At the heart of Keker’s argument are the search of the Scruggs Law Firm and wiretaps obtained by federal investigators through Lackey, who agreed to record conversations with Balducci. Keker says the government ignored evidence that exonerated Scruggs.
“Two principal defects infect each of the affidavits submitted by the government in support of their wiretap and search warrant applications,” Keker wrote in a motion to suppress the fruits of the wiretaps and search. “First, while the affidavits try to paint a dark picture of a conspiracy among defendants to bribe… Lackey going back to March 2007, the affidavits omit numerous specific facts known to the government which show that no such conspiracy existed and that, in fact, it was the government that created the alleged crime here.
“Second, the government omitted from its supporting affidavits specific evidence from audio recordings that exculpates defendants and defeats the government’s conspiracy claims.”
That evidence includes Balducci telling Lackey that he would one day tell Scruggs that he had taken care of a problem for him, indicating Scruggs was not aware of the alleged scheme. In another conversation, though, Balducci said only he, Scruggs and Lackey knew of the alleged scheme.
Keker also claims that FBI Agent William Delaney wrote misleading statements in some of his affidavits in support of extensions of the wiretap.