Scruggs II trial, Day Two: Steve Funderburg describes the history of the Wilson case

A couple of major points that Scruggs’s team is attempting make are that, first, the decisions in 2005-2006 (during the period Peters was acting behind the scenes) were all the logical result of a 2002 order, and thus not any corrupt deal, and, second, that the decisions weren’t hanging out there waiting to be made at the time of the March 2006 call from Trent Lott– they were made either before than (January of 2006) or after (July of 2006). The prosecution is countering that there was corrupt contact and it was an advantage for the Scruggs team, and that, what Scruggs’s team sought was to get advantages in discretion calls that could not be reversed on appeal. The points the Scruggs team is making seem glancing blows to me: The question still comes down to whether consideration for the federal bench is of value and whether that was dangled out before DeLaughter as a part of an effort to influence him.

NMC
3/27/12