Ellington

The Clarion is reporting today that District Attorney Faye Peterson is outraged that Judge Bobby DeLaughter has allowed a police officer charged with vehicular manslaughter to go free with no jail time. After Jeffrey Middleton, who ran a red light and killed a man in 2005 while on duty, pled guilty to the charge that carries up to 20 years in prison, DeLaughter placed him on probation and withheld adjudication, which means that the judge can undo his guilty plea if he doesn't violate the terms of his short probation, and then expunge his record. That, Peterson says, could mean that Middleton is allowed to become a police officer again.

Peterson called that a startling sentence in a case involving death. She said she believes the sentence is illegal because state law does not allow judges to withhold adjudication in cases involving "crimes against the person."

Middleton's attorneys are former District Attorney Ed Peters and Assistant District Attorney Tommy Mayfield, both of whom DeLaughter worked with when he was an assistant district attorney.

Previous Comments

ID

91612

Comment

I don't know the details of the case but I am guessing it boils down to the fact that the officer involved had no priors, was otherwise a decent citizen, and made a "mistake" and is suffering consequences of that. Since he pled guilty that will make the civil trial rough on him I am guessing..... Since he wasn't drinking I think one can make a decent case for leniency in this particular situation, and while the judge knew the defendants lawyers well, doesn't make this situation smack of misconduct.

Author

GLewis

Date

2007-03-28T12:51:42-06:00

ID

91613

Comment

I agree, plus if any Judge and I mean ANY Judge in this state is to be viewed as "non-lienient," then its Judge DeLaughter. Plus I personally believe that he does have a lot of integrity & would not allow the fact that he knows Peters & Mayfield affect his decision. The officer was negligent, yes, but this was not an intentional act and I don't think justice would be served by sentecing him to prison time.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T13:38:18-06:00

ID

91614

Comment

Is the Magnolia Bar going to call for sanctions against Faye for saying Judge Delaughter did something that is "illegal?"

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-28T13:40:09-06:00

ID

91615

Comment

Thank you Curt, That is the best post of have ever read on here.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T13:42:19-06:00

ID

91616

Comment

And do you think Judge DeLaughter is going to go down to the clerk's office & remove his order before this gets out of hand? Do think he might ask the SC to sanction Faye?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T13:50:18-06:00

ID

91617

Comment

Do think you think is also going to write a letter to the JFP explaining his actions?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T13:52:53-06:00

ID

91618

Comment

Hell nall, we ain't. Did she really say "illegal." We will ask for sanctions if appropriate though. Curt and Shaun, I bet you wonder why there is a Magnolia Bar, now or earlier. I've had white prosecutors and white judges ask me this amazing questions. I didn't curse them out either although I thought about it. He. he...

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-28T14:23:26-06:00

ID

91619

Comment

According to the report on WAPT 16, the officer was "OFF DUTY" and was driving at a speed of 100mph. He ran a red light and the rest is hostory. Faye Peterson knows when she is being blind-sided. At some point, you just get sick and tired of this political SH. The guy who killed the attorney's son had no previous record. He was just doing what so many youngsters do - RACE. He was sentenced to 15 years to serve. Ray Carter, your point is very well taken about the reason there is a "Magnolia Ba.r" TRANSLATION: INJUSTICE

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-28T14:50:39-06:00

ID

91620

Comment

Obviously, you guys are reading too much into what Peterson said. She said, "she believes" this sentence is illegal. She didn't "say" that the DeLaughter committed felonious larceny, and cite paragraphs of law to back up her point. She didn't file an emergency request with the MSSC making these claims and then go to the press and crow about it. And Green didn't need the Magnolia Bar Association to have the AG's office write an opinion in her favor. Yeah, y'all must be right, ain't no way bias can creep into a decision from judge like Delaughter. Bias isn't behind y'all responses either. And to the notion that no priors played into this, WAPT points out that a similar situation happened to this man: Peterson pointed to the case of Jerrell Jones, who had a clean record, and was sentenced to 15 years for killing another teen during a drag-racing crash. "This is a gross and obvious disparity, and it just shouldn't have happened," Peterson said. 15 YEARS! Hello! Either they need to go back and let this guy out of jail so he can move one with his life, or they need to sentence the officer accordingly to at least 2 years in jail!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T14:54:09-06:00

ID

91621

Comment

"you guys" equals Shaun and GLewis - not Ray and jess

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T14:55:19-06:00

ID

91622

Comment

You've also got to watch the Ledger. They put words in source's mouths—like "illegal." Notice it's not in quotes. The question is: Is it "illegal"? I assume that Curt and Shaun were just as outraged about the Jerrell Jones sentencing? If not, guys, you should ask yourselves why. Meantime, your belittlement of things you have no desire to understand is noted, and expected. 100 mph? Through a red light? A dead person? That's some mistake for a "decent citizen" to make. I assume y'all wouldn't mind if we get him back on the force, either? Certainly, DeLaughter is not lenient in every case. Remember the case of Cedric Willis? Cedric spent 12 years in prison due to DeLaughter's, er, non-leniency. And he was innocent. Sigh.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:02:33-06:00

ID

91623

Comment

" When pressed, he said defense attorneys requested the light sentence, and he agreed to impose it because nobody objected - not the prosecutor nor anyone from the victim's family. "This was not done lightly," he said. "If there had been an objection made by the victim's family, it would have been an entirely different situation." So he is saying Peterson dropped the ball and didn't object to the sentence and is not objecting in the media when she had an opportunity to make an objection to the sentence to the judge.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-28T15:15:33-06:00

ID

91624

Comment

I don't think that is what happened, 'Fish. A big problem in it, as I understand it, is that non-adjudicated part. It doesn't sound like the judge told the D.A. about that part—which seems to mean that the police officer will not only not serve time, but his record could be wiped clean, and he could even become a police officer again. (Someone who drives 100 mph, recall.) My assumption is that there is a way to prove who is telling the truth here. We're working on this story already (we heard about it early this week, but didn't have time to flesh it out before the issue). We'll get to the bottom of it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:22:50-06:00

ID

91625

Comment

BTW, I'm thrilled to see the media taking a closer look at our judges and what they do. In the past, that hasn't seemed to have happened. It seems clear that many of the problems with our criminal-justice rests on their doorstep. Not all, but many.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:24:15-06:00

ID

91626

Comment

Y'all really think Cedric Willis was innocent? I still can't believe that anyone thinks that.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T15:28:43-06:00

ID

91627

Comment

Shaun, you are incredibly predictable.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:29:45-06:00

ID

91628

Comment

I know bloggers here don't want to hear it; but, this story is right up Bill O'Reilly's alley. He can't stand when judges abuse their position. Mainly with children; but, given the circumstances with the other kid who is locked away for 15 years, and the Willis case, he may pick it up.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T15:31:02-06:00

ID

91629

Comment

Well, Shaun, once the school in Greenwood released the video, it showed exactly what that kid involved with the officer said happened. The cop was holding his arms, he was moving towards him and the door just opened up which made the cop roll backwards with him on top. Look at the video from the conference room. You can see the teacher open the door causing them to fall over. And, once again, the JFP was pretty much the only major media outlet that cared about the boy, and sought out his side of the story - in person!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T15:35:21-06:00

ID

91630

Comment

Yeah Donna I know thanks

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T15:40:32-06:00

ID

91631

Comment

Wrong story, Pike, but thank you! You're talking about James Marshall. ;-) We're talking about Cedric Willis, who went to Parchman for 12 years on shoddy evidence. See link above.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:43:50-06:00

ID

91632

Comment

leave my shaun alone. I like to read Shaun's posts. Bad enough Tom got locked up by the admins here.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-28T15:46:00-06:00

ID

91633

Comment

Thanks Fish, hey I could be wrong Cedric probably was innocent. ( being a criminal defense lawyer, I think this might be the first time I have ever sided with the DAs office on any issue). But you just gotta respect DeLaughter & Ed Peters as well as Mrylie Evers, for begining the fight on civil-rights era killings.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-28T15:49:47-06:00

ID

91634

Comment

Tom didn't get locked up by anybody here, 'Fish. Please don't start making crap up. Otherwise, mind your own business. My comments to Shaun and other posters aren't your business.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:50:28-06:00

ID

91635

Comment

I do respect DeLaughter et al on the Evers case. However, that doesn't mean everything else they've done is stellar. When I heard the details of how DeLaughter handled the Willis case, for instance, I was stunned. Since then, I've realized that he may not be a hero on every front. Certainly, the same goes for Peters, but that's a subject for another day.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:52:19-06:00

ID

91636

Comment

Oh, and reading the archives about DeLaughter's and Peters' reticence (*refusal* would be a better word) to put the Youth Detention Center crimes before a grand jury is truly, truly remarkable.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T15:54:18-06:00

ID

91637

Comment

Pleading open or in the dark is done when the DA's office isn't offering you any plea deal but is allowing you to present your client's case to judge without a deal from the DA's office and is hopeful that the judge won't give the defendant any favorable or extraordinarily benign sentence. Doing this requires either deference or respect for the defense attorney(s) or indifference to the particular case. DeLaughter clearly and probably properly estimated that the DA's office wasn't insistent on any harsh sentence otherwise they would have driven a harder bargain or refused any plea deal at all, including one done in the blind. Prosecutors sometimes agree to this when they know the judge has a reputation for not being too lenient to defendants. The DA's office weren't afraid to do this likely because DeLaughter is an ex-prosecutor, and had formerly been tough as a judge. They probably likewise didn't believe Peters and Mayfield had greater persuasive positions than they have with the judge causing them to take the position of silence while in the courtroom when everything mattered. DeLaughter showed them they were wrong in this instance. Personally, I would have figured the relationship between Peters and DeLaughter was too strong to run the risk. However, you can't really blame the DA's office for thinking otherwise. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. It appears they lost the gamble here and are now complaining when it's too late. I say this despite having much affinity for Faye Peterson. I would make the assistants who did this deal take the hit, not me as the District Attorney unless I did it personally.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-28T15:56:38-06:00

ID

91638

Comment

Shaun is clearly prosecution oriented! He's questioning Willis' innocence when it's now clear to most Willis is innocent. Shaun doesn't believe in innocence until proved guilty or apparently innocence when proven innocent. I feel sorry for his clients.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-28T16:01:32-06:00

ID

91639

Comment

Yeah, me, too. And I hope that if Shaun is ever accused of a crime, and then the evidence against him proved to be false, that folks won't continue going around and proclaiming his guilt. Even if that's what he does to other people.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T16:05:00-06:00

ID

91640

Comment

Oh yeah, I should have better explained myself as I did have a sentence with Willis in it; but, deleted it. My point was in the Greenwood case many people were taking the cops side and the JFP went and got the kids side of the story which played out to be the truth as he told it. Not everyone believed his innocence either Shaun. I should have added that.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T16:34:03-06:00

ID

91641

Comment

But you just gotta respect DeLaughter & Ed Peters as well as Mrylie Evers, for begining the fight on civil-rights era killings. Shuan That doesn't make up for Ed Peters being caught with some under-aged girls. Or his manipulation of the Juvenile abuse claims for his friend Frank Blunston. I'm pretty sure his son went to jail, and was in and out of trouble when he was younger. Also, Peters must have not seen the light after those civil rights cases because he is providing council to Melton as he acts like a black Bull Conner.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T16:42:20-06:00

ID

91642

Comment

Wow, that Cedric story was really awesome! Thanks for the link :) But all that aside, I think justice was served in the current case, putting people behind bars isn't always the best option, although the idea of the driver going 100 mph makes me a little less sympathetic.

Author

GLewis

Date

2007-03-28T16:46:39-06:00

ID

91643

Comment

I agree with that, GLewis. But there is a consistency problem here, and I don't want him back on the police force. I'm really surprised that DeLaughter is allowing him that option. That just wasn't necessary. Ah, I see your point, Pike, about Greenwood. It's a good one. We strive to tell stories from all the sides, and certainly the ones you don't hear from, usually, which includes the victims andd the not-official sources. That drives some people crazy, and keeps people reading for the stories they don't usually hear. In the Welch stabbing case, Adam actually got the victim on the phone at UMC—smile—but he said one thing and hung up. That's too bad, although I understand that you might not want to talk to the media while in the hospital, even the good media. (Smile.) Hopefully, he'll talk to him, yet. My staff is tenacious, to put it mildly.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T16:53:38-06:00

ID

91644

Comment

Oh, cheers about the Willis story, GLewis. Brian did a great job.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T16:54:16-06:00

ID

91645

Comment

Is it just me, or do we have more than our share of sex scandals involving powerful men? It seems like every time you turn around, you hear about another man in power diddling a kid here in the heart of the Bible Belt. I don't know about y'all, but I'm tired of it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T17:01:07-06:00

ID

91646

Comment

It makes you not want to watch national news either. But, if we don't know how bad the problem is getting then it will still go on. Kind of like if someone in the neighborhood of Ridgeway didn't make a courageous call about Frank Melton. I am glad he was caught before he really harmed someone. However, if he got away with Ridgeway St. and the Upper Level that night, it was only going to be a matter of weeks before he did something that the people wouldn't be able to excuse - EVEN THOUGH SUPPORTERS SAY WHAT HE DID ON RIDGEWAY WAS WRONG! It's somehow excusable. The fix is in. *head in hands*

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T17:14:49-06:00

ID

91647

Comment

Ms. Peterson did not say the Judge committed an illegal act, she said the sentence was illegal. There is a vast difference between that accusing a sitting judge of commiting a felony. Also, I don't know about the argument that since the cop was not drunk he should not be punished as severely. Look at it this way, a drunk person's judgment is clouded by alcohol. While that is no excuse, you must admit that an intoxicated person can not think rationally as a stone cold sober person. I just think that driving 100 mph on hwy 18 is ridiculous! And the victim would be no more dead if the officer had been drunk. The officer basicly said I am not concerned about the safety of other drivers and drove wrecklessly. Isn't that what drunk drivers do as well? Finally, all this was considered by the legislature when it made the penalty from 2-20 years. There is a separate law for drunk drivers that cause deaths. I think this is a clear example of the good ole boy network (DeLaughter, Mayfield, Peters) looking out for one another. And I hate to pull out the card but the cop was white.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-03-28T19:41:01-06:00

ID

91648

Comment

But, if we don't know how bad the problem is getting then it will still go on. Agreed, Pike. Just like with the willingness to look back at our race past, we have to look at what is happening now with unflinching honesty. That's how we'll get through it with the least lasting damage.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T19:56:26-06:00

ID

91649

Comment

The DA's office has no say in regards to sentencing in an open plea. Any defendant can always plead open to any offense as charged in their indictment. Once a defendant pleads guilty, the DA has no say over the sentencing. I found this out during the Toice Wilson plea which was on the front page of the CL. In that case Wilson pleaded guilty to murder and since there was only legal sentence for murder (life) that is what Wilson got. Besides, the only reason you have a trial is to determine innocence or guilt. Once the defendant pleads guilty, the only thing left is sentencing. Ofcourse, during the sentencing hearing, the respective families can beg for leniency or severe punishment, but the final decision is up to the judge. It sounds like a cliche' but Middleton threw himself on the mercy of the court. Even in a plea bargain, the judge does not have to accept the plea deal. The judge can either increase or decrease the time as he or she sees fit. Petereson could only hope that the sentence was within the guidelines of 2-20 years.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-03-28T19:58:22-06:00

ID

91650

Comment

Ladd, There does seem to be a ton of sex scandals as of late... Maybe because of better reporting or better victim support we hear more about them? I think sexual assault (or any other sexual battery) is probably one of the *WORST* crimes that can ever be committed against the person. Perhaps Melton would like to hire the Mendenhall cop after (if) he's convicted?!? (By the way, where is Melton as of late???)

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-28T20:06:13-06:00

ID

91651

Comment

LawClerk, isn't it true that our laws on sexual assault of teens suck? Guess who came up with them, eh? Peters and DeLaughter wouldn't take the Youth Detention Center case to the grand jury because the teenage girls in the detention center, er, "consented" to have sex with the guards. Except that's not what they said. Regardless of the laws, what kind of message did it send the D.A. wouldn't even *try* to take them to the grand jury (and then hired director Bluntson after he agreed to step down?). It's remarkable to me to hear people complaining about the current D.A. considering what the city apparently had before her. Wish the JFP had been here. Of course, maybe some of those folks don't mind the idea of prison guards having their way with minor charges. It. boggles. the. mind.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T20:10:59-06:00

ID

91652

Comment

Also, Clerk, let me say this to victims of sexual assault reading this: It is not your fault, and report it. There are people who will help you. We will get the truth out, as needed, and get you to the people who can help you. Step up and help stop this cycle. And you fellas wanting your way with children: This is a new Mississippi, we're not living in the dark ages, and these games are not OK anymore.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-28T20:13:32-06:00

ID

91653

Comment

There are two major problems. First, minors cannot consent to have sex with any adult, hence the term STATUTORY RAPE and secondly, under state law, even adult prisoners cannot consent to have sex with guards or any one that is supervising them. That whole consent excuse is garbage. No wonder Ed Peters is endorsing Robert Smith for DA. I heard he was ticked off with Peterson because of the article that the Free Press ran regarding the youth detention fiasco.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-03-28T20:17:36-06:00

ID

91654

Comment

Ladd, I did a special project with the Mississippi Children's Justice Center last year and I learned more than I ever wanted to about this. It is simply atrocious what these victims go through, and then to have unsympathetic public officials is a double victimization. It is truly one of the worst crimes. EVER. It's not that our laws suck, because we have laws on the books, at this moment, that deal with almost any issue that will come up in the area of child sexual assault. It's the implementation of the laws, and the enforcement of the laws that suck. I think people that committ these crimes should be in jail. Forever. I simply do not believe that they can be rehabilitated, nor do I want an innocent child to be violated because we tried to rehabilitate and failed. Once is too many times, and twice is unforgivable. (Now back to our regularly scheduled programming!) :) lc

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-28T21:05:10-06:00

ID

91655

Comment

I heard he was ticked off with Peterson because of the article that the Free Press ran regarding the youth detention fiasco. thetruth Well, I can't imagine why he'd be ticked at her for the JFP's story. The Clarion Ledger did some good reporting of the story back when it happened. They just chose to ignore it once it became relevant again when Bluntson and Melton ran for office. They ignored all the allegations made based on very suspect actions by the mayor about the two young boys he abused, and the apparent cover-up. We will never know the truth. But, no one with a rational mind can read the facts and get a warm fuzzy from the results of the players involved. They convienently forgot they were involved in a major lawsuit involving the credibility of Melton, their paper, and the livelihood of two MBN agents. (By the way, where is Melton as of late???) He did make time to announce that the BBCoach at Lanier would be running the Youth Camps for Parks and Rec. this Summer. That's great! Unless it is because Melvin will be in over his head, and they are covering their a$$ by throwing money at the problem. If he was "hired" I hope he is getting "paid." Of course, it could be a way to kind of give him a bonus for doing such an outstanding job with his Three titles. In that case, I'd be for it - kind of.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-28T21:22:47-06:00

ID

91656

Comment

Clerk: It doesn't help when you have a Mississippi Supreme COurt letting scumbags like Pittman off of the hook either.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-28T21:36:14-06:00

ID

91657

Comment

Well Kingfish, all I can say is remember this when it comes time for elections. Our Sup.Ct is elected. ;)

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-28T22:13:40-06:00

ID

91658

Comment

No wonder Ed Peters is endorsing Robert Smith for DA. I heard he was ticked off with Peterson because of the article that the Free Press ran regarding the youth detention fiasco. Peters was mad at Peterson because I wrote about the Youth Detention Center fiasco? That's funny to me. Why? Because I had never had a conversation with Peterson as of the time I ran that story. Not one. Melton is the person who alerted me to that story. He talked about the "rumors" at the Bravo! breakfast, blaming them on the police and saying, "Jimmy Wilson is dumb as a box of rocks." After the breakfast, he challenged me to look into it, saying that the Johnson campaign was trying to bring it up on him again. (Which they didn't do with me.) He also told me to talk to Victor Mason who could prove that the Johnson campaign was doing it, but Mason told me he doesn't know anything about that. I went to Nexis and, voila, there was the story. It wasn't exactly hard to find, and I didn't need to the district attorney to tell me about it. Give me credit for knowing how to look at news archives, for God's sake. Yes, The Clarion-Ledger covered it extensively then—including now metro editor Grace Simmons and even Jerry Mitchell—which makes it all the more remarkable that it all never came up during Mr. Bluntson's and Mr. Melton's campaign, especially Mr. Bluntson's. They did suddenly stop covering it, though. Do Melton's friends always try to blame other people for what they do? I don't know Peters, but this is certainly something that Melton does all the time—blame others. It gets tired. Then, look at the interviews he did with me. He continually brought up the old allegations against him. This is his obsession, not mine. Of course, if I was falsely accused of awful things, I might be obsessed with it, too. But I shouldn't then go around blaming other people for bringing it up, when I'm the one trying to get people to talk about it. Just sayin'.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T09:44:42-06:00

ID

91659

Comment

I will also add that it would be remarkable if the whole reason that Melton's camp is so focused on trashing Peterson is because they blame her for something he did himself. Wow.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T09:46:41-06:00

ID

91660

Comment

We mustn't forget that Ed Peters was originally part of Melton's defense team.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-03-29T10:08:35-06:00

ID

91661

Comment

True. Mr. Peters, Mr. Melton, Mr. Bluntson and Mr. Danks seem very tight. Their names come up together in archives going back many years.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T10:12:24-06:00

ID

91662

Comment

Yeah Ray, I am prosecution orientated when it comes to Faye's office, I mean their incompentence is great for my clients. They either get soft plea deals or go to trial & get off completely. So when it comes to Hinds County I am pro-prosecution (I of course would not say this about Neshoba or Lauderdale or even Panola).

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T10:27:39-06:00

ID

91663

Comment

Just having fun with you Shaun. All the best to you. I understand how we have lingering doubt about cases. I have it about OJ's case. I met Dr. Lee, Dr. Baden and Dr. Werner Spitz, three renowned doctors and forensic criminalists or scientists, and I become more convinced of OJ's guilt after listening to them talk about OJ's case. However, I can live with the verdict because the defense lawyers did their jobs of taking advantage of every weakness they saw in the case. Some say they went too far. How far is too far?

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T10:36:16-06:00

ID

91664

Comment

I would love to hear who your clients are, Shaun.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T10:45:58-06:00

ID

91665

Comment

sarcasm?

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T11:02:02-06:00

ID

91666

Comment

No, I'd love to hear who his clients are so we could examine the circumstances of the "soft pleas" or their getting off completely. I'm curious where the problems with the cases were. Like: Did he represent any clients who were "arrested" by Mr. Melton?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T11:07:25-06:00

ID

91667

Comment

Yeah, Shaun who are all these people you're walking or exonerating so frequently? Why isn't the Clarion Ledger writing about your cases? Tell us who they are so we can help you get the publicity you desrve for your fine work.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T11:10:27-06:00

ID

91668

Comment

I'm sure shaun can email you in confidence if need be. You are good about that I will say.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T11:23:35-06:00

ID

91669

Comment

Yeah I don't have a problem with the email route. Can I ask one thing though, why do y'all defend Faye so much and never even question what is going on with that office. I mean you are so quick to villify Danks, DeLaughter, & Ed Peters, all great men who have done nothing but help in the advancement of this city (not to say that they are perfect and have never done anything wrong) but when it comes to Faye and that office y'all won't look into anything.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T12:50:34-06:00

ID

91670

Comment

I assume Shaun's question is for Donna or someone else as I have certainly criticized actions from the current DA's office. I like Faye but will criticize if I think it's appropriate and fair to do so. However, I don't want Faye held to an unfair standard that Ed wasn't held to. Nor do I want Faye criticized unjustly and unnecessarily because she's black and a woman. I have not reached the point of illusion where I think Jackson and Mississippi have reached a point where sex and race don't matter.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T13:08:29-06:00

ID

91671

Comment

Shaun, the problem with your question is that I don't defend or villify based on generalizations, as so many people do. Anything I say about Peters, Melton, Bluntson, Peterson, Hood or anyone else is based on something specific (or, in Melton's case especially, lots of specifics). The problem with the villification of the D.A. is that I have never seen real evidence to back it up. It comes across as a political witchhunt. I started noticing that when Wilson Carroll was running against her. So many of the things being said didn't check out. I don't ever feel like I have to *like* everything anyone does. But I don't like, at all, are unfair smear campaigns, and I've seen those launched against people in Jackson who don't deserve it, even as people who need severe scrutiny based on obvious things don't get it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:16:44-06:00

ID

91672

Comment

Otherwise, I agree with everything Ray said. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:17:15-06:00

ID

91673

Comment

Also, Shaun, do you know how insulted and disgusted I am as a woman that Frank Melton put Christopher Walker up at that press conference to say "She fucked Jimmy Jam"? Melton had told me the same thing (using different words). Guess what? The person Melton claimed could confirm Peterson's supposed relationship with the dead bail bondsman was shocked that Melton said such a thing, or that she knew about it. In other words, the rumor didn't check out. Yet again. I don't have to agree with everything the D.A. does to know a disgusting, racist, sexist witchhunt when I see one.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:33:17-06:00

ID

91674

Comment

And I agree with everything Ray said as well but I still feel that Faye should not be given a blank check to do whatever she wants and no one wants to critize her for it. Did y'all even see a problem with the way she indicted Melton in like 15 seconds? Has that ever happened before in Hinds County or any county for that matter.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T13:34:20-06:00

ID

91675

Comment

and yes Donna the "Jimmy Jam" thing was dutterly disgusting.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T13:35:38-06:00

ID

91676

Comment

Back to Judge DeLaughter. Was he even a Judge 12 years ago? Or was he the Prosecuter?

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-29T13:35:40-06:00

ID

91677

Comment

and yes Donna the "Jimmy Jam" thing was utterly disgusting.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T13:35:43-06:00

ID

91678

Comment

Shaun Eren, the men you mention and accuse certain bloggers of villifying is totally off-base. These people created their own histories and many of us were either a part of, effected by or just simply care too much about Jackson and its citizens to turn our heads and pretend that the damage done did not negatively impact this community. Just ONE young girl, consenting or volunteering, should not have been sexually and emotionally violated by men/women who this community entrusted their children. They were to uphold the law; not break it. I am certain that parents of some of these kids though that the Youth Detention Center was a much safer place for their troubled youth than to have them running the streets: Not so. Their environment bacame a living hell and many complained of giving up their bodies (having sex) to use a cell phone or to be given a candy bar. There are just some histories and the people owning them that just simply can't be forgotten. There is no repentance: No remorse: No signs of change; not even vicariously. Seemingly this group is from one scandal to the next. Some of us have simply had enough!.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-29T13:35:50-06:00

ID

91679

Comment

No one has given her a blank check. That's your characterization, and you clearly are approaching this from the other point of view. That's fine, but it doesn't make your statement true. Of course I didn't see a problem with the way she indicted Melton quickly. That was the only responsible thing to do with a person in a position of power, carrying guns around, busting into people's houses without a warrant—and who had directly defied the warnings of the attorney general and even laughed about the warnings. In fact, we had heavily criticized all law enforcement in the state prior to that because they *had not* done something sooner to stop this man who was acting on the behalf of the citizens. He is our responsibility. He had to be stopped. She deserves an award for moving "fast" (although, frankly, she should have been doing more sooner, as should the AG). Do you really not understand that priority *has* to be given to stopping criminals using the public's resources and violating our trust? I'm surprised by your comment. You seem sharper than someone who would parrot the Melton apologists' favorite excuse. (Whistles in disbelief.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:40:10-06:00

ID

91680

Comment

Speak, justjess. I've certainly had enough of the justification of sexual assault of minors, I can tell you that. All of our children matter, and not just the ones from "good" homes. I've also had enough of witchhunts and rumors that don't check out. When I get time, I'll pull some fun quotes out of the archives for y'all about why the prosecutors back then said they refused to put those cases before the grand jury. (Chris, read the Cedric story linked up above somewhere.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:45:01-06:00

ID

91681

Comment

First of all I am not a "Melton apologist" and I think that he is a terrible mayor and should be removed from office. That being said, he is still a citizen and deserves to be treated fairly and is entitled to the same rights as any other citizen. These indictments, probabation, etc. have been handled swiftly, wrongly and embrassingly. Melton deserves due process and he is not being provided with it.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T13:46:24-06:00

ID

91682

Comment

It wasn't just about sex. The kids had to pay a guard $20 to use the payphone.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:48:15-06:00

ID

91683

Comment

Ummm... can you name one thing Danks did that has left an imprint on this City. Being there during the flood doesn't count. He served many years after that. One thing. Is there even a building or City property named for him? You could rightfully name the Union Station the Ditto Union Station, and the Convention Center the Harvey Johnson CC. What did Danks develop that left a mark on this City?

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-29T13:48:44-06:00

ID

91684

Comment

He was there during the flood & UV awarness?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T13:52:11-06:00

ID

91685

Comment

These indictments, probabation, etc. have been handled swiftly, wrongly and embrassingly. Melton deserves due process and he is not being provided with it. You are actually complaining that a person abusing a position of authority is being deal with too "swiftly"??? Sounds like extreme apologism to me. So you truly understand how many people Melton have pulled into his shenanigans with him? Do you know how many officers are ordered to help him do his thing, thus risking their own careers (and perhaps lives)? With due respect, Shaun, you're sounding weird-o. I don't get the disconnect for people who don't understand that problems of "public integrity" have to be top authority because of the position they hold. With due respect, this is the kind of talk that makes Mississippians look like fools to the rest of the country. Otherwise, you're going to have to explain the "wrong" and "embarassing" part, not to mention the assertion that Melton hasn't gotten "due process." Provide evidence, please, or is this just another statement you throw out there without anything to back it up? Our mayor is embarassing, friend. I thank God that not everyone of our public officials is too afraid to call him out for his actions and to try to stop him before he really hurts himself or someone else.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:55:15-06:00

ID

91686

Comment

Shaun, you do realize that Judge Green hid the fact that Melton was under house arrest and wearing an ankle bracelet, right? She sealed the document so the media wouldn't find out. We had heard he was wearing a bracelet, but couldn't confirm it. Poor Melton. He's just so mistreated.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T13:57:11-06:00

ID

91687

Comment

That being said, he is still a citizen and deserves to be treated fairly and is entitled to the same rights as any other citizen. These indictments, probabation, etc. have been handled swiftly, wrongly and embrassingly. Melton deserves due process and he is not being provided with it. shaun Isn't Welch a citizen? Did he and the house he rented deserve fair treatment? Wasn't the guy at the Upper Level a citizen? Didn't the Sheriff take about two weeks to investigate the Ridgeway case? Didn't Melton first admit to tearing down the house on the TV news only to recant a day or two later once he saw that he messed up? How long did it take for a Grand Jury to be convened for the guy that killed Tawana Roberts? Wasn't too long, as he is in jail just over a year later! Why smart people do not want to see why it is important to swiftly move people through the system who are able to use the resources of gov't to carryout their actions is troubling. I think I am more embarrassed by the actions Melton took to violate his parole over what the Courts did to impose the rule of law on Melton.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-29T14:01:12-06:00

ID

91688

Comment

Why smart people do not want to see why it is important to swiftly move people through the system who are able to use the resources of gov't to carryout their actions is troubling. Troubling is a mild word for it. This kind of attitude is how you end up with major corruption problems and public officials in jail for very serious crimes (not to mention Hitlers and the like). The funny part is that Melton regularly belittled all efforts to get him to obey the law. He stuck his tongue out as if he was above the law. He does that repeatedly, and seems to do something worse each time he gets away with something. This should worry people. If he really messes up, the citizenry is to blame (and is financially liable) if we did too little to stop it. Good public servants know this. My hat is off to AG Hood, DA Peterson and Sheriff McMillin for standing up for what is right. Does that mean I won't criticize them as needed? Hell, no. But I'm also not going to buy into unsubstantiated witchhunts against them, or anyone else, either.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T14:11:40-06:00

ID

91689

Comment

I agree with Donna that Faye Peterson deserves an award for how she handled the Melton situation. Judge Green too. I realize much of the public disagree but I think they're wrong.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T14:16:23-06:00

ID

91690

Comment

I predict that history will be kind to them. Not so much to some others.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T14:19:13-06:00

ID

91691

Comment

If you argue against swift, then maybe there is also a problem with the swift nature the MSSC moved on four motions filed by the Mayors attorneys, yet has dragged their feet on motions from Judge Green and the AG.

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-29T14:29:06-06:00

ID

91692

Comment

Mayor melton is an oridinary citizen as it relates to to his rights; however, he does wear the mantle of Mayor of the Capitol City of Mississippi. Shaun, you asked if anyone had ever seen anybody indicted as fast as melton. A better question would be, have you ever seen any mayor acting in this matter: tearing down properties allowing youth to participate in unlawful acts allowing youth to participate in beating up a hand-cuffed businessman opening the car trunks and searching black youth without cause carring a gun on airplaines, churchs, schools and parks impersonating a POLICE officer when his real title is MAYOR housing criminals at his home instead of in jail tampering with witnesses stopping a loaded school bus on Jackson's most dangerous Interstate there are EYE and EAR wittnesses to the fact that he is killing Jackson declaring in a public form that he does not give a sh!t about what the people think going on private property, armed with guns and dogs, threatening and calling a citizen out knocking on the door of a citizen's home with the butt of a rifle (with no prior gun training)? While I commend Faye Peterson for her courageous stand for the law she is sworn to uphold, go ahead, SHAUN, GIVE HIM A HUG!!!!1

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-29T14:42:41-06:00

ID

91693

Comment

Jennifer, Add to the slowness the Restraining order against Melton filed by the Upper Level... and to my knowledge, still not signed off on.

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-29T14:42:48-06:00

ID

91694

Comment

Thanks, Justjess. I think you just shut Shaun up.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T14:46:19-06:00

ID

91695

Comment

Jennifer made a three-point play as well. Right in the kisser. It is so nice to hear so many loud voices in town these days, folks. Y'all are making it mighty hard for the the boyz used to people believing something simply because they said it's true. Cheers.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T14:55:22-06:00

ID

91696

Comment

I'll take a stab at this one. The average guy in the street in Jackson right now, he's worried about getting carjacked, robbed, or seeing his home burglarized. That is a real threat to him right now (Popeyes anyone? ). The risk to him of Frank Melton doing ssomething directly to him is pretty low. The threat from a local thug is much more direct and real. Some people see Frank getting prosecuted much more quickly than the thugs in jail who they realistically fear and they have quetions about priorities. Now I think Donna had a good response (groans from the MP crowd as Loonfish kisses her ass) in her reply, but that is what alot of people think. They see thugs not being prosecuted quickly and Melton gets out of hand with a schizophrenic with a history of arrests and wonder what is going on? It doesn't help when the CL and media doesn't scrutinize what Melton does like the JFP either. There must be some kind of way out of here.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T15:04:41-06:00

ID

91697

Comment

Here comes the Binary Express again. I'm not sure why people would think they have to pick their threat. All criminals are "threats," whether they do it from the mayor's office or from a street corner. I promise you, from first-hand observation, a mayor who likes his booze wearing guns around the city is a huge threat to himself and others. The really sorry part is the demagoguery coming from the folks who are only playing politics—the ones who care more about politics than people's rights and safety. I haven't heard a single everyday person say a word about the indictment against Melton coming too fast; I've only heard it from the D.A.-hater crowd. It does make one wonder what those folks want out of a D.A.—maybe one who won't notice their little transgressions, and only those of the "thugs"? That's my working theory.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T15:10:22-06:00

ID

91698

Comment

Ok apparently I am now a Melton supporter and I thought Marion Berry was great mayor as well (another crazy mayor). Justjess, I understand what Melton has done and that it was wrong and I understand that it needed to be dealt with in an appropriate manner. But it just has not been and no matter what anyone has done our constitution guarantees them certain rights (and no I don't want to give a hug) And Yes I think Faye has been mistreated by Melton and I can certainly understand her being upset when her and ADA Dewey Arthur were railroaded by Melton into those Woddstreet trials last year. Also, thats why I think it might have been more appropriate for the AGs office to handle all of the Melton cases, just for the appearence of no vindictiveness (and no Donna I am not saying that Faye indicted Melton out of revenge for Woodstreet, I do believe her to be more professional than that, but just for appearence sakes I think the AGs should have handled it all).

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T15:11:42-06:00

ID

91699

Comment

binary express? time for you to come up with something more original than for using it as your stock label for people with whom you disagree. However, since you feel the need to think I was criticizing the prosecution, I will reply in kind. I was stating how a lot of people view this whole ordeal. Those are comments I hear all the time. I have my own views and I think by now you know what they are. HOever, after reading that post, maybe you don't. I am all for the prosecution of Melton. I think he has grossly abused his authority and violated the law more than once. I think he is dangerous and is a severe accident or tragedy waiting to happen. I think he is in over his head, has no clue, and is irrational. I have no problem with his prosecution at all. The strongest criticisms about Melton I hear come from people in the law enforcement community, believe it or not. Now, if you want to accuse me of demagoguery, which I am going to assume you were not, it is your right to do so.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T15:19:11-06:00

ID

91700

Comment

There ain't no telling what Frank's crazy-ass would have done sooner or later if Peterson hadn't stopped him quickly with those indictments. He thought he was above the law and would be allowed to infuse Melton-styled justice at will with no blockage or impediments from anyone, regardless of the constitution or laws of this city, state and country. He indeed thought he was the ultimate authority. How can you live in reality and even believe you can do this? Frank had gone wild and Peterson needed to ring his nutty and fruity butt back to reality of the times and law as soon as possible. And she did. Arguably, Frank was our most dangerous criminal at the time. We know he was because we got to see too much of it in living color.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T15:29:25-06:00

ID

91701

Comment

Nope, 'Fish. I will continue to call out binary constructions when they're thrown my direction. It's not about disagreement. It's about not making logical sense. It doesn't make sense to present that people believe that the D.A. should not have indicted Melton so fast because people feel threatened on the street. That is creating a false, binary scenario. Either or. Pick one. In this case, it may not be you being binary, but the people you describe are (not that I think you're qualified to read all their minds, but that's a different problem). Now, you are responding in another illogical fashion, saying that I accuse you (or whomever) of being binary when I "disagree." That's not true. You're not giving me anything to agree or disagree with—it's not logical, so we don't get to that stage. I don't have to decide to agree or not with something that doesn't make a lick o' sense. Of course, people in the law-enforcement community are going to criticize him. He. is. in. the. way. Has been for a long time. His interference is the reason a lot of these cases have gotten derailed. He is endangering people. He is interfering with the way the PD is run. Obviously, people who actually care about crime-fighting aren't gonna dig him. Shaun, I'm not saying you're a Melton supporter, even if you're using many of their arguments. I can't really know what you think, but I can read what you write. And it's remarkable to watch how you've bashed the D.A. without backing up a single piece of it, and you accused me and others of giving her a "blank sheet" or some such bullshit because we don't automatically believe everything her political detractors say. You're backing away some now that you've been called out on it, and that's fine, but that doesn't change how this started. Funny, Ray: Frank had gone wild and Peterson needed to ring his nutty and fruity butt back to reality of the times and law as soon as possible. And she did. I personally believe the biggest danger of Frank Melton lies in how all the young people of Jackson respond to his mixed messages. It doesn't look good so far. And you're right: He was on a roll and getting worse before the D.A. and AG stepped in. They were doing their jobs, thankfully, considering how many people aren't.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T16:15:33-06:00

ID

91702

Comment

you miss the point. I said that was how a lot of people see it. I didn't say they were right or wrong, just how they see it. You took that to be my position when it wasn't. I would assume that quite a few people engage in binary thinking which is why they make those kind of perceptions.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T16:20:39-06:00

ID

91703

Comment

Kingfish, we're now hearing Alberta Gonzalez is lying about not being involved in the firing of the U.S. attorneys. Do you repugnants ever stop lying. Sorry, I meant republicans ever stop lying?

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-29T16:24:15-06:00

ID

91704

Comment

LawClerk, I had forgotten about the restraining order - when did they request that and in what court system? This sounds like a great follow up story. Would this be going to Judge Webster as well? I'm behind on this one and thanks for reminding us.

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-29T16:26:06-06:00

ID

91705

Comment

King, I understand what you were inferring and agree to an extent. Whether the Mayor has the knowledge to govern actually doesn't matter because - as Donna previously wrote regarding the Tisdale factor - his charisma is huge and appealing to many who feel like they have been ignored and he's going to fight for them. Granted, I believe it is hurting more than helping, but I get your thought on the matter, King.

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-29T16:30:32-06:00

ID

91706

Comment

I think its ridiculous. They can be fired at any time and like I said, Clinton fired all US attorneys the day he assumed office. all 93 of them. I didn't hear a peep out of anyone. They work for Bush and he can fire them at will. Gonzales is guilty of being clumsy. He's not that bright to begin with. This is just more political stuff out of DC where one side is doing a full court press and playing gotcha. I haven't given it any thought to be honest.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T16:31:15-06:00

ID

91707

Comment

My problem is, if you indeed have the procedural authority to fire every U.S. Attorney in the country, why lie about it? It's the "I had no knowledge of that...." which was also a problem for Clinton....

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-03-29T16:35:13-06:00

ID

91708

Comment

bunker mentality. Half the time, what you are lying about is not as bad as the lie itself. Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart didn't acctually break the law, it was their lying that got them in trouble. I watched O'Reilly last week and he showed where there was good cause to fire 3 of the judges and couldn't understand why Bush people didn't stand up for it instead of taking the course they took. Most of the time, these hearings are a joke anyway and are just an excuse for the to primp for the cameras.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-29T16:41:17-06:00

ID

91709

Comment

"You're backing away some now that you've been called out on it, and that's fine, but that doesn't change how this started." I am not backing away a bit on my position that Faye is an incompenent DA & will most likely be defeated this fall, probably by Robert Smith. I do think she was treated unfairly by Melton but that does not change the fact that she has not handled her job well & certainly not as well as Ed Peters. Y'all just hate Melton so much that it blinds you to the other tragedies of justice that our occuring to bring him down. It kind of reminds of HUAC and McCarthy when people were so scared of communitst inflitration of the government that they were blinded by the injustices that occured to try & stop the inflitration (that didn't really exist). Sort of like Bush's war on terrorism. Yes, we need to stop terror & Melton but we cannot throw our civil liberties to the wayside to do it. That mistake has been made way too many times in our past.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T18:29:46-06:00

ID

91710

Comment

Well Shaun I will "go on the record and say I don't like Melton. I also think Faye is incompetent. The difference between me and some others is we'll say we think she is incompetent but Frank has taken Faye to his own ugly level by calling her corrupt. I've seen first hand her office lose arrest packets, not file cases in a timely manner with the grand jury and generally not wanting to prosecute drug traffickers (not possession cases) where a Confidential Sources (CS) was utilized. Is this incompetence? Yes. Is it corruption? No. Frank always considers a person corrupt if they disagree with him or his way of doing things. On another note in a vote btween Faye and Purvis I'm casting my vote for Faye! Regards, Larry.

Author

Larry

Date

2007-03-29T19:32:54-06:00

ID

91711

Comment

between, my mistake!

Author

Larry

Date

2007-03-29T19:34:29-06:00

ID

91712

Comment

Y'all just hate Melton so much There you go again, Shaun, with another non sequitur. You have provided no evidence for most assertions you make here, and even criticize Melton, but other people (not you) "hate" him when they criticize him. You have lost any respect you might have gained from me with these kind of nonsensical games. I'll say it again: I don't "hate" Frank Melton. I like him as a person. He's fun and funny. I think he is a very, very bad mayor. Now, Larry's comments about the D.A.'s office are more interesting to me, probably because I know he's pretty smart about these things, and he's at least touching on specifics. I don't think he "hates" her by saying that, however. Shaun, here's the bottom line: I have been provided no evidence of the D.A.'s "incompetence." I've even looked for it, and haven't found it. And don't "hate" me because I tell you that I don't believe anything you say at this point. You haven't given me a reason to. Can anyone share reasons that Smith should be elected? I like him as a person, certainly, but am worried about his close association with Melton of late. The last thing we need is a D.A. handpicked by Melton.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-29T21:38:54-06:00

ID

91713

Comment

Donna, Don't believe me thats fine with me I am not here to argue with you, just to point out that I am not the only one that finds Faye to be incompetent, apparently Larry understands it as well and obviously has dealt with their office as I have. Just because her incompetence doen't make the papers doesn't mean those of us who deal with that office don't see it on a daily basis and understand the difference between a well run DAs office (such as Bilbo Mitchell's in Lauderdale) and Faye's office. Smith has now got the "money" (and I wont say who, sorry I am not being specific enough for you Donna but you don't have to trust me on this one if you don't want to) behind him to ensure his election.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T21:48:22-06:00

ID

91714

Comment

Smith should be elected because is a very competent, established trial lawyer. He is a good lawyer that cares about his clients and does a good job on his cases. He has the experinence in criminal law to make a great District Attorney. He and his family are also very well known and liked by the majority of this community. Whether Melton picked him or not, hes still a great choice.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-29T21:54:29-06:00

ID

91715

Comment

How can you hold the DA accountable for the lack of staff? I think every one forgets that the JURY decides who is guilty or innocent in most cases. Before you tar and feather her you might want to really do some research. Smith will do no better if he has to deal with the lack of resources like she does. Melton is a joke. He isn't given respect just grins from those he supports. Money talks, bull s---t walks he is full of both IMO.

Author

jada

Date

2007-03-29T23:06:20-06:00

ID

91716

Comment

Larry, thank you for providing more specific reasons to criticize Faye other than the usual talking points. You sound much more credible on this issue. Do you have an opinion on Smith? I happen to like him and under ordinary circumstances I wouldn't have a problem supporting him for D.A. I don't expect perfection from Faye, Meltdown, or any elected official or public servant, just competence and professionalism. I don't have to believe Peterson is incompetent in order not to like her or to vote against her. I have my own opinions of her from the way her office handled a case involving a friend of my family, but I would hate to see someone worse assume the position.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-03-30T05:32:15-06:00

ID

91717

Comment

On second thought, I should have written: "I don't expect perfection from Faye, Meltdown, or any elected official or public servant, just competence, professionalism, and respect for their constituents, taxpayers and the law."

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-03-30T07:43:49-06:00

ID

91718

Comment

I like Robert and Faye. I could vote for either. I wouldn't vote for Michelle Purvis though. From conversations with other black lawyers, many of which are females too, I'm worried Faye is in trouble on being re-elected. I don't know any lawyers who dislike Robert Smith (excepting perhaps some in the DA's office), and he's certainly well connected in the Hinds County Community. He was well thought of as a person and lawyer before connecting with Frank Melton. Not sure how much the connection to Frank will hurt or help him. Ed Peter's office had a long history of losing documents too. It can happen under any DA's administration. I can't speak for which is better.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T08:11:44-06:00

ID

91719

Comment

Just a question here... How many folks that are associated with gangs and/or Melton has Smith represented? Anyway, you could provide that information or list who you know? I agree everyone needs representation, etc... But, no matter how well respected the attorney might be would you want a Mafia attorney to serve as a public DA? Unfortunately, many of the same white fools that put money into Melton's campaign are going to do the same for Smith because they think he will put these thugs away. Puhleese! He will put the ones away that are hand picked by the Mayor. Does anyone in their right mind think that any of the candidates Melton is supporting are not expected to be under the Mayor's thumb? Melton didn't care about politics or vote until a few years ago. Fool me once...

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-30T08:25:17-06:00

ID

91720

Comment

Well, Pike, I started to say earlier but decided against it, that I do want to see a disconnect of Smith from Melton. The connection bothers me. Beyond that I have a high opinion of Robert. I have a high opinion of Faye too. i doubt Robert will let anyone control him. I would have to see it to believe it. I've seen him countless times stand up to judges and prosecutors when he thought he was right. Robert was doing well at making a living before Frank became mayor. He did a good job at the public defenders office prior to entering private practice. Most young lawyers scrapping for a living cheerish a client who can pay them well for their services. Not many lawyers would turn down business or opportunities offered by a rich or powerful person. Johnnie Cochran reported once of having some drug dealing clients leave $600,000.00 cash at his office for future representations that weren't actualized or needed yet. He said he wanted and needed the money but was scared to sell his soul. I imagine he was likewise afraid of the police and drug dealers extracting revenge for future losses or disassociation. I was offered similar types of money and connections when in private practice that I refused, because I rather be poor than controlled by anyone but me.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T08:43:57-06:00

ID

91721

Comment

I agree with Ray, I do not think Robert will be under Melton's thumb despite their connection. Also, Melton may not (and probably won't be) even be mayor by the time Smith takes office next year, so I really don't see it as a problem.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T09:10:44-06:00

ID

91722

Comment

I actually spoke to Michael Guest (who is running for DA in Madison-Rankin) and he seems that he has alot of support behind him as well. I have also met David Clark before, who is a really nice guy, but with his heatlh problems it must be hard on him to be effective. I think a new DAs in Hinds & Madison-Rankin will be a very positive step for the tri-county area.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T09:16:51-06:00

ID

91723

Comment

Jeff, to answer your question about Robert Smith. He, Smith represented several people my group arrested (Federally). He was professional and tried every "trick" that the law allowed to get his clients the best defense. In all cases he lost. That's federal court, certainly a whole differnet "animal than state court. Would I vote for him over Faye? Two, three, four years ago yes. Now? I'm not sure. Smith's asociation with "Frank and the boys" has me puzzeled. I'm on record as saying I would vote for Faye over Purvis anyday! As for David Clark and Michael Quest in Rankin County - I worked alot with Quest. He's a fina person and good attorney. David does have some medical issues but they were never a problem when I was "still in the game." Regards, Larry.

Author

Larry

Date

2007-03-30T09:46:10-06:00

ID

91724

Comment

"white fools" Terms like this are why nobody takes you off-the-reservation liberals seriously.

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T10:08:36-06:00

ID

91725

Comment

Pike is a Republican, Curt, and a conservative. ... as if goofy labels like "off-the-reservation liberals" gets you a whole lot of credibility!

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T10:12:49-06:00

ID

91726

Comment

Do Mr. Melton and Mr. Smith have any sort of history that anyone knows about, from before the Batman trials and such? I've said here before that he was at Mr. Melton's house on the eve of the Wood Street trial (which included Benton, whom he was defending) at the same time that a whole ton of people, including Melton's "star witness" Christopher Walker, were. But he seemed genuinely puzzled as to why Melton had called him, an attorney for the "other side," there. The whole thing, and the mixture of people having dinner, was very odd.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T10:16:02-06:00

ID

91727

Comment

I do not think Robert will be under Melton's thumb despite their connection. I'd like to think that, too, but it strikes me that the risk may be too great. There's a whole lot at stake here.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T10:17:09-06:00

ID

91728

Comment

My motto for the upcoming election is : If it ain't broke; don't try to fix it." Robert Smith does have a "good reputation" in the community; however, his melton connection scares me to death. McMillin. in my opinion, has been a decent sheriff and I know of so mny young people that he has helped. He would really have to do something off the wall at the point to lose my support. "Tyrone Lewis" signs are showing up in a lot of communities and especially in areas that are heavily or exclusively black. I still can't get over Lewis saying on WAPT that we will have to let the mayor break some rules if he is going to get rid of crime. That young man's brain is not ticking: Someone needs to wake him up.

Author

justjess

Date

2007-03-30T10:34:25-06:00

ID

91729

Comment

We've evidently got two different definitions of "conservative." And would it be cool for any other race to be inserted before the word "fool?"

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T10:39:05-06:00

ID

91730

Comment

McMillian is the best choice, you're right there justjess. He has served this county with intergrity & dedication for a very long time & should be re-elected.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T10:40:44-06:00

ID

91731

Comment

So in your world, Curt, a "conservative" wouldn't call out fellow "white fools" or stand up for the Constitution against an out-of-control police-mayor? You can keep your world. To answer your next question, sure, I think there are a good number of "black fools" running around in the city. Next question?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T10:45:58-06:00

ID

91732

Comment

Ladd, U 2 Much!

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-30T10:55:15-06:00

ID

91733

Comment

Jennifer, I'm not sure where the restraining order was filed. Hell, with all the recusals, I'm not sure we even have a judge to preside over anything anymore. I imagine it would be funneled to Webster, but that is pure speculation on my part. Ladd, can you find out where it was filed? I'm going out of town this weekend, and won't be able to do any digging. lc

Author

LawClerk

Date

2007-03-30T10:58:17-06:00

ID

91734

Comment

No, Donna. My issue is exclusively with the racial label.

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T11:01:11-06:00

ID

91735

Comment

Curt, shouldn't you be settling some cases right now "3 times, 3 times" lol.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T11:05:40-06:00

ID

91736

Comment

Curt, I actually agree with you on the racial label thing. It makes no sense to do that, especially considering that most of our clients are african-american. Heck the only white client we have together is Bowman.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T11:11:16-06:00

ID

91737

Comment

Curt if you go look at Melton's finance report - the JFP has a copy online - you will see many white people put good money into Melton's pocket. They were fools. Many now say they were "fooled" by Melton. Alas, there is a small , but vocal group who may as well just be "white fools." And, why is it SO offensive when someone on this blog makes a turt comment about some Meltonites; yet, others in Jackson find delight in talking up the editors skirt at the JFP or declaring everyone over here looney-lefties without even reading any articles or posts? This can be a very dynamic group. See the big secret no one will openly address in this great land is that most, if not 99.9%, of the people actually hold views that are on both the left and the right. I don't think you should lay allegiance to either party as long as you want to be a free thinker. For the record, I can't dispute that I am generally conservative. I even "joined" the club for one year when I was younger, dumber, etc... But, I never rejoined. The last several years in MS has opened my eyes to how backwards ass a bulk of the republicans, and a very vocal group of democrats are in this State. Other Southern States are light years ahead of MS in so many ways that allow for more and more people to find their kicks in life without all the political BS! This is a very judgemental State...

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-30T11:32:32-06:00

ID

91738

Comment

The sad part is Piker, I can't think of any successful CEO's who would run Jackson the way Melton has. Even the mavericks like Ross Perot would still follow certain basic management principles. If a CEO ran a company like Melton has Jackson, he wouldn't have lasted this long before the shareholders kicked him out.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T11:35:41-06:00

ID

91739

Comment

Exactly kingfish. That financial and management plan I posted would have gotten Metlon through the first two to three years with only having to add the mil increase. He would have had more officers or more money to pay those we have. He would have public works projects going that he could add to with all this Katrina GoZone incentives. And, he would only of had to make a few difficult decisions in laying out a plan for the next 4 to 5 years. Thing is, his folks are not capable of producing anything close to that kind of report without major outside help. Ya, think the Meltonites will bitch when Melton has to plan or study something? Either way, by even taking a good portion of the ground work Johnson had done, he would have had more time to focus on crime in his glorified way - though we know now his method doesn't work. But, instead he decided that he needed to pretty much gut the police, the budget and the city staff all to ride around in an RV parading in front of the people for show.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-30T12:18:54-06:00

ID

91740

Comment

If you are talking about the Upper Level restraining order, I think it was filed with Judge Patricia Wise.

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-30T12:56:52-06:00

ID

91741

Comment

Ladd, U 2 Much! Thanks, friend. I try. ;-D

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T13:05:02-06:00

ID

91742

Comment

Curt and Shaun brought up something real interesting - the old style racist act of using persons you look down on and hate to make a living, while doing all you can otherwise to destroy their chances to ever be seen as your equal. Another interesting thing is the foolishness of some black people to let adverse and hateful people represent them. The same hateful and advese persons don't share any of their client's values, votes in ways adverse to them, talks to them with contempt and utter disregard, and sees these client as money or chattel only, not as living and breathing human being just like them who are worthy of similar concerns, protections, good representation or equality. For too long this has been the south's and Mississippi's representation of a good ole boy - a would be Klansman dressed in a suit and winking to other good ole boys as he flunts his chattel for all to see. Then he goes to his private country club and neo-klan meetings just as he was trained to do.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T13:11:56-06:00

ID

91743

Comment

the old style racist act of using persons you look down on and hate to make a living, while doing all you can otherwise to destroy their chances to ever be seen as your equal. This is certainly alive and well these days, and in such a tragic way. I've said it already—look at the big picture, folks, and stop being blinded by references to race. Race politics are certainly in play here, but in service to something else. If you allow race defensiveness to blind you, you're not going to solve the puzzle. Think, boyz, think. This is your brain teaser o' the day. (Year?)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T13:18:52-06:00

ID

91744

Comment

Hey wait a second Ray I don't look down because of their race, for one thing I am half syrian so the last thing I would do is put a racist label on anything. If thats the way it came across, I apoligize.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T13:20:18-06:00

ID

91745

Comment

And don't think that under the current "terrorist-fear" politcal climate that I don't feel hints of discrimination over my last name & heritage.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T13:22:14-06:00

ID

91746

Comment

Ray, I agree. But, would add, its not just here and not just the South. That klanish behavior by many groups is rampant.

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-03-30T13:27:47-06:00

ID

91747

Comment

Ray, as long as you're defending death penalty cases, I'll feel safer at night.

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T13:31:17-06:00

ID

91748

Comment

Shaun, I know you're sorry that the head ornament fell off. I imagine Curt is sorry too, publicly, at least. I don't blame y'all too much. You are what you desire to be. I blame black folks for falling for slick advertisement and a newly adorned attire poorly substituted for the all white pullover suit and pointed hat. Curt, my comrade, I sleep well at night too because I keep at least three items ready for any intruders daring to harm me. Don't worry about my clients or me. The proper course is to start caring about the ones you hate and so casually dismiss and disrespect. All the best. Much Love. Sho Nuff. And that's the double truth, Ruth. All if forgiven although I strongly believe I have captured the moment as it was laid out by you too.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T13:54:48-06:00

ID

91749

Comment

Yeah Ray I am sorry the Klan didn't accept my application for membership, apparently they don't accept Arabs.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T13:58:08-06:00

ID

91750

Comment

The ACLU actually did though, but thats another story enitrely.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:00:03-06:00

ID

91751

Comment

Hey fuck you Ray. Who do you think you are calling people Klansmen. Why dont you get off your sorry, state-employee ass, and do the job we're paying you to do, instead of fucking around on jfp all day. Dont you have a brief due?

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T14:02:54-06:00

ID

91752

Comment

Bye, Curt. I'm doing my job well. Have a good day. Cheers.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T14:07:23-06:00

ID

91753

Comment

You know Curt I lost my Klan robe and I was planning on going on my pligrammage to Mecca this summer, you got one I can borrow.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:07:25-06:00

ID

91754

Comment

you will definitely need the hood part if you are going to make that trip.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:09:07-06:00

ID

91755

Comment

Good thinking Fish, I almost forgot, Curt ya got an extra hood?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:10:22-06:00

ID

91756

Comment

69 MFs on death row. Yeah, good job.

Author

Curt Crowley

Date

2007-03-30T14:13:49-06:00

ID

91757

Comment

69 Curt? Are you talking about the a fun position or the number of actual inmates on death row.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:14:47-06:00

ID

91758

Comment

Damn 69 huh? I am certainly never killing someone in this state, you would have better luck of not being executed in Texas.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:17:36-06:00

ID

91759

Comment

Hey f*** you Ray. I go to Rainbow to get lunch, and you guys devolve into a cess pool here. Needless to say, Curt, saying "f&ck you" here is a violation of the User Agreement. Lata, gata. Otherwise, the Klan jokes in response to serious comments don't exactly show the best side of y'all boyz. If it had been a trap, you fell into it. I don't think the biggest threat these days is Klannish behavior, all. It's Citizen Councilish.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:25:17-06:00

ID

91760

Comment

you know Ladd, when Ray decided to drag my family into that thread last week, I didn't see you saying a word about it.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:27:39-06:00

ID

91761

Comment

Calling someone a Klansman is not a serious comment Donna, its offensive and down right ridiculous.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:30:29-06:00

ID

91762

Comment

Shaun: Power sister!!! Don't take it from The man.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:32:02-06:00

ID

91763

Comment

I thought that type of behavior violated the user agreement, I mean is ok if Ray refers to me as a "Dune Koon" as well

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:37:17-06:00

ID

91764

Comment

Uh, Shaun, darlin'. I just did a search above on the word "Klan" and "Klansman," and can't for the life of me find where anyone calling any of you boyz "Klansmen." Could you help me out here? Was it the "head ornament" jab? Have you read your own comments before that, or Curt's? Your belitting of every attempt to discuss race without even paying attention to what's written? Have you read your own remarks about our black district attorney—which are NEVER backed up with facts? Do you really think you have the privilege of going around slinging your pathetic style of insults at people and not have not them jab you back? Darlins', you ain't better than nobody else on this site. Get used to a different kind of conversation that make you guys uncomfortable now and then—or take a frackin' hike.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:38:32-06:00

ID

91765

Comment

Shaun, you are acting like a pure moron. And a whiny one at that.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:39:28-06:00

ID

91766

Comment

'Fish, I don't know the "family" reference you mean. I do, however, know your history here, exhibiting your vast understanding of the Race Question, so you oughta stop the whining. You know as well as I do that you're in your ninth life here. Let Shaun fight his own whiny battles. I should also add that I am oblivious to whining. A turn toward intelligence is the only thing that will sway me.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:41:50-06:00

ID

91767

Comment

What is brown and black and looks good on a lawyer? A doberman.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:42:34-06:00

ID

91768

Comment

"Have you read your own remarks about our black district attorney—which are NEVER backed up with facts?" When have I ever disparged Faye because she is black? or a woman? I think I intially stated awhile back that I liked and still do, Michelle Purvis for DA (a black woman) and I do like Robert Smith (another Black man). Are you the one that is obessed with race Donna or is it just protecting Faye?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T14:45:10-06:00

ID

91769

Comment

haven't whined at all and as you know I am quite capable of fighting my own battles here. Last week when we had that discussion on race and your Deacon of Defense story, he decided to drag my family into the thread near the end of it, which I thought was pretty damn well beneath him. I could make smartass comments or barbs about posters' families here but I consider that completely off limits and expect the same unless poster has made his own the topic of dicussion. I don't think that is being unreasonable.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:46:46-06:00

ID

91770

Comment

What is brown and black and looks good on a lawyer? A doberman. Actually, Pike, the only reason you're still here is probably because you make my laugh right after you do something stupid, which leads me to believe—perhaps wrongly—that you're not mean-spirited. ;-) Certainly, we have too damn many lawyers on this site with too much time on their hands. No question. At least Ray disappears for days and weeks at a time. Not sure what the rest of you are up to. As for your oh-so-intelligent query, Shaun—I will answer it that way: I have no problem whatsoever talking about the very issue that white people are raised in state not to talk about. I don't feel the need to defend po white folk because I grew up one. I also don't feel the need to defend or attack black people because I didn't. Race politics are alive and huge in our city and our state, and the folks playing them are using your discomfort as cover for some really ugly that ends up with little to do with race. It is complex, and we are going to continue talking about it until we don't need to anymore. And if that makes you give all bent out of shape, I suggest that you simply not look at the JFP site again. You have free will; exercise it. Otherwise, get out of the way while the rest of us make up for lost time. I'm not trying to protect Faye. She's a tougher woman than I will ever be, and I don't care what race she is. She doesn't need me to protect her. However, I will continue to call out witchhunts as I see them, and ask for people to back up their innuendo with facts. I'm funny that way.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:52:09-06:00

ID

91771

Comment

Pike? That was my joke.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:53:47-06:00

ID

91772

Comment

HOwever, I will offer the following link to you peeps for your review: lawyers

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T14:55:20-06:00

ID

91773

Comment

(Shaun, for the record, I don't think people are targeting Peterson because she's black. I think they're targeting her because she's not owned. However, the Melton camp is playing the race card on her, telling "the people" she's not black enough just as they did with Johnson (which is mighty ironic, but hey no one said this is an honest game). And I don't really think the N-JAM types know what they're doing. They're pawns—just doing, and repeating, what they're told by the higher-ups. If it makes you feel any better, you're not simply offensive when it comes to race. But boy do you hate it when people talk about it. Guess what? It doesn't matter here what you think about it. What y'all aren't getting to because you can't even deal with a mention of race is the ugly, cynical way that race is being used to further non-race-related goals. But we can't stop it, or reveal it, if we're not willing to discuss race politics. Of course, if you've never allowed yourself to go first base on discussion of race dynamics, this is going to go straight over your head, and you're going to respond with nonsensical, defensive Klan jokes, because you take everything said about race personally. We can't help that, but I hope that you'll wise up a bit.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:57:52-06:00

ID

91774

Comment

I mean, 'Fish. My post was to you, not Pike.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T14:58:49-06:00

ID

91775

Comment

Gulp, I messed up and I didn't even know it!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-03-30T14:59:01-06:00

ID

91776

Comment

I don't mind the discussion of race, for one thing I grew up in Miami for the majority of my life & not here so the issue is not something that I really dealt with. My father is from outside of Damascus, so I didn't grow up with the whole "black-white" thing that most Mississipians did. I am just saying that you called Faye our "black district attorney" and I just don't think that her race is relevant to her performance.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-30T15:06:10-06:00

ID

91777

Comment

I will say this in defense of Shaun. I'm more inclined to listen to attorneys that deal with Ms Peterson's office all the time than just a caller to a radio show who gripes about that idiot DA in Jackson or Rankin/Madison. I don't expect them to keep cases listed or mistakes chronicled for this kind of forum so I am prepared to take them a little more at their word as they know more about what they are talking about than most posters probably.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T15:09:00-06:00

ID

91778

Comment

and I thought you kept me around for the free king cake.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T15:10:08-06:00

ID

91779

Comment

I don't think her race is relevant to our performance, either. Doh. But it's at the heart of the, er, machine's approach to demonizing her. And I've never quite seen anything like this machine, at least per capita. OK, let's put it this way. The machine, which is a rainbow colition if not an admirable one, didn't like Johnson, and it didn't like Chief Moore, and it is turning on Sheriff McMillin. It didn't like Chief Wilson in the old days. It doesn't like Peterson now. Ask yourself why it doesn't like them. Hint: It has *nothing* to with planning or perception or the procedural things you lawyers don't like about the D.A. Every D.A., and every judge, and every mayor, and every police chief, has problems we can point out. If we didn't have the machine pushing some really ugly buttons, racial and otherwise, for its own purposes (that have nothing to do with race), then we could judge our public servants on their own merits. But we have a mayor whose posse goes around saying that the D.A. "fucked" a bail bondsman without evidence, along with a multitude of other accusations of all the people named (they've told us others that didn't check out, either), and the minions repeat what the machine tells them to say—many of them because the machine is playing off their racial "thug" fears. The minions start whining on cue because the D.A. indicted the mayor so damn fast—what about all the other rapists and murderers!!! The machine is able to play off these race issues because we haven't aired them out and can't even have a conversation about race issues without a bunch of defensive white boyz jerking both knees out of their sockets in their distress over the topic even coming up. Meantime, the machine smiles. Now, I'm done talking in riddles. Make fun of my comments as you will, guys. But I urge you to think about the big picture more often. You're all attorneys: Logic is your friend. Just ask "why?" over and over again and try not to get so bent out of shape when people bring up race. You'll live. I'm out.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T15:18:40-06:00

ID

91780

Comment

oh no . . . . here comes the binary express . . . 010011011010110001111010110011100111101010110101 sorry, i couldn't resist. here's another- there are only 10 types of people in the world. those who can undestand binary and those who can't. sorry again. my inner nerd made me do it.

Author

djames

Date

2007-03-30T15:19:23-06:00

ID

91781

Comment

I don't keep you around, 'Fish. I just don't kick you out. There's a difference. Bye. Keep y'all's pants zipped up.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T15:19:59-06:00

ID

91782

Comment

Yeah, king, and you were innocently trying to make me a bigot with a total spin on something I said? That comment was pointed at you and no one but you. I'm too busy to argue though, so think whatever you please.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T15:27:41-06:00

ID

91783

Comment

Curt, fyi, I have only one person on death row and he's coming off. Our whole office has less than 5 on death row in our 6th year existence. Once again, your own clients should be your concern. I feel too sorry for your clients to even mention what happens to them with you. I won't mention the lowly depths of what you do. But I suspect you're the right man for the job.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-03-30T15:36:40-06:00

ID

91784

Comment

Donna: From my perspective you are right about "the machine!" The "machine" comes in all shapes, sizes, race, religion, creed and gender. Donna is correct. Just step back and look and the "big picture" and you will see a select few win and the majority both black and white lose! I know you don't need it Donna but I have your back! Larry.

Author

Larry

Date

2007-03-30T16:17:46-06:00

ID

91785

Comment

total spin? Not hardly. I put quotes around what you said and stated clearly why I thought it sounded the way it did. I also said I was disappointed in your saying something like that, which does give you some credit. I didn't say you were a bigot. I said the statement was bigoted. A little bit of a difference there. I've never thought you were a bigot. I know damn good and well that reference about my family was directed at me. And if you had said it to my face, you would've been getting up off of the floor just as I would expect to be getting off of the floor if I dragged your kids or a relative into a political discussion.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T16:25:04-06:00

ID

91786

Comment

'Fish, saying you're "disappointed" in what someone says is most certainly *not* giving credit. It's condescending and implies that you, somehow, are in a place to show disappointment in the person you're talking to us. That is certainly not the case with you and Ray, with due respect. It's gross to watch you, and others, try to talk down to him because you don't want him saying what he is saying. Y'all try to turn him into a bigot every time he brings up an uncomfortable race issue. It's tiresome and transparent.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T16:56:30-06:00

ID

91787

Comment

Thanks, Larry.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-03-30T16:57:04-06:00

ID

91788

Comment

I do not try to turn him into a bigot "every time" he brings up an uncomfortable race issue. You misinterpret what I say and try to put your own spin on it. I defy you to show where I have tried to turn him into a bigot. Go ahead. If anything, I've defended his point of view more than once on here and on other sites. Guess you missed that part or conveniently forgot it. I meant it in the following way: I have alot of respect for Ray's opinion. I have enjoyed most of my exchanges with him and when he is making a serious point, give it serious consideration. I have respect for him as someone who has been around and has much to offer younger people like me based on what he has experienced and seen in his life. SO when I read a statement by him that I was surprised came from him as I think he is intelligent and educated, I stated what I thought about the statement itself, not the person. The only thing I'm taking issue with right now is his dragging my family into it. If you can't understand why I might take objection to that, I'm not going to apologize for taking offense to the statement. I will say it very clearly right now. I do not think Ray is a bigot at all. period. I think he made an ignorant statement that sounded racist. I think all groups are equally evil or capable of evil and no one group is worse than the other. That means I don't think Blacks have a predisposition towards crime like the klukkers do nor do I think that the white man is the most evil or violent race ever created like some black panthers think either. For the record, I enjoy having racial discussions that are candid in nature as Councilman Crisler's mother and I had for years when I went to Hinds in her office. I enjoy having them with Ray. If you ever notice what I tend to jump on is when I read general statements about groups like "all this" or "all that".

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T17:11:58-06:00

ID

91789

Comment

What is brown and black and looks good on a lawyer? A doberman. ROTFLMAF That may be the funniest line I've read on this site today. I needed that!

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-03-30T17:20:34-06:00

ID

91790

Comment

lawyer jokes: balm for the soul. ;-) YOu know what. I just had a thought. The Marquise De Sade. The one thing about him I noticed was who all tried to throw him in jail. The King. The Radicals like Robespierre who ran the reign of terror. Napoleon. Pretty much the one thing everyone in France agreed on while they were trying to butcher each other was that De Sade should be in jail. Kind of like Melton. Look at who all wants him gone. Pretty diverse group. Who said Melton was not a uniter? He's bringing people together who 5 years ago, would've barely spoken to each other. ;-)

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-30T17:49:55-06:00

ID

91791

Comment

Melton "A uniter not a divider," good point fish I think has done a good job of extracting pissing every group in the city off.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-31T12:01:55-06:00

ID

91792

Comment

I meant i think melton has done a good job of pissing every group in the city off.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-31T12:07:48-06:00

ID

91793

Comment

As far as Mr. Smith being his own man once he gets in office, having we heard that thinking before when Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court? Furthermore, as I understand it, Robert originally did not even want to be DA. He started out as Michele Purvis' campaign director and for some reason decided to run for DA. Maybe someone should ask themselves why he would want to give up a lucrative private practice to make about $100k a year and deal with all the headaches that go along with being DA. I keep hearing the term "incompetent" thrown around while referring to Peterson. Other than the gang cases which Melton had his finger in, her office has obtained guilty verdict after guilty verdict. Her office even prosecuted a death penalty case (Eric Moffett) and obtained a death sentence for a murder which took place in 1992 which her predecessor didn't even bother to indict. Last week her office obtained a guilty plea to murder (Toice Wilson). I don't know but as I understand it, a guilty plea to murder is a pretty rare. Her office even won the Elicia Hughes case, which according to the CL was unwinnable. I realize that the Judge gave her a new trial but as I understand it that was based on the Judge's error. As far as Mr. Smith's prowess as a lawyer, other than the gang cases, what not guilty verdicts has he gotten for his clients? He represented Daren Rouster and he was found guilty of Murder and 2 counts of Aggravated Assault. He represented one of the Brooks boys that murdered their father and allowed him to plead to 25 years. So what evidence do we have that he is a great attorney? I don't see it. Nor do I see all the imcompetence of Peterson. What I do see are a lot of convictions coming out of her so-called incompetent office.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-03-31T16:26:00-06:00

ID

91794

Comment

I actually Daron Rouster's appeallate counsel and I watch some of the trial and have read the entire trial transcript and written the brief and to Robert's credit he tried a great case that had very very difficult factual circumstances. The Elicia Hughes trial was not overturned because of Judge Kidd's error, it was because the defense raised their Batson challenges in their motion for a new trial and Mr. Alexander could not provide Judge Kidd with adequate race-neutral reasons for striking potential jurors. As well did any read the decision by the court of appeals where they go off on ADA Mansell for inapproriate behavior for a prosecutor? This is the second decision this year by them that I have read in whic they tear into her for her conduct in Yerger's courtroom. The first decision discussed how she was basically making personal attacks against Tom Fortner, a great public defender. You see this all goes to the imcompentence issue, it is Faye's job to manage the conduct of her ADAs and she simply doesn't do a good job of it. One year ago I had my former paralegal call ADA Dewey Arthur and request a potential witness list for a case that I thought was going to trial (it didn't) anyway he yelled at her so much and made so many derrogatory comments to her that she came into my office bursting in tears (she was just a 19 year old). Anyway there is no reason for that type of unprofessionalism and its Faye's responsibilty to curb it.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-31T17:09:52-06:00

ID

91795

Comment

"Did prosecutorial misconduct warrant a mistrial? Because this is the third case at this Court in less than a year alleging prosecutorial misconduct against the same district attorney’s office(Hinds County), we will address this issue." Douvell Lamon Davis v. State of Mississippi. The cite the other 2 cases as Bailey v. State, No. 2004-KA-00640-COA (Miss. Ct. App. June 27, 2006); Bailey v. State2 , No. 2004-KA-01560-COA (Miss. Ct. App. May 16, 2006). This case is the fourth handed down last Tuesday: Marcus Whitehead v. State of Mississippi. In the Davis case the Court states that: "Since we have already reversed the case and remanded for new trial, it is not necessary that we determine whether the misconduct prejudiced the defendant. Our analysis is provided to assist the trial court on retrial." They didn't need to address this issue because they had already reversed the case but felt that the behavior was so egregious that it must be addressed because it was the THIRD time in less than a year that this had happened. Donna, you always say you want me to be more specific so here it is, please go read the Davis case and decide for yourself. You can read it on the SC website under the Court of Appeals hand down list of 12/12/06. If this is not incompetence then I guess I just don't know what is.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-03-31T17:29:59-06:00

ID

91796

Comment

thetruth: Why don't you start tellling the truth. Thomas has been his own man. In his first year on the court, he wrote more opinions than any other first year justice (source: Front page story of WSJ in 94 that was was about his first year record). Of course, its ok for you to say that about Thomas but you have no comment about Woodward saying the same thing about Thurgood Marshall in The Brethren. From Lawblog of WSJ: January 22, 2007, 1:16 pm A Dissenting Opinion on Clarence Thomas Posted by Peter Lattman Jan Crawford Greenburg, legal correspondent for ABC News, has a new book out tomorrow: “Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story for Control of the United States Supreme Court.” Today, the WSJ publishes an op-ed by Greenburg on Justice Thomas. Here’s an excerpt: Clarence Thomas has borne some of the most vitriolic personal attacks in Supreme Court history. But the persistent stereotypes about his views on the law and subordinate role on the court are equally offensive — and demonstrably false. An extensive documentary record shows that Justice Thomas has been a significant force in shaping the direction and decisions of the court for the past 15 years. That’s not the standard storyline. Immediately upon his arrival at the court, Justice Thomas was savaged by court-watchers as Antonin Scalia’s dutiful apprentice, blindly following his mentor’s lead. It’s a grossly inaccurate portrayal, imbued with politically incorrect innuendo, as documents and notes from Justice Thomas’s very first days on the court conclusively show. Far from being a Scalia lackey, the rookie jurist made clear to the other justices that he was willing to be the solo dissenter, sending a strong signal that he would not moderate his opinions for the sake of comity . . . Clarence Thomas, for example, is the only justice who rarely asks questions at oral arguments. One reason is that he thinks his colleagues talk too much from the bench, and he prefers to let the lawyers explain their case with fewer interruptions. But his silence is sometimes interpreted as a lack of interest, and friends have begged him to ask a few questions to dispel those suggestions. He refuses to do it. “They have no credibility,” he says of critics. “I am free to live up to my oath.” Permalink | Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/22/a-dissenting-opinion-on-clarence-thomas/trackback/ Save & Share: Share on Facebook | Del.icio.us | Digg this | Email This Read more: Supreme Court

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-03-31T19:49:39-06:00

ID

91797

Comment

I am not an attorney, but the last time I checked, motions for new trials as well as appeals are based upon errors made by the Judge at the trial court level. In the Hughes case, the defense filed a motion for new trial based upon the Judge's error in not asking for race-neutral issues during the actual trial. As far as the Bailey case and any other case at the appellate level, all cases are appealed on errors that are allegedly made by the Judge at the trial court level. Usually about an evidentiary ruling that the Judge made. It behooves defense lawyers to allege as many errors as possible because it increases their chances of success on the appeal. Prosecutorial misconduct is yet another appeal ground which is thrown in just as insufficient evidence to support the verdict. I remember reading about the Bailey case in the paper and it was reversed on an evidentiary error made by Yerger during the trial, not prosecutorial misconduct. Now give us a case which was reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct. I think far more Hinds County cases have been affirmed by the Supreme Court than have been reversed. As far as Mr. Smith's representation of Rouster, he would have been much better served to have pleaded guilty to murder. At least he would have had an opportunity to get out someday. Life sentences are eligible for parole at the age of 65. But he got life plus 40. Sometimes a lawyer must counsel with their client rather than rush to trial. Even if it is a high profile case that will afford the lawyer free advertising. You speak of the third case alleging misconduct. That tells me that there were three convictions. You mentioned the Michael Whitehead case, well I just went to the MS Court of Appeals website and according to what I read the CONVICTION WAS AFFIRMED. Which means there was no reversible error. So basicly, your evidence is one case which was reversed on an evidentiary error made by the Judge, not on prosecutorial misconduct. How many murder trials have you tried and won? It appears that you have a problem with Ms. Mansell. Has she beaten you in court? It sounds kind of personal. I will be waiting on that case that was reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T10:05:40-06:00

ID

91798

Comment

I think I specifically had stated that the cases were reversed for other reasons but since it was the THIRD time that that office had been accussed of prosecutorial misconduct, the Court would address this issue. Now why would they do this? For fun? No they did it as a warning to that office to stop pulling that kind of unprofessional conduct.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T10:21:55-06:00

ID

91799

Comment

The Court addressed the issue in the Whitehead case but found no reversible error. I try not to get into mind reading especially when it comes to the minds of justices, but I'll play along. As I read that opinion it appeared to me that the Court had grown tired of Lynn Watkins complaining of misconduct and that they addressed it to try to let her know that it was a waste of both her time (and theirs) for her to continue to raise an issue which is without reversible merit. Obviously, the issue in Whitehead was without merit because the Court did not reverse but chose to affirm. They affirmed again in the Michael Bailey case. Even though the Davis case was reversed, it was not because of prosecutorial misconduct. The Court found no prosecutorial misconduct in that case. That case was reversed because the Court found that Judge Yerger was in error because he limited the defense attorney's cross of one of the State's witnesses. Furthermore, since you have not produced a case which has been reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct against the Hinds County DA's office, I will assume that such a case does not exist and therefore you are just spouting your personal feelings rather than facts which are supported by evidence. I have a friend that is a lawyer and he told me that under the Mississippi Rules of Discovery, the prosecution does not have to give you a witness list, but only provide to you all of the possible witnesses along with their anticipated testimony and addresses. He said this differs from the federal rules in which the State has to provide a witness list. I hope this will help you in your future dealings with Mr. Arthur. Maybe if were familiar with the Mississippi Rules you wouldn't have asked your assistant to ask for things which are not provided for by the Mississippi Rules. This way maybe her delicate feelings won't be hurt in the future.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T15:44:50-06:00

ID

91800

Comment

Hey truth, thats what I meant by a "witness list." Mr. Arthur said anybody listed in any document in discovery could have been called, which is wrong. When a lawyer says he wants a witness list thats what he means, what you just stated, i.e. names , addresses, anticipated testimony. Again I did not say that they reversed the case on prosecutorial misconduct but they chose to address it once they had already reversed it. Now WHY IN THE HELL would they want to do that if not to make a point. Were they just writing for shits & giggles. As to your statement about Ms. Mansell, I have never had a case against her and have no opinion or personal problems with her whatsoever. As well there is no such thing as the "Mississippi Rules of Discovery" only the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure (rule 26) for civil matters (which don't apply to criminal proceedings), the only thing that does is the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice (particularly rule 4.04) and the the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and corresponding sections of the Mississippi Constitution. There used to be Uniform Criminal Rules for Mississippi but they were done away awhile ago. Maybe your friend needs to brush up on the rules a bit. And as to Mr. Arthur, I would bet you would love it if someone called a memeber of you staff a "stupid fucking bitch" for no reason & to request something that is discoverable. Truth, stop trying to play lawyer and go back to your real job which is probably on the oil rig.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T16:38:35-06:00

ID

91801

Comment

You should pick up your Rule book more often because Rule 9.04 (not 4.04) addresses discovery matters in Mississippi criminal cases. I guest you didn't get that edition. I won't be so crass as to insult oil rig workers or any other occupation for that matter. But for those oil rig workers, you couldn't drive your sedan to work everyday. But I guess you never thought of it that way. Again, I read it as the Court telling the appellate attorney to stop making frivolous claims which have never been deemed to rise to the level of reversible error. Ok, forget Mansell, have you won any criminal cases? I'll even include traffic tickets in JP court? It sounds like you are an appellate attorney that would faint if he/she ever had to talk to a jury comprised of (heaven forbid) blue collar oil rig workers. If I'm wrong, and you have won a jury trial of any type, let me know.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T16:51:34-06:00

ID

91802

Comment

Yeah I would faint you got that right and whoops I missed typed & wrote 4.04 instead of 9.04 but I guess you miss typed when you wrote Mississippi Rules of Discovery & I am sure you have one a ton of criminal jury trials. And what is JP COurt. Don't you mean Justice Court or Municipal Court, I guess that was a mistrype also.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T17:09:51-06:00

ID

91803

Comment

It appears that not only did you want to know who the potential witnesses were but also exactly what Mr. Arthur's trial strategy was. I'm sorry, but since you NOW (and I can't see how you could hit 4 instead of 9 because on my keyboard they are quite a distance apart) know the correct rule number, where does it say in 9.04 that the State has to give you a witness list which outlines exactly who they plan on calling at trial? It doesn't say that. I guess you are pretty young b/c JP court to we old timers means Justice of the Peace court. I haven't tried any cases and it appears that we have that in common. No I didn't mistype when I typed Mississippi Rules of Discovery, because 9.04 is the Mississippi Rule regarding discovery in criminal matters, not 4.04 as you would have us to believe. I do know that Rule 9.04 does not require the state to give you a neat tidy list of their witnesses but they do have to give you a list of all potential witnesses along with their proposed testimony along with addresses. In the future, don't have your assistant to call an attorney. You should make the call. Anything less is disrespectful at least that's the way it is in the HR business. I would never have my adm. asst. call another HR director for me. You shouldn't have put your staff in that position. And I wonder if she had the same wrong impression of 9.04 as you do and attempted to educate Mr. Arthur, who by the way, has won quite a few murder cases as well as other types of trials. Read 9.04 again or 4.04 or whatever you paper lawyers do.

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T17:31:52-06:00

ID

91804

Comment

Rule 9.04 "1. Names and addresses of all witnesses in chief proposed to be offered by the prosecution at trial, together with a copy of the contents of any statement, written, recorded or otherwise preserved of each such witness and the substance of any oral statement made by any such witness;" Yeah Truth I guess Mr. Arthur didn't have to give me a "witness list" my mistake, I guess that statement does not mean "list" in your mind it probably means he could of yelled it out of the courthouse window. I also guess that his statement that "anyone listed in discovery anywhere" was correct also. Man you really need to brush up on the rules since you think you are a lawyer.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T17:34:46-06:00

ID

91805

Comment

"proposed":To make known as one's intention; purpose or intend as defined by Webster's dictionary. Maybe you should take an english class.

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T17:39:55-06:00

ID

91806

Comment

As I understand it, the prosecutor gives you a copy of the file that they receive from the law enforcement agency. That file includes the statements that were taken from the witnesses as well as their addresses. If you get that file, then every potential witness is LISTED in that file. All you have to do is read the file. If you were right about your interpretation, you could have filed a Motion to Compel with the judge but you know you are wrong so I am guessing that you simply pleaded your client to avoid going to trial and facing those blue collar oilrig workers, didn't you? If you get the entire file with all the witnesses then you have all the statements. Ofcourse Mr. Arthur is under an obligation to supplement if he finds out any new information from those witnesses but if he gave you a copy of the file, as is the practice in most DA offices, he did comply. It appears you just wanted him to tell you his complete strategy. I won't lower myself to question your ability to use the english language. Now, since we are on the subject, did you comply with rule 9.04(C)?

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T18:24:03-06:00

ID

91807

Comment

Alright, the petty insult game ends here, children.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-01T19:07:28-06:00

ID

91808

Comment

Yes mam. lol

Author

thetruth

Date

2007-04-01T19:44:35-06:00

ID

91809

Comment

Truth, I think you have a point about the names listed in the file but every case I have ever handled over there they always provided me with an potential witness list, as required by Rule 9.04, I haven't dealt with Mr. Arthur though. Also I am not aware of the "Mississippi Rules of Discovery," isn't that just Rule 26 in civil cases & the URCCP?

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-01T20:58:39-06:00

ID

91810

Comment

good thing you two don't work together. I don't think the building would remain in one piece for long.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-04-01T23:34:48-06:00

ID

91811

Comment

Well, I will make a better effort to stay clear of certain kinds of people in the future. Schooling, reading and working intimately with people of a different ethnicities than mines have allowed me to see and interpret many complex facets of racial engagement. Some people expect minorities to integrate and assimilate to the extent that they accept various types of insults and conditions as just the way it is without any complaints, interpretation or outcry. Sadly, some black folks are so glad to have a so-called good job and are so afraid of losing it that they won't ever call out unbecoming or racist behavior when they see it. I wouldn't silently accept inappropriate behavior in elementary, middle, or high school and it has carried on to every other step of my life. I don't practice racism or bigotry and I'm not going to accept it from others regardless of race. Cheers. No hard feelings to anyone.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2007-04-02T10:42:49-06:00

ID

91812

Comment

You don't practice bigotry, you called me a Curt Klansmen with our robes for christ sakes. And I am a damn Arab, man are you really lost. Just because you are black doesn't give you the right to call everyone a racist. Screw your apology!

Author

snowjob

Date

2007-04-02T22:24:02-06:00

ID

91813

Comment

Did he really call you a Klansman, Shaun? Are you absolutely positive? And are you also positive that you have said NOTHING offensive on this entire thread to Ray or anyone else? And could it possibly, just maybe, be that you said some things that sound racist that you didn't mean to be that way? Perhaps others did the same thing? And I'm not sure what you're being part-Arab has to do with anything on this particular thread. Finally, I wouldn't exactly call Ray's statement an "apology"—an explanation, perhaps, but I'm not seeing why it makes you so livid.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-02T22:40:36-06:00

ID

91814

Comment

P.S. Ray doesn't "call everyone a racist." In fact, he gets called a racist, or a bigot, by a handful of people everytime he tries to express a sentiment about his race that they're not comfortable hearing. We're lucky he still bothers to show up here after some of the abuse he's taken. But I'm thrilled that he is here. Like the rest of us—except maybe you, Shaun—he doesn't say everything perfectly, but he says things that definitely need to be said on a "mixed" forum. Perhaps simply listening to him, without pre-judgment, might offer a different and useful perspective?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-04-02T22:43:19-06:00

ID

91815

Comment

Such wisdom from a man who speaks for the majority of white MS'ain's in saying Frankie boy is... well... He's their boy! This mayor is a person who can better the relations of the races. The majority of the white population of the city and state admire him for trying to make a difference. Suck it kneejerkers!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-04-03T00:47:04-06:00