Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Calcasieu judges order end to defendants’ purchase of gift cards for DA office in exchange for reduction of sentences

November 21, 2019 by tomaswell

There’s been a major rule change to Calcasieu Parish District Attorney John DeRosier’s Monopoly game.

Defendants in the 14th Judicial District Court may no longer pass Go by purchasing Get Out of Jail Gift Cards.

Okay, in the parlance of the classic board game of my youth, that’s something of a mixed metaphor. Anyone over 65 who has played the game knows that you collect $200 for passing Go and a Get Out of Jail Free card comes with the luck of the draw when you land on Community Chest.

But as it applies to past practices of DeRosier’s office, the metaphor is justified—and appropriate because DeRosier does run something of a monopoly and cards were certainly involved.

You may recall the LouisianaVoice STORY of Nov. 6 in which we called attention to a Nov. 1 story in a slightly more widely-read publication, the WASHINGTON POST (sorry, but if you don’t have a subscription the Post has a pay wall that only allows subscribers to access its stories—so you’ll just have to take my word for it), which described an ongoing scam over in Calcasieu whereby those arrested in the parish could buy their way to a reduced sentence by purchasing gift cards and donating them to the DA’s office.

Well, after the Post story and after our punctuation mark five days later, the district judges of the 14th JDC have abruptly put the quietus to the practice.

While it would appear highly unlikely that the good judges could have been unaware of the ongoing practice, there’s nothing like a little publicity to bring everyone around to the realization that even the appearance of a little not-so-subtle coercion, i.e. extortion, is never a good thing, especially when carried out in the name of law and order.

So, the obvious thing to do would be to stand tall for right and justice—‘cause now, folks are looking.

In the wake of the Post’s story and two days before LouisianaVoice came along with our reminder, DeRosier sent out a one-sentence memo to parish probation officers.

The memo, dated Nov. 4, read:

  • “Any defendant on Misdemeanor Probation who desires to change or modify any terms Misdemeanor Probation will be required to present such request to the court for its consideration. Only after response from the court will this office take any action to modify any term or condition of Misdemeanor Probation.”

Well, not so fast.

Click HERE to read DeRosier’s memo.

On Monday (Nov. 18), 14th JDC Judge W. Mitchell Redd, in a letter to DeRosier on which all the 14th JDC judges were copied, wrote:

  • “This confirms our recent meeting in which you informed us of the District Attorney’s program that had been allowing criminal defendants to purchase gift cards and give the gift cards to your office as a means of reducing up to one-half of their community service obligation.”

(Notice how Judge Redd was careful to note that DeRosier had only recently “informed” the judges of the program. That might be construed as deniability by someone more skeptical than I.)

Judge Redd continued:

  • “You asked the Court to advise you on whether or not the Court wished this program to continue as to criminal defendants who have been sentenced by the Court to community service.”

One might normally think the DA would have cleared this with the judges before the program was ever implemented and not as an afterthought—or more correctly, after the bright glare of light shone on it by the Post.

One might also have reckoned that the good judges would not have waited more than two weeks after the Post story or waited until after their “recent meeting” with DeRosier to issue its directive.

Finally, Judge Redd concluded his letter to the DA:

  • “Please be advised that the Court has discussed the matter and agreed not to allow gift cards to be substituted to any degree (emphasis mine) for our court-ordered community service. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. We appreciate you taking your time to discuss this with us.”

Click HERE to read Judge Redd’s letter to DeRosier.

The only question not addressed by the judges is what to do about the gift cards defendants already purchased and gave to the DA’s office which were supposed to be used for charitable purposes such as purchasing toys and gifts for underprivileged children but which in some cases were used instead to purchase gifts for staff members, their grandchildren and other relatives—and to DeRosier’s friends and political supporters and even journalists.

But then, that little matter probably didn’t come up in DeRosier’s “recent meeting” with the judges.

 

Posted in Corruption, Courts, Ethics, Judges, Media | 4 Comments »

Teetering towns tumbling down: Legislative Auditor lists 18 towns in 15 separate parishes experiencing financial distress

November 20, 2019 by tomaswell

Eight Louisiana towns, each in a separate parish, may be on the brink of having to shut down basic operations because of significant debt, insufficient utility rates and/or loss of a major industrial taxpayer, according to the Legislative Auditor’s Office.

Additionally, four municipalities, are facing serious concerns of operation of their rural water infrastructure systems. One of those is facing the double whammy of concerns about both ongoing operations and about its rural water system.

The 11 are among 18 considered by the state auditor’s office as being “fiscally distressed municipalities, including three whose latest financial statements indicate a negative fund balance.

Those over which the auditor’s office issued a concern for ongoing operations and their parishes include:

  • Grambling (Lincoln);
  • Tallulah (Madison);
  • Baldwin (St. Mary);
  • Basile (Evangeline);
  • Lake Providence (East Carroll);
  • Newellton (Tensas);
  • Washington (St. Landry), and
  • Epps (West Carroll).

Baldwin was also among four municipalities about which concerns were raised over rural water infrastructure committees. Others with rural water infrastructure concerns were:

  • Melville (St. Landry);
  • Tullos (LaSalle), and
  • Powhatan (Natchitoches).

Vidalia in Concordia, Winnsboro in Franklin, and Waterproof in Tensas were also flagged over concerns that their latest financial statements indicate a negative fund balance, or deficit.

Additionally, auditors could not issue an opinion for the most recent year for LeCompte in Rapides Parish and a fiscal review committee is monitoring the town of Clinton in East Feliciana Parish.

The auditor’s office was unable to issue an opinion for the most recent year for the towns of Ball in Rapides Parish and Jonesboro in Jackson Parish.

Legislative Auditor Daryl Purpera said the purpose of the list was to provide the public and elected officials at the state and local levels notice of the municipalities’ financial plights so that remedial measures could be undertaken.

“Our goal is to work with each municipality’s elected officials and to provide recommendations to place the municipality on a path to fiscal stability,” the Baton Rouge Business Report quoted Purpera as saying.

Posted in Audit Reports, Auditor, Finances | 2 Comments »

Notable Quotables: In their own words

November 18, 2019 by tomaswell

“If the judge seals it, they’ll bury this.”

—Mangham contractor Jeff Mercer, on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeal motion to seal documents in his fight to annul the appeal court’s reversal of a unanimous lower court verdict awarding him $20 million stemming from shakedown attempts by DOTD officials.

Posted in Politics | Leave a Comment »

What price justice? Case of Mangham contractor taking on ugly face of a judicial conspiracy against individual rights

November 18, 2019 by tomaswell

The saga of Mangham contractor Jeff Mercer is taking on all the ugly characteristics of a conspiracy between the state, the 4th Judicial District Court, and the 2ND Circuit Court of Appeal.

Mercer is the contractor who was forced out of business by the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) when DOTD withheld more than $11 million he was owed when he resisted SHAKEDOWN EFFORTS by a DOTD inspector who demanded that Mercer “put some green” in his hand and that he could “make things difficult for mercer.”

He is also the man who dug his heels in and sued DOTD, eventually winning a staggering $20 million JUDGMENT after a jury trial in Monroe’s 4th JDC.

And he is the man who saw his verdict overturned by the 2nd Circuit.

It’s not like LouisianaVoice didn’t obtain INTERNAL DOCUMENTS from DOTD that supported Mercer’s claim that he was owed the money. They did. In spades.

But then, more information became public. This time, it was about 2ND Circuit Court Chief Judge HENRY N. BROWN, who assigned the case to himself despite his ties to DOTD.

Brown subsequently wrote the opinion which reversed the unanimous state district court verdict. Subsequent to that adverse opinion, Mercer learned of Brown’s ties to DOTD and filed an application for rehearing and a motion to recuse and vacate the panel’s opinion which, of course, was denied.

But then even more damning information surfaced, including reports of ex-parte communications, unauthorized computer accessing, and apparent falsification of discussion of an alleged DE NOVO REVIEW by Brown of Mercer’s trial court record.

A year after Mercer’s motion to recuse was denied, Brown and his law clerk were gone. Brown was FORCED TO RESIGN after being suspended for his alleged behavior toward colleagues who were considering an appeal involving a close female friend of Brown’s.

So, Mercer did what anyone so aggrieved would do: He filed a 71-page PETITION TO ANNUL the 2nd Circuit Court’s judgment.

And that’s when the appearance of a tight-knit conspiracy begins to take shape.

The petition to annul was filed in 4th JDC in Monroe on September 27 but now the 2nd Circuit Court, which is not even a party to the original lawsuit, has jumped into the fray in an effort to seal documents sought by Mercer.

If that seems a bit confusing, it is. The 2nd Circuit’s MOTION, itself under seal, seeks an ex parte order to seal documents of the 2nd Circuit which Mercer feels would demonstrate rampant corruption in the 2nd Circuit which would in turn, justify overturning the appeal court’s reversal of his trial court verdict.

In a head-scratching claim in its decision to reverse the lower court verdict, the 2nd Circuit said Mercer had not proven the DOTD official had acted with malice or had prevented him from submitting contracts to the state.

No malice? Shakedown attempts? Withholding $11 million owed Mercer (which had the effect of preventing him from bidding on future contracts).

It’s difficult, if not impossible, to imagine what would constitute the definition of “malice” in the eyes of the 2nd Circuit if such intimidation didn’t do the trick.

If all that isn’t bizarre enough, motions are scheduled to be heard Thursday by 4th JDC Judge J. Wilson Rambo.

Rambo, of course, was a central figure in another case involving the DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS in a lawsuit by developer Stanley Palowsky, III.

The words of a judicial CONSPIRACY first appeared in connection to that case and nothing we have heard or read since then has removed the cloud over the entire 4th JDC.

Documents the 2nd Circuit seeks to seal include objections to jurisdiction as well as internal documents, bench memos, and drafts of opinions.

“If the judge (Rambo) seals it (the record), they’ll bury this,” Mercer said.

His words could well be prophetic.

Which would justifiably raise the question: What price justice?

Posted in Contracts, Corruption, Courts, Ethics, Judges, Lawsuits, Transparency | 1 Comment »

Is that ‘Vietnam Vet’ in the anti-Edwards ad really a vet or an actor? tips indicate he’s an actor—and not a good one

November 15, 2019 by tomaswell

It’s not enough that the Republican Governors Association (RGA) has MISCONSTRUED one of our stories about disaster relief in an effort to make Gov. John Bel Edwards look as ineffective as possible.

The RGA ran similar misleading ads in the recent Mississippi gubernatorial election campaign.

And they always seem to pop up at the very end of a campaign, too late for the other side to respond.

And to be sure, both sides are generally equally guilty of such tactics.

Now, an 11th hour TV ad features a grizzled old guy wearing a Vietnam Veteran’s cap ranting about how Edwards has disgraced West Point and the military in general and veterans in particular.

There are several not-so-subtle problems with the ad, however, telltale signs that might cause one to question the ad’s validity:

  • First of all, the “Vietnam vet” talking into the camera is just a little too slick in reciting his lines.
  • It’s almost as if his lines were rehearsed. He skillfully places just the right emphasis on just the right catch-phrases.
  • He comes off not as a genuine veteran, but more like an…actor—certainly not some typical Vietnam veteran one might encounter out for a morning stroll.
  • You notice he never gives his name. It would be helpful to know who this “veteran” is.
  • And that Vietnam Veteran cap? It looks just a little too crisp, too clean, too, well…new.

In the white-hot world of Louisiana political campaigns, there is usually no level to which a candidate is not willing to stoop.

In some quarters, that might be considered STOLEN VALOR.

Of course, the RGA could dispel that suspicion by simply identifying the speaker in the ad.

Posted in Politics | 18 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »