Just to return for a moment to the indictment itself (click here to see it), I’ve been mulling the allegations over, and I can’t decide about the alleged events of November 1. On that day, Balducci supposedly delivered the last $10,000 of the agreed upon $40,000 to Judge Lackey, and allegedly Dickie Scruggs had already given Balducci a $40,000 to cover this. On that same day, Balducci allegedly had the conversation with Zach Scruggs and Balducci were he said “we paid for this ruling, let’s be sure it says what we want it to say.” And also on November 1, Balducci allegedly had a conversation with Dickie Scruggs where Scruggs agreed to pay an extra $10,000 to Lackey. These last two items tend to support a theory that Balducci was already cooperating with the government at this point — the statement to Zach Scruggs and Backstrom smacks of one made to obtain their reactions on tape, and there is no reason to ask for a fake extra $10,000 payment from Dickie Scruggs unless to further implicate him and get documentary and audio recording evidence against him. However, if Balducci was cooperating, why deliver the last of the $40,000 to Lackey? What would be the purpose of delivering alleged bribes when both the bribee and the briber knew the transaction was fake? Maybe readers can supply the answer.
Insurance Coverage Blog