Mike Moore enters an appearance for Zach Scruggs
This is a pretty stunning development. Former Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore has entered an appearance for Zach Scruggs in U.S. v. Scruggs. Here is the Mike Moore entry of appearance.
This is a pretty stunning development. Former Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore has entered an appearance for Zach Scruggs in U.S. v. Scruggs. Here is the Mike Moore entry of appearance.
March 17, 2008 at 12:10 pm
GOP will return Scruggs money
http://www.djournal.com/pages/story.asp?ID=269741&pub=1&div=News
March 17, 2008 at 12:28 pm
What is Zach thinking? Is Mike repaying for all of the money and honor he got from the tobacco settlement?
Zach needs to re-think this thing. He has at the very least 3 former friends and business associates that will testify against him. DaddyWarbucks will take the fifth, if necessary.
Why put your sick Mama thru more pain and heartbreak?
Zach needs to get on with his life. Anything else is pure stupidity. Someone needs to send to him the picture of Paul Minor going away for 11 years and the massive fine he got stuck paying.
March 17, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Veddy interesting. Scruggs ably “donated” $40,000 in one day to a single judge in Lafayette County, whereas he was only able to drum up for the GOP a measly $27,250 over a period of TWO YEARS. How expansive of him. Bravo to the GOP for giving his tainted money to a worthy cause!
March 17, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Okay, just talked with NMC, on lunch break in what sounds like it might turn into a full day of court, but here’s his preliminary take:
He’s shocked-and-awed by this move, thinking it a “showing of fight” that means they won’t plead, at least not today. He smells classic-Dickie-Scruggs: “I’ll show them and bring out The Big Gun.”
When I said, “Well, a trial might be great for us, but it’s the dumbest move I ever heard of for Zach,” he replied,
“Dumbest move? (pause) I don’t know, the dumbest may have been not getting it all tied up in a neat little package on Friday.” (He think AUSA Tom Dawson is apt to be in a real “Bring it ON” mood.)
So unless Team Zach comes to its senses here right quick-like (and, I ask, when has it ever?), we’re in for a real spectacle in a couple of weeks.
Lay in plenty popcorn . . .
March 17, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Welcome to folo, rBARR. Didn’t he give the RNC something like $250,000? Think I remember that . . . not sure . . . and some hefty donations to a few R Senators too.
March 17, 2008 at 12:46 pm
My guess is Todd Graves and company just got fired.
March 17, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Is Mike Moore trying to go down Langstons’ path here by trying to lawyer up with the Scruggs’. Did he or did he not receive a TARGET LETTER. Is this called outsmarting the Feds. or do we have a mole in here somewhere, because this is not to help Zack its to protect something from not coming out.
March 17, 2008 at 12:47 pm
rnb, your question about his mama counts heavily for us normal folks, but obviously less so for the Zach Scruggses of the world.
March 17, 2008 at 12:49 pm
GOP leader wants investigation of Scruggs, Hood:
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080317/NEWS/80317016&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
March 17, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Homer R, if not fired, I bet at least roundly overruled. “Roundly” that is — not “soundly.”
March 17, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I’m thinking like Magnolia. Will this in any way provide any type of protection to Mike? (Obviously non-lawyer here)
March 17, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Surely the Mike Moore thing was Dickie’s idea (or not Zach’s alone) - what realistic advantage does Mike Moore bring to the table? I’m confused!
March 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm
…or is it simply filling the absence of former atty’s?
March 17, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Sometimes you get what you pay for, and Mr. Moore states he gets paid at the end of the day as a resolution attorney(his words not mine). So he be helt up somewhere ( would like to see phone records) as to who can we do what to whom. Would love to see the untracable cell phone thats been sold recently to current and past elected officials.
March 17, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Obvioiualy rhia ia a ploy for a motion for continuance. I’m sure Mike Moore will say that since he just got in the case, he can’t possiblyi be ready for trial on the 31st. He probably fired his other attorneys because they told him he should take the one year deal offered to him. Of course, I’m sure Mike will do everything he can to protect Dickie.
March 17, 2008 at 1:11 pm
It’s called “creating” attorney/client privilige. Although it has not gotten much coverage, it is common knowledge that Moore has been tied into the Scruggs/Langston/AG Hood confederacy longer and more deeply than others who have already plead guilty. This is genious by Scruggs and a setback for Prosecution.
March 17, 2008 at 1:14 pm
I think he got rid of Graves, for the same reason he got rid of Farese, and for the same reason he will eventually want to fire Moore— for getting the bad news that he is going to prison for a long time if he goes to trial.
March 17, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I was wondering about the attorney/client privilege issue. Do you think that is why they kept wanting Ken Coghlan on board?
March 17, 2008 at 1:33 pm
is Graves out for sure?
March 17, 2008 at 1:33 pm
The files turned over from the Taint Team might have given Mike the Riggors. My perception of Farese if he can’t help he would not won’t to be on the team, and with Graves a client would have to be pretty full of it to not let a former U S Attorney do what he could, and it might be Graves that ask to be released.
March 17, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Dumb question coming up…who/what determines who is notified? The entry of appearance list the following:
Thomas W. Dawson, Assistant United States Attorney, Robert H. Norman, Assistant United States Attorney, David Anthony Sanders, Assistant United States Attorney, Anthony L. Farese, J. Rhea Tannehill, Jr., Timothy R. Balducci, Hiram Eastland, Jr. and Frank Trapp.
Why isn’t Jim Greenlee listed? Why is Tim Balcucci listed but not Joey Langston? Why aren’t any of Zach’s prior attorneys listed (other than Farese?)
March 17, 2008 at 1:46 pm
s’junkie, are you talking about today’s entry-of-appearance? What’s Tony Farese doing on there? And Balducci, fer chrissakes — not even a lawyer anymore???
March 17, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Balducci is a co-defendant and technically is acting as his own attorney even though he is/will be disbarred.
March 17, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Madison @1:11, that’s an interesting theory — but I’d have to think there’s NO “indispensable person” in the government’s case (or set of cases), including Mike Moore.
March 17, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Yep, I got it right off the link - it’s bugging the crap out of me.
March 17, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Oh yeah, wc, thanks for that reminder. Weird, weird, weird though it be.
March 17, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Madison, that’s a real interesting observation, but one that frankly, makes less than no sense.
March 17, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Magnolia @ 12:46. I think you’re right - to protect/keep something from coming out, or at least to put M Moore (and his Big Tobacco knowledge) in the middle of the “horse trading” that’s going on between Dickie and Feds to try and get a good deal for Zack.
March 17, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Observer// Mike Moores’ ego has always been as inflated as Dickies’ or Hoods’ and We know how all of this was created, by intimidating anyone in their path because they either had high up people watching their backs or was in public office themselves. Frankly I believe Madison is right on.
March 17, 2008 at 2:07 pm
‘Think Mike’s there for Mike; not necessarily to “try and get a good deal for Zach, ” Justus, cuz I think the window for the best deal for Zach might have been shut. But then there’s always Mike getting a continuance and then a better deal and riding off into the sunset a hero….(sarcasm, here).
March 17, 2008 at 2:07 pm
I realize it is difficult to get anything through my thick head, but I still believe that before this day is gone, Zach will ask for a plea deal.Either way, this is going to be a St. Patrick’s Day that he will never forget. Or maybe he chose Mike Moore simply because misery loves company.
March 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm
How’s your mouf, darlin’ Dixie?
March 17, 2008 at 2:16 pm
In someones’ article today I have read about Pete Johnson, Where was the CL at the time he sued Dickie over what he was promised (and this man was an elected official at the time) when Dickie made a bargain to give him 10% of the fee money. Mr Johnson ended up taking 100k and no one even raised an eyebrow about this being illegal or unethical. Pete has since had to have a liver transplant and is now working for some federal agency that has connections to the State.
March 17, 2008 at 2:16 pm
The creating attorney/client privilidge may not make sense to you now. However, as this web continues to untangle, it may make perfect sense. Moore has been involved with past Scruggs high-profile litigation (tobacco/asbestos/State Farm). They have also ALWAYS worked in lock-step in Mississippi political efforts (Hood/McCoy/Diaz). Scruggs was also Moore’s largest political contributor. Thoughout his political career, Moore has always steered clear of scandle. Now, Moore is diving in headfirst. It benefits Moore to get involved with this mess - and it is not about the money.
March 17, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Lotus @ 12:46,
Here’s the link that will answer your question:
http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?20036053463
For a search based on contributor’s name, try this one:
http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml
March 17, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I agree with Sailor - I can’t see Mike Moore getting a better deal for young Zach than was arranged by Graves. This seems like some sort of reality-denying last grasp at a last straw, and goes hand in hand with Zach’s odd behavior as described in another post by some of our Oxford correspodents - pacing the Square on Friday, refusing to enter the courthouse. Strange indeed.
March 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Madison @ 2:16, I see your point, but I still bet the Feds have ways to work around/neutralize it (and more than one).
Thank you, Phantom @ 2:18.
March 17, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Someone else may recall this better than I do (as I think this entry may be on the other Folo website), but in last month’s hearing (the one when Balducci testified) there was a strange suggestion by the judge at the beginning of the hearing saying his office had received notice that Mike Moore would be joining the defense team. Keker looked surprised and assured the judge that was not the case. It seemed bizarre at the time to many of us in the courtroom. But little else was ever mentioned about it.
March 17, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Just when you think it can’t get more interesting….
To jump in the middle of this, it is an obvious “tell” that Mike wants to keep some things buried. I’m not sure how he can benefit now from the A/C privilege. Maybe he needs to consult with some mob lawyers about what the government can do to attorneys in situations like this. I will be disappointed if Moore is able to hide behind the sacred cloak of A/C privilege. I have a feeling that Moore doesn’t carry much weight with Biggers anyway.
March 17, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I believe all of the theories set forth have some substance, but I believe, but could be wrong, that any and all questions surrounding Mike Morre and Scruggs with past dealings would not be precluded based on his now current representation of Zach becasue of the crime / fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege.
March 17, 2008 at 2:45 pm
if i was zach, i think i’d like to have moore on my trial team, maybe not lead counsel, but on the team. despite what y’all think, moore is well liked and he is a good atty. i don’t buy all this conspiracy stuff. it is obvious to me that zach is calling his owns shots.
March 17, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Maybe he wont’s to have a big circus of a trial. He and Hood have scars from pushing each other to get the microphone, wouldn’t put it past him.
March 17, 2008 at 2:53 pm
mag, I didn’t think the circus could get any bigger til today. Still am puzzled by Zach’s movin’ on to trail and firing Graves or bringing in Mike as co-counsel to Graves whose advice he doesn’t seem to be taking. Tis a mystery.
March 17, 2008 at 2:58 pm
The whole idea of Moore taking Zach’s case to take advantage of an attorney/client privilege to get out of a crime already committed doesn’t compute, if you understand how it works.
March 17, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Lotus, I pray you are right. But remember, the Feds are figuring it out as they go….Team Scruggs already knows where the trail will lead.
March 17, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Madison and observer: agreed.
March 17, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Good point confounded, and why what Scruggs’s son does matters. He does know what happened.
March 17, 2008 at 3:07 pm
The Lawyers names we are discussing are called YARD DOGS. They know where the bones are buried and Moore is trying to draw the scent down wind. Madison@2:59 You I believe are fine tuned.
March 17, 2008 at 3:07 pm
My take from afar:
It’s simply about trying to obtain a continuance - - no more; no less.
… ‘Tis to get out from under the March 31 trial date by wishfully hoping that things may simmer down and then decide what to do.
Despite all of the other conjecturing (which are all too nuanced for the realities that face lil’ Zach ), it strikes JustOlMoi as the only thing that really makes any sense out of the situation.
March 17, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Jude Biggers has entered an order allowing Zack five additional day from March 14 to amend his current pending motions or file additional motions. THIS EXTENSION IN NO WAY AFFECTS ANY OTHER DEADLINES PREVIOUSLY SET IN THIS CAUSE.
March 17, 2008 at 3:30 pm
As I’ve said before, I don’t know Mike Moore. I do know a number of people who know Mike pretty well. Some of them are people who have been steady political donors of Moore’s; some have had other “dealings” with Moore. The general feeling is that Moore is shady and “sharkey.” Even his donor friends said they didn’t trust him, but he did hold a powerful political office, and they did not want to get on his bad side. Moore had also made it clear that he wanted to be elected US Senator, and being strong Dems, they would support Moore in that race too because “you don’t want to get Mike against you. He doesn’t play fair.”
They also have said that Moore has an addiction to publicity. He has to be in the limelight. That’s why I stated that I think that’s why Moore keeps popping up in this case: accompaning Scruggs to the Minor investigation grand jury appearance and wanting to sit at the counsel table in the USA vs Scruggs case. My thoughts were that he wanted some0ne to take his photo for the newspapers and put him on TV. I’ll bet Moore’s counseling Zach for free just for the publicity.
I agree that Mike’s in this for Mike. And Madison has a good point in that he may want to keep some information confidential. Also getting a continuance is a good move. But my gut feeling is that there is no evidence against Moore at this point. I think that Scruggs and PL have protected Moore so thoroughly that there’s nothing directly traceable to Moore. Moore’s usefulness to the “Ring” was his potential election and power as US Senator. Therefore, Moore had to be kept clean. Not that Moore didn’t receive “benefits” from many of Scruggs’ deals; Moore just had to be protected because of his future political plans.
Then there’s another side: Johnny Jones stated that although he saw the result in the Wilson case as a victory, D. Scruggs said he wished that he had listened to “his friends” Langston and Balducci in that case. Perhaps Zach had adopted that attitude: he’s listened to his hired legal advice, but now he’s going to listen to his friend, Mike Moore.
These are just ramblings on my part, but I’d bet the ranch that Moore won’t turn the heads of any of these prosecutors, and especially not Judge Biggers.
March 17, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Thanks for that info @ 3:27, nancy.
You’re a good stand-in NMC (which we need, what with him still marooned in court). He just called me on an even shorter break to find out what’s up, poor guy.
March 17, 2008 at 3:42 pm
As for my comment that Moore was counseling Zach for free, I think he’s already been paid. See Magnolia’s quote from Moore: “I get paid at the end of the day.” I think that day came after the tobacco case fees came in. Just my opinion.
March 17, 2008 at 3:45 pm
NOMISS// Shady/Sharkey ….Mike Moore will rue the day he put his name on the line. Even tho these decribe him fully, I was thinking of two mules used on the farm where I grew up. Now where did that come from.
March 17, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Pretty meaty ramblings ya got going there, Nomiss @ 3:30.
Of course, as a slack-jawed civilian (h/t Ben Cole), I could be wrong . . .
March 17, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Ida Clare, I don’t know where folo would be without our mag. In some MUCH less interesting territory, that’s for sure.
March 17, 2008 at 3:57 pm
There is now a Motion for Admisson of Counsel Pro Hac Vice signed by Chrstopher T. Robertson of the SCRUGGS LAW FIRM askingi that Edward T. Robertson, Jr., an attorney from Missouri, be admitted to represent Zack. However, he also shows on the motion that Garrett and Graves, the first Missouri attorneys, are still Of Counsel - I don’t know what they’re doing up there
March 17, 2008 at 3:58 pm
“I have know [sic] Zach Scruggs since he was a little boy. He asked me to represent him should his case ever get to trial. Zach is innocent of the charges pressed against him and we look forward to his exoneration.”
– Mike Moore
March 17, 2008 at 3:59 pm
JustOlMoi - I’m with you on that thought.
March 17, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Oh me, I hope WSJ won’t actually fire Jamie Heller for linking to folo.
March 17, 2008 at 4:27 pm
lotus @ 4:20p // why would they do that?
March 17, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I’m teasing them, DN — but they do apparently try every way they can think of to avoid mentioning us, since, outside of Scruggs stuff, we sometimes post Lefty.
March 17, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I think WSJ should be paying NMC for his dead-on birdseye analysis. And footing your bills, for folo, lotus! I’m still wondering how the CL got stuff SO WRONG on Friday!
March 17, 2008 at 4:41 pm
According to the WSJ, Todd Graves states that Mike Moore has been helping with this case. Sounds as if Mike has been an attorney not “on record” until now. Scruggs’ cases have a pattern of attorneys not on record, such as Ed Peters.
March 17, 2008 at 4:45 pm
I LIKE the way you think, Sailor (always have). And yes, there must be a good story there at the C-L. But I bet we never hear it.
That they do, Nomiss, that they surely do. You wonder if it would kill ‘em to do something aboveboard one time.
March 17, 2008 at 4:49 pm
“And yes, there must be a good story there at the C-L.”
My guess, FWIW, is that one of Zach’s lawyers spoke to a C-L reporter & someone (lawyer or reporter, or both) got confused re: the difference b/t what the lawyers were urging Zach to do, and what Zach agreed to do.
March 17, 2008 at 4:53 pm
The crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege works against the theory that Moore is in this to keep “some things confidential.” Also, the fact that Moore has been hanging around (even in court) since day one works against any continuance. The court is smarter than that. Wholesale dismissal of your counsel this close to trial is looked upon as suspicious, and the court would ask for some evidence of cause for the dismissal.
I think Moore has probably been begging to get into the game since the indictments came out. There are lots of simple reasons for his “sudden” appearance - pay back to Dickie; publicity; his own information gathering for what is coming down the pipe; who else can Zach trust; etc.
Although there will be an anonymous jury, Morre is anything but anonymous to the potential jury pool. He is a local face, and chances are, one or more jurors may like him. That bodes well for Zach.
March 17, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Jerry Mitchell talked directly to Dickie Scruggs friday according to Radio Talking Heads this morning, and when it did not come to pass they took it down. Having had a chain of convention stores I can assure you Mike Moore is a hated man in Mississippi not only by the smoker but by wholesalers, as well as business owners, and I can assure you that encompass’s a lot of people.
March 17, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Is Mike Moore Zach’s uncle? I’ve never been able to keep the kinship ties among these folks straight.
March 17, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Lawyers of the distinguished ‘Folo Legal Group’,
Is 404(b) evidence admissible against only Zach in what remains of the pending action ?
Has Zach been factually linked to the rationale behind the permission of 404(b) evidence for it to be used against him?
I simply can’t see why any Scruggs would want to be in the position of ‘opening that can of worms’ voluntarily and/or prematurely.
What am I missing ?
March 17, 2008 at 5:43 pm
In organized crime the Don has his lawyer who sits with the outside paid lawyers so nobody gets scared or brave, according to how you look at it, and gives something or someone up. Could be Mikey is the inside man. Moore surely knows where the other bodies are buried. As a practicing DA he had lots of “tells” while in court. You could read his face.
Wonder if the same is going to apply while he is representing the other side now.
March 17, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Catty@ 5:43. That’s what I was referring to at 2:00 above.
Any plea agreement will have to be approved by Moore. He can “screen” for Dickie, what will and won’t be sufficient info to trade with the Feds to make a deal for Zach. Moore will know what pieces of info can be exchanged with the feds because they lead to dead-ends and are no real threat, and which bits of information would probablyaffect other lawyers or politicos, thus are taboo.
March 17, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Justus @ 6:10 - I think you just nailed it.
March 17, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Y’all interested in the latest from NMC?
^ ^ ^ Upstairs ^ ^ ^
March 17, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Justus@6:10–I agree. You nailed it.
March 17, 2008 at 9:42 pm
scandaljunkie at 1:39:
Asked who decides who gets notified. A computer. The service list is done as lawyers enter appearances or pleadings. Lawyers get added. As near as I can tell, nothing is done to clean it up– they don’t remove folks, and service is automatic. When you do electronic filing, you just file the document and the clerk’s computer looks at who is being served and does the service automatically.
And the service lists lawyers use is based on the ones that the computers generate. They don’t seem to clean theirs up, either.
March 17, 2008 at 9:43 pm
oh, and isn’t Zach’s prior attorney Ken Coghlan? The court ordered him off the case, so the clerks office would have noticed that and struck him. So that’s why he’s not notified.
And Jim Greenlee hasn’t formally appeared. The service goes to lawyers working in his office.
March 17, 2008 at 9:53 pm
The conspiracy theories about Moore seem completely wrong to me. Some of this has to be taken at face value– Moore really has known Zach since he was a child. Moore really is personally close to Scruggs going way, way back. I’m not sure, but I would credit that as one of the strongest reasons he is doing what he is doing.
And when the admission of more lawyers made clear that Graves is still on the case, it’s clear that Zach is lawyering up, and Graves has no reliable local counsel at all.
I do think the decision is being made by the Scruggses though– I don’t think picking Moore as a criminal defense lawyer makes a lick of sense. That’s not what he’s ever done.
March 17, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Thanks for asking, lotus. My mouf is doing great right now, but is beginning to hurt just thinking about what’s coming. When I kick the bucket I want the mortician to prop my mouth wide open,’ cause that’s where all my money will be.
March 17, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Moore got $20,000,000.00 per year from the tobacco settlement - that was disclosed to the public years later he did not have to account for any of it.
I imagine Moore owes Scruggs (and lets not forget Paul Minor) a lot of representation for all that money.
Kind of reminds me of Minor’s change of attorneys - to keep it all in the family.
March 17, 2008 at 10:11 pm
If these people think they can hoodwink Judge Biggers, then they may be in for a greater surprise than they can imagine.
March 17, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Thanks NMC, for that - and well….for everything else you’ve done as well.
I don’t understand this “still getting paid” business with these settlements. I was told that many attorneys are still getting money - did they set it up like a structured settlement? An attorney I was talking to today wondered if Scruggs is still getting tobacco money and if he’s still entitled to it (after being disbarred)?
Forgive my ignorance on some of these subjects, it boggles the mind.
March 17, 2008 at 10:24 pm
oh, and Ken Coghlan was Pattersons attorney who was then replaced by I thought Hiram Eastland (?) - but then Ronald Michael (or is it Michael Ronald?) is who escorted him (Patterson) to the courthouse and back. (Is it correct that Ronald/Michael was at one time a partner with Joey Langston?)
March 17, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Paul Minor was sentenced to federal prison last September for his part in Mississippi’s judicial bribery expose’. Minor will continue to receive over a million $ a year from tobacco payouts while he is in prison. These attorneys will continue to reap the benefits from their ill gotten settlements. Nice work. A few years in a club fed (a few rounds of golf and a legal library to research their next appeal)- money still pouring in - legal teams to help them hide their fortunes - the list goes on. No wonder these guys are held high as gods and idols for budding attorneys.
March 17, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Out of wind,
An 11 year sentence is a devastating sentence for someone in Paul Minor’s situation. He’s got over $2.5 million of fines and restitution to deal with, but all of that pales beside a decade in prison, which is what he is about to face.
If you think this means a vacation and golf in a pleasant place, you have never visited anyone in prison.
This is not a comment on the charges against Paul Minor or his conviction. It is a comment on the seriousness of the sentence he received. To treat it as a light one is to lack perspective entirely.
March 17, 2008 at 10:55 pm
scandaljunkie:
The tobacco settlements pay out money over 20+ years, and the legal fees are paid in the same way. There are bizarre, complex side deals among the lawyers that I don’t pretend to understand about how the money was divvied up; the only place I know to send someone is the trial record in Luckey v. Scruggs, in which Scruggs was on the stand under cross-examination for 2 days, and in which P.L. Blake testified. Maybe some day I’m going to try to sort through all that, but no time soon.
I guess Scruggs will still share the fees if he’s disbarred, although that is a good question. He’s already done the work in theory and the, um, untimely demise of his law license wouldn’t change that. But I hadn’t thought about it before you asked so that’s no better than a guess.
March 17, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Out of wind - that just doesn’t seem right does it? To bribe a judge is suppose to be the worst thing an attorney can do, and yet, they don’t have to give up much for the crime they’ve committed. Marion Jones was stripped of her olympic metal and had to go to jail. Could her crime be worse than bribery?
March 17, 2008 at 11:06 pm
I need the edit button…I meant “medals”
March 18, 2008 at 12:22 am
Mystery solved……..
Moore enrolled on behalf of Zach because Hood was busy.
March 18, 2008 at 7:45 am
To all in the know:
Out of Wind revealingly states that: “Moore got $20,000,000.00 per year from the tobacco settlement - that was disclosed to the public years later he did not have to account for any of it.”
That is a huge amount of cash, is that amount correct ???
Moreover, how, please tell this ‘mere citizen’, can an acting Attorney General of the MS legally and ethically take ANY of this money for simply doing his state-paid job (or delegating it out) ??????
What am I missing here ?
March 18, 2008 at 8:39 am
JustOLMoi// Moore got a friend who was a Chancery Judge to delegate 20MILLION per year to him where he set up a front and called it A Partership For a Healthy Mississippi, paying off the press by buying FULL PAGE ADS two or three times a year, giving 100 Black Men of Mississippi 800K a year giving AG’S office 800K a year, going into the Mississippi Legislature and buying the Black Cacus for 800k a year, and all of this was out front, the Mississippi Legislature bowed down when he went in, and then the Sh-it hit the fan, when a power call SuperTalk Ms. beat not only Mike Moore, but the Mississippi Legislature every day for two years, until the State sued and the MSC overruled Mr. Moore .
March 18, 2008 at 8:40 am
Was the $20 million his “Partnership” money or was there more?
March 18, 2008 at 8:42 am
Mag, you answered my question.
March 18, 2008 at 8:46 am
mag: who was the chancellor?
March 18, 2008 at 8:51 am
First, does it not seem odd that Dickie’s number one concern wasn’t his son, and that he would not have pled without resolving Zack’s charges? Second, Mike Moore and Jim Hood are best buds and Hood and Moore are also closely associated with Scruggs and his crew both personally and professionally. Does Moore have a conflict of interest representing Zack? Will Moore look out totally for Zack’s best interest or for himself and his friends and associates?
March 18, 2008 at 9:02 am
Nomiss// Partnership was a non profit, that was run by Moore. He had a PR firm from out of State and was lawyered up within this non-profit where every thing was untouchable by any arm of accounting by any office of State Goverment. All that one could see was the IRS filings and non-profits have a cover that if you are not terrorist related it is what it is and can’t be touched. Non of this would have every been uncovered if not for SuperTalk even tho we had a Republican Governor and A Republican Auditor. So this was not Political in Nature and I have followed Mike Moore beginning in the days where he got Pete Johnson to push Scruggs/Lotts Law thru the Mississippi Legislature. Not having the facts of fees’ there is a poster who is posting on David’s site by the name of M Williams that is saying they were there working daily with Scruggs/Moore and Moore hid his fee’s with the ASA Attorneys. Now who these Attorneys are I do not know, I know Langston is Hoods and it is speculated Joey had to split his 7 Million with someone since he didn’t give any to Balliducci. This money the State is going after and it looks like they will win on it.
March 18, 2008 at 9:07 am
Confounded// A lady first name Jan but don’t recall her last name, from the coast, and The first time the State sued Moore went back to her and she ruled for him again, and I believe she is still on the bench.
March 18, 2008 at 9:09 am
lotus, an error appeared as I was sending and it ask me to send again, please remove one for me.
March 18, 2008 at 11:34 am
Mag, do you mean Judge Jaye Bradley? She was somewhat active republican whom Musgrove appointed to fill an unexpired term, then has subsequently held on to her seat for two terms now, if memory serves…Just remeber many dem lawyers questioning that appointment
March 18, 2008 at 11:56 am
Sailor, weren’t we talking about her recently, either on-blog or maybe just email between the two of us? If the latter, would you please email me what that was about? (My steel trap’s all rusty, doncha know.)
March 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Sailor// Thats’ who she be, and I can’t remember her connection to Mike Moore but it was a very close one, maybe worked togather. We just need to keep digging and see where all this tobacco fee money went, while the time is right the Mississippi Legislature can right what they did wrong to the people of Mississippi. I’m gonna lobby to get rid of Peers, or if I can’t get them to abolish it , maybe get the entrenched politicos’ out, thats those at the very top who knows where all the bodies are buried.
March 18, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Mag, I know about Moore’s partnership money. It was his own personal political slush fund. Most importantly, he was accountable to no one regarding how he used the money, as you pointed out.
I did hear that a large sum from it went to at least one or several PR firms. I think he also used some of the money to fund some polls to see what people thought about him and his chance of being elected US Senator.
March 18, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I was told that Musgrove often put the judgeships “out for bid.” Highest bidder got the job.
March 18, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Mag/ lotus: no off blog e-mails re: Judge Bradley, but just remembered why folks were grumblin bout the Chancery appt. in 2000–she had (one year previously , in 99) been appointed by then gov. Kirk Fordice to serve as DA for Jackson, George and Greene Co., and nobody could figure that out, as it seems like she had very little if any prosecutorial experience. AnyHOOOOO, connections w/ Moore abound, as you’ve so astutely pointed out, mag. I b’lieve at some point she reversed herself on some of the Partnership issues, and then was reversed by the supremes….Don’t have time to google all that
March 18, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Will add this, too, mag, I think you’d be mistaken that Bradley and Moore are close…I think somehow she HELPED Gov. Barbour by allowing that lawsuit against the Partnership. Wasn’t paying too much attention to all that havin’ been “dislocated” from the coast (Sep 05-06) . Thats all I can remember…
March 18, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Sailor// Believe she got caught between a rock and a hard place, don’t remember all, but she kept giving extentions thinking the climate would change, while he went all over the state on a PR tour, something to that effect. Just know she was on the wrong side of Supertalk because thats the only place I every heard of her.
March 18, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Nomiss at 2:08, is there any documentary support for that rumor about Musgrove?