Zach Scruggs gets serious about asking for discovery in a rehearing petition

Zach Scruggs has sought rehearing on his effort to get discovery. This time out, he’s serious: There’s lots of law about when he should get discovery, and specific-to-his-situation explanations about why it would be unfair to say no. More to our interest, there’s a lot of new and interesting factual matter, starting with the John Keker affidavit I discuss in my previous post (that’s the real news from this pleading).
There’s one misleading bit. The discovery motion was filed on February 14th and denied on February 16th before any response by the governmetn would due. The rehearing motion creatively reinterprets that: ”The Government indicated no objection to the Motion….”
There’s reference to an revisit by Balducci into the Scruggs office on November 19th, in which, at least according to this pleading (unsupported by affidavit or other proof), Balducci was not as productive as he’d been in the November 1st visit, the transcript of which has long been public:

nmisscommentor.com
3/2/11