Bolar, and others to any employee or volunteer at LA Tech since April 15, 2015. Requesting specifically any and all e-mails, documents, audio files, digital files, and printed matters from or to President Les Guice with the words “debate,” Vitter, “Edwards,” “Angelle,” “Dardenne,” “Senator,” “Governor,” or “Sen.”

Requesting a written rationale for not allowing students, staff, faculty, or the community to view the debate in person on campus.

Requesting a written rationale for the decision to allow certain radio and television stations to broadcast the event. and not allowing others.

Requesting a list of names, titles, and e-mail addresses for all persons involved in any way with planning, promoting, facilitating or decision-making related to the debate.

(Disclaimer: Not that it matters, but I am a 1970 graduate of Louisiana Tech.)

Read Full Post »

Guest columnist Earthmother unloads on economic theories of the 1 percent vs. poverty, hunger, inadequate health care

Posted in Economy, Education, Elections, Ethics, Guest Columnist, Health Care, Media, Politicians on October 15, 2015| 20 Comments »

“The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.” (Mahatma Ghandi)

“If you don’t want your tax dollars to help the poor, then stop saying you want a country based on Christian values. Because you don’t.” (Comedian John Fugelsang, sometimes mistakenly attributed to former President Jimmy Carter)

“A bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich people by telling the poor people that other poor people are the reason they’re poor.” (NOLA.com comment, Oct. 14, 2015)

 

By guest columnist Earthmother

           Not being an economist, there is much I do not understand about macro-economics.  But as an observer, I have some questions that I hope some of you who do understand economic structure can help me comprehend.

(Disclaimer: I am not an ascetic and have not followed Jesus’ teaching to sell all that I have and give the proceeds to the poor. We’ve worked hard, have a nice home and nice things, way more than we need.  I try to remember that money is not the root of evil—the love of money is. In most ways I’m no different from any other middle class American.)

I get the thinking behind the desire of the “one percenters/oligarchs” (or whatever we choose to call the wealthy ultra conservatives) for a poor educational system for the masses while their own children attend outstanding non-public schools. This creates a latter day feudal, Dark Ages situation where people who are kept ignorant and uneducated are easier to control, and provide an unending source of cheap labor. With no critical thinking skills, the disadvantaged vote as they are told by overlord politicians and the hate media….never realizing that they themselves are members of “The Other” that the hatemongers are telling them are the reason their lives are difficult. (Here’s a sad little rabbit trail—to a suggestion that a woman speak to her school board member, she replied in fear, “Am I allowed to speak to elected people?  Will I get fired from my job or punished?”)

Several journeys to Third World type countries make one highly sensitive to socio-political trends that could result in similar conditions in this great country of ours. Here’s a brief, firsthand glimpse of what a nation looks like when the wealthy can afford all the luxuries the world offers while the majority of the population cannot afford the basic necessities of life.

With a minimal tax base and small government, there are few government services, and those are often corrupt.  Many streets are littered with garbage; people live in housing sometimes made of scraps, cardboard and tin—with no electricity or indoor plumbing. Children and adults, dressed in rags, beg for food or change, eat from garbage dumps, and root through trash for anything of use. People who get sick or injured often die because they are unable to afford basic healthcare; there is no government “safety net.”

People of all ages walk for a day to see a missionary doctor in a schoolhouse, then walk for a day back home. People bathe in and drink from polluted streams of water; they are infested with parasites, and die from infections that could be prevented with over-the-counter medicines but which are out of their reach.

When you’ve bought food for toddlers abandoned to the streets because the parents cannot afford to feed them, worked in an orphanage and talked to children who were rescued as army personnel and fun-loving civilians rid neighborhoods of “vermin” street children, you cherish you own kids more and pray such things could never happen at home.  (Google “street children shot” if you think this is melodramatic.) Women have babies they can’t afford to feed, in patriarchal societies where women have few rights and no access to birth control and family planning services, and are beaten if they say no. Men abandon their families en masse either to work far away or just to avoid their responsibility. Women have little education or job skills to be able to support themselves and their children. Even scarce jobs in skilled labor areas such as welding and construction pay paltry wages, leading to illegal immigration.

Louisiana already looks much like a Third World country in many ways. The litter problem is a startling similarity. We have cities with neighborhoods with lovely homes, world class restaurants and attractions, sprawling university campuses that turn out graduates who go on to lucrative careers in prestigious fields.

But we are also a national leader in several less attractive quality-of-life areas: poverty, chronic disease, AIDS and STDs, violent crime and income inequality, and we remain near-last in education and literacy, health care accessibility and outcomes, life expectancy and economic parity. There is a possible correlation between Louisiana’s high poverty rate and poor education, etc., and the fact that we also have the highest percentage of the population incarcerated in the U.S., which has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world, gives us the dubious distinction of being the prison capital of the entire world.

Add an unfair, regressive  tax system, wages kept low so that people at the top can take home more, a criminal justice system that appears designed to perpetuate poverty,  uncaring and/or ineffective leaders, all agenda-driven and backed by a sophisticated and effective propaganda machine, and we have a Third World-style society in the making.

So finally to my questions: Since the one-percenters already have more money than they can spend in several lifetimes, and the servant class is already sufficient in number to care for them, how does it benefit them to impoverish large numbers of people and create a huge underclass? With no money to buy things, the poor can’t purchase the goods and services to keep the wealthy wealthy.

Why inflict the unpleasant sights of abject poverty on their families?  (Seeing these things is very disturbing if one has a heart at all.) Often the “let them eat cake” people don’t notice the poor and disadvantaged in our midst. No one has explained that people who are hungry, poorly nourished with non-nutritious foods, and chronically ill, are not good students or employees.

If not motivated by altruism, what about the purely pragmatic idea that throwing a bone to the underclass keeps the upper class safe in their homes and safe from people who have little and want to take theirs in order to survive. If you read local and national news it should come as no surprise that we already have a huge problem resulting from the struggle between the Haves and the Have-Nots.

Does denial of healthcare services to the less advantaged provide more and better care for the wealthy? Does paying a living wage and allowing employees to work enough hours to qualify for benefits and earn enough to pay the rent and buy food somehow diminish the rich?  Why destroy traditional corporate pension plans and also attempt to cut Social Security benefits, so that retirees fall into poverty and lose their dignity?

How does it make sense to deny birth control and family planning services to poor women, then penalize them for getting pregnant by curtailing pre-natal care and seeking to withhold nutrition assistance to mothers and children? Why continue to insist that cost-free abstinence-only is all that’s needed to prevent pregnancy, when it’s proven to be rather unrealistic? Has anyone reasoned that when women are abstinent, theoretically their male significant others are, too? Just ask Sen. Bill Cassidy’s teen daughter if it works, and ask never-married spokeswoman-in-chief Bristol Palin how that abstinence thing is working out for her and her growing family.

Why do smart people ignore the failure of Friedman Chicago School economics, wherever it’s been implemented, worldwide? (Hint: read Naomi Klein Shock Doctrine.)

It would be naïve not to acknowledge the fact that every dollar (or euro, kroner, peso, lempira, or whatever) not given up by the wealthy in the form of reasonable taxes or fair wages and benefits for employees is another dollar in their bank account. Employers’ base pay rates on the value they place on work, and employers certainly have that right. What does it say about one’s attitude about the inherent value of people who perform menial task—those who clean their toilets, secure their property, and cook and serve their food? When is more than enough enough? And why is it desirable and moral to deny everyone else a reasonable standard of living?

Seriously, what is the rationale for the rich wanting to keep other people down?   How does it benefit them? How does it enhance their lives, or take anything from them if other people have sufficient resources to live on? I was taught that the U.S. classless society was different from other countries where aristocrats controlled the peasants. Was that teaching wrong or just invalidated by human nature?

When did the term “common good” become socialist/un-American/anti-capitalist? When did it become alright to take funds from needy children, the poor, the sick, the disabled, and give those tax dollars to the rich in the form of corporate welfare, including sports franchises and motorsports tracks owned by mega-millionaires? Why do free market capitalists thinks it’s their right to demand government handouts to grow their wealth instead of investing their own money?

Awaiting enlightenment from folks wiser and more educated than I.

 

Read Full Post »

Rape arrest in Caddo conflicts with Bienville Parish grand jury’s no true bill in New Bethany case nine months earlier

Posted in Courts, Crime, Elections, Ethics, TV News on October 10, 2015| 11 Comments »

When the Greeks and Romans created their respective gods of justice, they apparently did not have Louisiana’s Second Judicial District in mind.

The Lady of Justice, holding a sword and the scales of justice, is a familiar sight in Western culture. Her statue adorns many courthouses and halls of justice across the U.S. and miniature versions stand proudly on the desks of countless attorneys. In some depictions, she is blindfolded but most often, she is not.

Lady Justice Statue- 7.75 Inch

The origin of the statue is said to be Themis, a Greek goddess of divine justice. In illustrations of her, she carries the scales of justice in one hand and a sword in the other, with her eyes covered. The Romans consolidated her and her daughter Dike to form Justitia.

So just how did the Second Judicial District, which comprises the parishes of Jackson, Bienville and Claiborne, come to be overlooked in the administering of so-called blind justice, aka fair and impartial justice?

Two words.

Mack Ford.

Or more accurately, three words: Rev. Mack Ford.

Back in January, a Bienville Parish grand jury declined to indict Ford, then 82, who was accused of raping girls who were residents of his infamous New Bethany Home in Arcadia in the 1970s, ‘80s and into the ‘90s. Ford died suddenly just over a month later, on February 11. http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/02/mack_w_ford_founder_of_new_bet.html

And while it may seem unfair to pick on him at this point, his death is not the issue here.

Three former residents of New Bethany traveled to Arcadia from three different states in December of 2014 to testify about their experiences with Ford. Other witnesses testified in October of that year.

But in a terse, one-paragraph written statement, then-District Attorney Jonathan Stewart said the grand jury was given “research and information regarding the statute of limitations with regard to each alleged act and, after deliberation, returned a no true bill.” STEWART GRAND JURY LETTER A no true bill means the grand jury decided not to indict. http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/01/grand_jury_declines_to_indict.html

So, if we are to understand Stewart’s statement and his interpretation of the law (and apparently, his instructions to the grand jury—though we will never know that for sure since grand jury proceedings are secret), the reason there was no indictment was because the statute of limitations had expired.

But wait!

Just last week, on Thursday (October 8), Shreveport television station KSLA ran a story about a 74-year-old Grant Parish man who was arrested for his alleged involvement in the rape of a young girl….in the 1970s. http://www.ksla.com/story/30219460/74-year-old-charged-in-1970s-rape-of-young-girl?fb_action_ids=10154259652069128&fb_action_types=og.comments&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B913686945391152%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.comments%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

Roy Leon Robertson was booked into the Caddo Correctional Center on Monday, October 5 and charged with aggravated rape, according to the TV report.

He is accused of raping a girl under the age of 13 in the ‘70s, but the rape was not reported to Caddo authorities until 2014 when he came under investigation for similar offenses in Winn Parish.

The parallels in the Robertson and Ford cases are unmistakable. Both were accused of raping juveniles in the ‘70s even though in each case, the offenses were not formally reported until 2014, and the reported offenses occurred in the same general area of the state.

Yet, while one such report resulted in an immediate arrest, the other was dismissed because of what the local D.A said was an expired statute of limitation.

But let’s hear what a Caddo official had to say about that:

“There is no prescription for aggravated rape,” according to investigator Jared Marshall. A victim may come forward at any time. “Normally it’s called the statue (sic) of limitations, but in Louisiana it’s called a prescription,” the TV station quoted Marshall as saying.

Detectives said the victim decided to come forward upon learning that Robertson may still be harming young children.

“It doesn’t shock me at all that a report like this was made years later,” said psychologist Bruce McCormick. “Sometimes people are just not psychologically ready to make a report at the time, particularly the younger people,” he said.

Marshall said victims should not be concerned if it’s too late to prosecute. “The process of coming forward is for the protection of potential future victims,” he said.

Never too late to prosecute?

Oops. Apparently Jonathan Stewart didn’t get the memo.

“If he (Ford) had been indicted for just one thing, it would have been justice for so many people,” Kansas police dispatcher Simone Jones, one of Ford’s accusers, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune in January. She said Ford raped her in the early 1980s. “Why does this man continue to walk free?” she said following the grand jury’s decision.

The grand jury was convened a year after Jones and other former residents traveled to Arcadia in support of Jennifer Halter, a cancer victim who said she wanted to fulfill a dying wish to report Ford who she said began molesting her shortly after she arrived at the school in 1988, abuse she said continued until she left in 1990.

Jones said she was 14 when Ford forced her to perform oral sex on him.

“They let us down again,” Halter told The Times-Picayune. “I can’t understand why it’s okay for these people to do what they do and walk away like nothing was done wrong.” She said she experienced frequent sexual contact by Ford during choir trips to area churches which he chaperoned. She said she reported those incidents to police in 2013.

“This has gone on for years,” Tara Cummings told The Times-Picayune. A resident of New Bethany in 1982 and ’83, she said if the statute of limitations was an issue, Stewart should never have convened a grand jury to in the first place. “The particulars for the statutes of limitations for these crimes was always accessible to the DA’s office,” she was quoted as saying. “They (prosecutors) are the party who needs to understand and be clear about what is and what is not possible under the statutes.”

Perhaps Stewart should contact the District Attorney’s office in Caddo Parish—except he is no longer in office.

STEWART WITHDRAWAL

In April of 2014, Stewart fired Assistant District Attorney Danny Newell after Newell announced he would run against his boss. Stewart subsequently withdrew from his re-election bid and Newell was elected district attorney. https://lincolnparishnewsonline.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/da-stewart-fires-assistant-in-claiborne-newell-likely-opponent-in-14/

Read Full Post »

State Police Captain Kevin Devall, son of Hammond police chief, leads charmed life; cleared twice by Internal Affairs

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, State Police on October 6, 2015| 14 Comments »

When State Police Capt. Barry Branton, a supervisor with a previously unblemished record, approved a Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) on fellow Troop D Lt. Harlan Chris Guillory, it did not seem to matter that Guillory was indeed found to be abusing prescription drugs while on duty.

Instead, Guillory was subsequently promoted to captain and made Commander of Troop D while Branton was placed on administrative leave and demoted the rank of lieutenant. He appealed and eventually reached a settlement by agreeing to accept the demotion in exchange for having the suspension expunged from his record and his receiving full back pay.

But the bottom line was Branton was demoted for initiating a PMP out of concern for the professionalism of a fellow officer.

That stands in stark contrast to the decision not to punish a state trooper in Washington Parish after he and his brother, a DEA agent, were reported to have threatened a Metairie lawyer with bodily harm, imprisonment, and closure of his law practice—all over the issue of the attorney’s having parked his vehicle near their deer stand in December of 2012.

Michael Gahagan, a Metairie immigration attorney, on Tuesday provided LouisianaVoice with a three-page affidavit he filed with the Washington Parish Sheriff’s Office following a December 21, 2012, confrontation with State Police Captain Kevin Devall and his brother, Drug Enforcement Agent Page Devall.

Both men are the sons of Hammond Police Chief Roddy Devall who is said to be a strong supporter of State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson.

Gahagan told LouisianaVoice that he was “assaulted, threatened, and abducted by the brothers after they blocked his truck which he said was parked on the roadside next to a hunting lease controlled by the Parish Line Hunting Club. Gahagan said he was a member of the club and was hunting from his deer stand around 4 p.m. on December 21 when he heard an all-terrain vehicle drive up to his truck and stop and then leave after a few minutes.

He said he climbed down from his deer stand about 5:15 intending to drive home only to find his truck blocked by Kevin Devall’s full-sized white pickup truck and a black trailer. When he asked the brothers, who were standing nearby, to move, they approached him cursing and grabbing the front of his shirt with their faces touching his.

He said he broke free and began walking backwards down the road that led away from his truck and into the woods in an effort to get away from them. He said as he walked backward, he extended his hands in front in an effort to keep them at arms’ length. All the while, he said the brothers were screaming threats at him. Page Devall yelled that he was a DEA agent and that “I kick in doors for a living” as he repeatedly “reached out and put his finger in my face and pushed my face,” Gahagan said.

Kevin Devall, he said, boasted that “I make the laws in Louisiana” and that he “would throw me in jail for the rest of my life and take away my law license if I didn’t do what he said.”

Fearing that he would be severely beaten or even killed, he considered drawing his handgun that he was carrying in his back waistband. He said he is a registered concealed carry permit holder and that if the two had not been police officers, “I would have defended myself and shot and killed them in order to prevent a beating and escape the attack and illegal detention.”

Because the two men were police officers, he said, “I chose not to draw and fire my handgun,” he said. “I did not use deadly force to defend myself because I was afraid what would happen to me after I was arrested by other police officers for shooting a police officer in self-defense.”

He said after about 45 minutes of repeated threats from the two, Kevin Devall ordered him into the Devalls’ ATV “so that he would drive me back into the woods and show me where he would allow me to park my vehicle.”

Before getting into the ATV, Gahagan was ordered by Paige Devall to disarm “or we will never let you leave,” he said. Gahagan said he removed his handgun and placed it into his truck and locked the truck. “Then Paige Devall gave me a full-body pat down (without probable cause or reasonable suspicion that I had committed any crime).”

Gahagan said he was then driven “several miles” into the woods and shown where he would be allowed to park.

He said he was finally allowed to leave the area around 8 p.m., nearly three hours after his ordeal began.

Following the confrontation, State Police Internal Affairs conducted an investigation of the allegations during which Gahagan was administered a polygraph test but neither of the Devalls were required to take a polygraph.

That was similar to the case of State Police Lieutenant John Cannon who was accused by a woman of twice paying her to have sex, once in the rear seat of his patrol car. The woman was given a polygraph but Cannon was not even though he did admit to twice having sex with her while on duty but denied paying for sex.

Two other significant events followed Gahagan’s encounter with the Devalls, he said.

First, Parish Line Hunting Club discontinued the Devalls’ membership at the hunting lease and after Gahagan filed a formal complaint against Paige Devall with his employer, DEA, Gahagan, his wife and his law practice were subjected to IRS audits. “I had never been audited by the IRS before in my life,” he said. “It seems awfully coincidental that I would be hit with three simultaneous audits at that particular time.”

LouisianaVoice has made a formal public records request to State Police for Kevin Devall’s personnel file and all Internal Affairs investigative reports on him.

Here is the sworn affidavit Gahagan filed with the Washington Parish Sheriff’s Office following his encounter with the Devalls (Warning: this document contains graphic language that may be offensive to some): AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL GAHAGAN

Nor was the 2012 incident the last time that Kevin Devall has had a complaint filed against him.

About 16 months later, on April 22, 2014, the estranged wife of St. Bernard Parish President Dave Peralta filed a formal complaint against Kevin Devall for the manner in which he investigated her report that her husband, a former police officer, had forced her to perform oral sex on him and then raped her the previous October. Here is her formal complaint: SHARON PERALTA COMPLAINT

Sharon Peralta said Devall, instead of arresting her husband, was laughing and joking with Dave Peralta on the front lawn and that her husband was never handcuffed but instead was allowed to walk around the front lawn freely. “I was told to leave and they would handle things from there,” she was quoted as saying by the New Orleans Times-Picayune. She said Dave Peralta subsequently intimidated her into dropping charges against him. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/04/state_police_probe_sharon_pera.html#incart_email

It took exactly five days after Mrs. Peralta’s charges were made public for State Police Internal Affairs to clear Devall of any improper conduct in the manner in which he conducted his investigation. http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/04/state_police_clear_captain_of.html

But on April 23, a St. Bernard Parish grand jury indicted Dave Peralta on a charge of sexual battery, which could have carried a 10-year prison sentence.

Prosecutors dismissed that case on a technicality in April but in August of this year, Peralta was re-indicted by a St. Bernard Parish grand jury that accused him of using parish employees to help him stalk his ex-wife as well as other offenses. In September of 2014, he was indicted by a St. Tammany Parish grand jury on charges of felony stalking and in May of this year, he was indicted by an East Baton Rouge Parish grand jury on three counts of filing false reports and for perjury.

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, Notable Quotables, State Police on October 4, 2015| 3 Comments »

“After they had sex, Lt. Cannon realized his unit was stuck….”

State Police internal investigation report, detailing in what is assumed was an unintentional double entendre how state police lieutenant John Cannon’s patrol car got stuck during a back seat sexual encounter while on duty near St. Francisville on March 4, 2014.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »