DeLaughter to plead guilty on one count
by Patsy R. Brumfield/NEMS Daily Journal
7 months ago | 2159 views | 3 3 comments | 5 5 recommendations | email to a friend | print
ABERDEEN – Bobby DeLaughter, the embattled circuit judge from Hinds County, will admit Thursday that he lied to investigators about claims he was bribed by Richard “Dickie” Scruggs of Oxford and others.

U.S. District Court documents filed Tuesday show DeLaughter will change his not-guilty plea on Count 5 of his Jan. 6 indictment, which also accuses him of allowing himself to be bribed and of mail fraud connected to documents in a legal-fees lawsuit against Scruggs.

The fate of the other charges was not immediately known.

The change-of-plea hearing is set for 2 p.m. before Judge Glen H. Davidson in the Aberdeen federal courthouse.

Friday, several witnesses for DeLaughter’s Aug. 17 trial arrived in Oxford – Scruggs, former Booneville attorney Joey Langston and former state Auditor Steven Patterson of New Albany. They are serving federal prison time for guilty pleas in at least one judicial bribery scheme.

The plea could pre-empt the trial.

Speculation has swirled for weeks about whether DeLaughter would be offered a deal or if the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oxford would insist the case go to trial.

DeLaughter, 55, pleaded not guilty to all counts during a Feb. 12 arraignment, two days after Scruggs pleaded guilty to the bribery conspiracy and mail fraud charges.

The accusations stem from a legal-fees lawsuit, Wilson v. Scruggs, which is still active in Hinds County. It also is the subject of a newer federal lawsuit.

In those actions, attorney W. Roberts Wilson seeks fees he says he deserves from collaborating with Scruggs on national asbestos lawsuits years ago. In the federal suit, Wilson also claims Scruggs and others used his fees to bankroll other national lawsuits that brought in hefty returns to Scruggs and associated attorneys.

DeLaughter was accused of doing Scruggs’ bidding in the Hinds lawsuit in hopes Scruggs would get his brother-in-law, then-Sen. Trent Lott, to maneuver him a nomination to a federal judgeship.

This is the case to which Langston pleaded guilty in early January 2008. He is serving prison time in Alabama.

If convicted on all five counts, DeLaughter faced a maximum 85 years in prison and $1.25 million in fines.

Count 5, which says he lied to investigators, carries a maximum of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

The DeLaughter case was Scruggs’ second guilty plea in a judicial bribery scandal.

Scruggs was sentenced to extra time in a Kentucky federal prison for his DeLaughter plea, added to the five years he received in an attempt to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey over another legal-fees lawsuit in 2007.

Patterson also pleaded guilty in that case.

Notice of Thursday’s change-of-plea hearing came about 3 p.m., followed a few minutes later by minutes of a conference call between DeLaughter’s attorneys and assistant U.S. Attorneys prosecuting the case.

Among the witnesses expected to testify at trial was DeLaughter’s ex-boss, former Hinds District Attorney Ed Peters, who Langston and Scruggs said they paid $1 million to get DeLaughter’s cooperation.

Others included Lott and Scruggs co-conspirator, former New Albany attorney Timothy Balducci, also serving time in the Lackey case.

Late Tuesday, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons listed Balducci “in transit,” which means he’s being held somewhere other than a holding center. He is not in the Lafayette County jail, its administrator said.

Contact Patsy R. Brumfield at (662) 678-1596 or patsy.brumfield@djournal.com.
comments (3)
« MSRep wrote on Wednesday, Jul 29 at 04:31 PM »
Patsy, if you are going to report on this subject, at least get it right. Delaughter is NOT pleading guilty to lying "to investigators about claims he was bribed by Richard “Dickie” Scruggs of Oxford and others." He is pleading guilty to lying about whether he had ever discussed the Wilson case with Ed Peters.

All allegations regarding "bribery", and similar terms will be dismissed. What this means folks is that Bobby Delaugher IS NOT GUILTY of conspiring to bribe, accepting a bribe,or discussing a bribe with anyone. He did two things wrong. #1. He discussed the case with someone who was not the attorney of record. #2. He denied that when he was first asked during an "unofficial" inquiry by the feds. No, Delaugher's not perfect. (Who is?) But, he doesn't deserve the reputation he's been given by the biased media in this state. If not for constant, inaccurate reporting such as this, Delaughter probably could have been more confident of a "fair" hearing and probably would not have accepted this plea offer.
« mississippipatriot wrote on Wednesday, Jul 29 at 03:14 PM »
There is a critical need of reevaluating the idea of appointing judges versus electing judges. Corruption & greed run rampant in our courts and accountability goes unchecked.

The smaller courts are not immune to the same problems and seem to attract judges with "look at who I am" attitudes that are out of touch with reality and cannot render an impartial decision....especially in Chancery court.

Term limits and appointment limits or evaluations are crucial to at least attempting to keep these ego maniacs honest and accountable.
« InTheMiddle wrote on Wednesday, Jul 29 at 12:52 PM »
Judge DeLaughter should receive the maximum based on all counts- at least a hundred years. He is the scum of the earth. A judge who sold justice to the highest bidder. This hurts everyone - especially the honest judges and prosecutors. What he did is detestable. I hope that the DA and one of his fellow judges refuse to go easy on him. The powerful and the rich have lived a privileged life for far too long.