Jackson Jambalaya

I smell Brother Kali and the Kush League. Smith is grooming Anna. They think they can bring Anna Wolfe into the fold.

RSS: Donna Ladd is hatin.. She wish she could be as good as you. She has printed false, slanderous things about me and my family. If it weren't for my family, her newspaper wouldn't exist. What a slap. But you're doing great. Thanks for all you do. Later. (May 23, 2016)

Sounds like the Clarion Ledger has been getting rid of the wrong reporters. Wolfe needs to be reassigned from this case, unless they don't want the truth to come out!

And believe it or not, she had lunch with Waide and Smith earlier this week and Waide PAID FOR IT.

If you can't take a lobbyist's money and then say no, then you shouldn't be in the business.

Seems like a mighty "chummy" relationship for an "unbiased" reporter. I had hope for that young girl, but that is what she is....a (naïve, played like a fiddle) young girl.

RSS fears JJ.

Doesn't JT have a show to do, and why is obsessed with Donna and the JFP.

So he would buy an Ad for $1000 for a false story to be covered and printed. Does the clarion actually do stuff like that?

I hear you 9:58 but I know for a fact that the CL's policy at one time would not allow ANY gratuities to ANYone from ANYbody. Maybe not the case now but I know at one time it was.

This is astounding.

Someone read the above string of texts and said this:

Sounds like the Clarion Ledger has been getting rid of the wrong reporters. Wolfe needs to be reassigned from this case, unless they don't want the truth to come out!

So, if I'm following...

1. Smith concludes that Donna Ladd -- the white-guiltiest of all social justice warriors in the state of Mississippi -- is out to get him. (hint: the only time she'll honestly critique a black dude is when he's an outright lunatic. See, e.g., Melton, F. and Smith, R.S.)

2. Somehow, Anna Wolfe should be booted from covering this story because....because, why, @9:47?

Kenny Stokes' die-hards can be excused for supporting him; they're stupid. Just dumb. Smith's supporters, I've concluded are like he is: corrupt to the core.

I mean, good grief, 9:47. Whom are you trying to convince? As a follow-up, were you hit on the head this morning?

PS

9:57 -- Reporters aren't supposed to accept lunch from the subject(s) of a news story, to avoid the appearance of impropriety. It's ticky-tack, but a solid principle. Do you know for a fact Ms. Wolfe didn't pay for her meal separately? And is there anything in her coverage to indicate a bias in favor of RSS? I'm just curious.

Wolfe has integrity. She was smart enough to get out of JFP land and away from Ladd the control freak.

Donner is fixated on the Kingsnake.

Smith is obviously focused on the wrong virus.

All she has to do is contact me. She knows how to reach me.

I somehow don't think Ms Wolfe would sell out for a $10 or $15 lunch.

Just from reading what has been posted I don't think she is smart enough to know she was being bought. Price wouldn't matter, intelligence would.

I thought Wolfe's reporting was pretty biased in favor of RSS throughout this whole saga. Does anyone actually believe that Christopher Butler was framed? If he was, why didnt RSS present any evidence to that effect?

That being said, she does seem to be blowing him off in these texts. I mean she pushes him off on Jimmie Gates and doesnt respond to his other "flattering" texts.

Seems to me @10:44 that Smith is saying that LaddCo was bought and isn't paying off.

Didn't take it that way at all. Smith's family published the Mississippi Free Press during the civil rights struggle. It was a well-known publication in the black community when papers such as the CL had a segregationist bent. Smith has a legitimate sense of pride where that publication was concerned.

Ms. Ladd named her publication in honor of the original Mississippi Free Press. Smith is a little off-base here. If his family had not created the MFP, then she would have just called it another name.

Notice how she Wolfe got excited that there may be a story about Tony Yarber's 'white' support. Oh the humanity! White people supporting a black mayor. Gee how can we stir the racist sh!t storm in Jackson. Black power isn't supposed to mingle with whitey. So stupid.

I appreciate her coverage of Jackson; but that kind of text shows the true heart of what is wrong with journalism and liberal and minorities in America.

I'm not sure if the people on JJ are ignorant or just racists... but, it is clear; crystal clear from these text messages and from every relevant text message presented at trial that RSS was legitimately trying to prevent what he honestly believed was an injustice. The man was trying to get someone; anyone, to listen to him!!

Additionally, the judge in this case was an open and unapologetic racist. I counted countless reversible errors on his part. He allowed the AGO to introduce their snippets of the video, but refused to let RSS introduce the entire video. The video in its entirety is the best evidence. Many of those snippets were taken out of context and used to confuse and mislead the jury.

And, Mr. Kingsnake, knows for himself that the video he published on his own site show MBN agents turning the camera on the outside away from their activity in front of the house! How suspect is that?? If you have nothing to hide, there's no need to alter video or not release it for five years, not release it to RSS, but to Kevin Rundlett, the actual defense attorney. RSS was investigating corruption and he uncovered it and was punished for that.

Why move the outside surveillance camera? Did it ever occur to any of you that the drugs were found in a chest outside???? Or did you just overlook that important fact. Did it ever occur to you that the video from camera #2, the camera fixed on the bench was not produced??? There should have been hours of video for every camera. Somebody altered the video to jump from camera to camera and show only what they wanted to show. This is corruption at its finest- MISSISSIPPI STYLE! I know full well from visiting this site from time to time, the type and character of the audience that KF caters to. But, you do not have believe one word I say, the video speaks for itself and the judge made known to us all his true character by not allowing RSS to play the video of the raid in its entirety.

I tell you this one thing, Hood committed political suicide by allowing Sanders and Beasley and Alexander and Yurtkuran to convince him to try and destroy Robert. In an earlier post, it was mentioned that RSS took 70% of the vote in the election against Alexander. Hood, for whatever reason, failed to realized that Hinds County is the largest county in the State. Whatever he felt about RSS, he should have kept to himself. Everybody knows that Tate won't takes Hinds County, but after this, I really can't say that Hood will either. The reality is that the community was backing RSS before the trial and after seeing the trial, and hearing what it was really about, which was nothing more than retaliation, they are even more upset with Hood. And, I'm pretty sure he's feeling it right about now. He compromised his chance at Governor ( which I don't think he had a shot at anyway) AND his chance at seeking re-election as AG just to " get back" at RSS. Sad, but true...
Additionally, Mr. Hood is a sitting AG. Has anyone ever seen him try a case???? Civil or criminal??? I found it odd that his response to the mistrial, was not that the case had to be re-tried, but that it needed to be presented to another GRAND JURY, ASAP....?????
😳🙄😯😦😕😐😶
Surely, the chief prosecutor/ Chief Leo for the STATE should know that you don't re-present an already indicted case to a new grand jury just because of a mistrial. I just don't understand how he could be a prosecutor for as many years as he has and not know that...

But, I will tell you this, when you set out to massacre someone else's character out of an unapologetic spirit of revenge and hate and envy, God will always have the last say, which will often times mean your gets the last laugh. Hood better serious consider...

Mr. Smith has a perfectly acceptable means of overcoming Judge Weill. The appeal. There is even an interlocutary version of it. He could've appealed on the issue. Did he?



Last time I checked, it wasn't Judge Weill who was calling blacks Uncle Tom, was using the word "n***a like crazy, and threw the race card whenever possible but I guess in your world, that is non-racist behavior.

Did I post the video on here? Don't think I did. No one has ever given it to me. It was the Clarion-Ledger who posted the video.

So how come no one trusts a jury to throw out the charges if the video will indeed clear Butler?

Oh, and this quote:

"He allowed the AGO to introduce their snippets of the video, but refused to let RSS introduce the entire video."

The AGO is not prosecuting the drug charges, the DA"s office is but you did know that, didn't you?

12:02 PM, it is early in the day. Put the bottle down.

Ladd bought off by him? HAHAHAHAHA. I'll believe that when I see it and even then I'd have to look two or three times.

12:02 --

I'm not sure if the people on JJ are ignorant or just racists

Yep. If people think there's something wrong with a DA moving heaven & earth on behalf of drug dealer, they're either racists or morons.

crystal clear from these text messages and from every relevant text message presented at trial that RSS was legitimately trying to prevent what he honestly believed was an injustice.

Ok. Where is the proof? (Indicting a judge and two assistant AGs is not proof.)

I tell you this one thing, Hood committed political suicide by allowing Sanders and Beasley and Alexander and Yurtkuran to convince him to try and destroy Robert.

Until Louisiana elected a Democrat governor last year, Jim Hood (whom I despise) was the only statewide elected Democrat in the deep South. The Mississippi GOP hasn't been able to knock him off in three tries. Yet this case -- in your mind -- amounts to Hood's committing political suicide? How, exactly, will that work? Will the legislative black caucus & Bennie Thompson hand pick some left wing Dem to challenge Hood in a primary in 2 years? I'd love to hear the plan.

Everybody knows that Tate won't takes Hinds County, but after this, I really can't say that Hood will either.

Oh. I get it now. You think Hood will run for governor. You're on heavy drugs.

Additionally, Mr. Hood is a sitting AG. Has anyone ever seen him try a case?

As a sitting AG? I bet nobody has. What's your point? Did Eric Holder try any cases as AG? What about Loretta Lynch?

On the other hand, I bet Hood (whom I despise) tried plenty when he was working under Mike Moore. And when he was a prosecutor before that.

Surely, the chief prosecutor/ Chief Leo for the STATE should know that you don't re-present an already indicted case to a new grand jury just because of a mistrial.

1. He wouldn't have to re-present to a new grand jury. He can try the case again.

2. Probably a waste of time to prosecute in Hinds County, whose juries regularly set murderers free to "stick it to the man," and likely have an average IQ of around 80.

Hood handled the oral arguments for the pardons. He also handled the prosecution for the Heather Spencer murder. He's jumped in on a couple of others.

Be real. When it comes to a November election and Tate is on one said and Hood is on the other, the Black voters are going to vote for the Democrat, even if they hate Hood right now.

12:02 Your point about Camera #2 seems to be a very important one if that film was in the possession of the AG but not produced to RSS. Is that your understanding? If so, is Waide smart enough to focus on this? Seems to me there is a reasonable doubt there until someone produces the film and shows it.

God, when will this bullshit end? Will they next show what's in the man's toilet? Disloyal employees wearing wires, secreted text messages, bugged phones, felons singing for a deal... and this is all they've got? Put half the Mississippi bar and the legislature under this kind of scrutiny and you would need 2 new prisons. Move on, Smith is slightly paranoid and obsessive but proving he's a criminal just because half the assistant AG's are either disgruntled, jealous and also obsessive former ADA"s who want his scalp/job is not worth all this drama (and tax-payer expense) Move On!

Anna Wolfe, if you have read the comments thus far, and I can't imagine that you have not, then I hope you already have the thick skin that you need when you're doing an honest job as a journalist. Clearly there are a good many thin-skinned folks commenting about you who would apparently second-guess the Apostle Paul if he were among us today.

Keep on digging.

Uh, no, Mr. Kingfish. The the African Americans in Hinds County will vote for WHOEVER THEY CHOOSE/ FIND to run against Mr. Hood. It could be an African American candidate or THE POWERS THAT BE may choose to back another white democrat. Either way, Hood is out! And the campaign to oust him has already begun. And he is fully aware.

And, Mr. Kingfish, you should get real. The function of the grand jury is 1st year crim law and procedure in every ABA accredited law school. You don't re-present a case to the grand jury after a mistrial. THE AG OF THE STATE OF MS OUGHT TO KNOW THAT...

12:58, you're the kind of person 12:02 is talking about. You're either racist or just plain ignorant to the facts. The announcement
made by Hood after the mistrial, was that , " THIS CASE WILL HAVE TO BE PRESENTED TO A NEW GRAND JURY ASAP." Uh, the Attorney General for the State is the chief prosecutor for the state and SHOULD KNOW that's not what you do after a mistrial. You simply try the case again.

And the text messages I saw during the trial showed the DA going after a racist sitting Judge who has been shot down and cast down by the Supreme Court more than any other judge in the STATE, with the exception of Judge Green. But, at least she has been on the bench 20 years!!! Weill has just two terms!

And case law has made it clear that Weill can't prevent the DA's Office from dismissing any case. Those laws were referenced in the jury instructions read by Roberts. It doesn't matter if Weill did t like it or suspect something was not right, he can't prevent the State from choosing not to prosecute. And that, my friend is obstruction of justice, and with way more evidence to the support a charge against Weill than what the State had to support a charge against RSS. This page is filled with non lawyers and non licensed law school graduates who don't have a clue.

And Anna Wolfe did a great job. She was fair and honest in her reporting.

Since you referred to me, I never once said he had to resubmit case to grand jury. AG said that.

Frankly, defense should've been happy if Hood tried the case. He is not quick on his feet and is lousy in the courtroom. Just watch the video I shot of the pardon hearing. He grabbed that case from more capable attorneys on his staff who were sitting next to him and proceeded to look pretty bad making an oral argument.

As for Weill, you must've missed the text where Smith said he would make up an indictment. The rules allow weill to ask for a written motion. In fact. Hannan is doing the same thing in a case up in Madison county. Both judges are within their rights to do so.

If Smith had a problem with that then he should've appealed, not try to indict the guy for an assertion of his powers. Most first year law students know about appeals as well since you are an expert on them.

Looks to me like a veteran reporter cultivating a source relationship, which is what the best journalists do. Rookies sit around waiting for press releases to show up or to write down what's said at meetings/trials.

all of this ignores that the jury has told media that the tainted juror was in favor of conviction and hid the fact that she worked for JPD which has been an enemy of RSS for years. the majority of that particular jury didn't believe the state proved its case. now it will be interesting to see if Hood moves against the juror that failed to reveal she worked for JPD...

Kingfish,

The judge cannot ask for a BRIEF before he agrees to dismiss a case. All the motion of nolle prosequi has to say is why the State is choosing not to prosecute. Weill is requiring that he be made aware of the history of the case and the defendant and the the evidence and the witnesses. That is crazy!!!! Insane!!!! That is not for him to know at that stage. If you have never practiced before Weill, you are in no position to comment. No disrespect, but, if you have never practiced, you are not in any position to comment. Judges are not even entitled to discovery! They are not supposed to know every detail of the case before trial, other than what they hear in motions argued pretrial. They are supposed to be impartial.
Weill will tell the prosecutor how he thinks they should/could try their case. And that is highly improper and highly unethical for a judge. Judges are to have NO interest in or influence over criminal proceedings. For a judge to deny a nolle pros simply because he thinks the State can prove their case is highly improper! It may not seem right to lay persons, but it's the law. Prosecutors often nolle pros and outright dismiss cases for many reasons other than an inability to proved their case. Don't believe me, Just ask Anderson and Sanders why they cut McBride loose.
And Kingfish, I recall there being a text that said, "I don't care if there isn't a charge..." but, I also recall there being many more text messages from other attorneys and messages referencing other attorneys that clearly said that there was sufficient evidence for obstruction of justice. In other words, a proper charge was found, unlike the AGO who had to indict and re-indict 100 times before they could figure out something to charge RSS with, and even then, they still jacked the indictment up! Even the judge had to admit he didn't know what RSS was being charged with.

Let us say you are correct. The judge can not require a motion. That is still a matter for an appeals court. The appeals court is quite capable of correcting and remanding Judge Weill or any other judge.

That doesn't give the D.A. the right to decide he is going to use the grand jury to intimidate a judge or say he is going to indict him even if he admits he has no law to support it.

All he had to do was appeal. He knows perfectly well how to do it and I suspect you do as well.

Forget it is Weill. Step back and look at big picture. Do you really want D.A's. hauling judges before grand juries over cases they are disputing or both are handling? Think of the precedent that sets.

KF, a motion is one thing, a BRIEF is another. He cannot require all of that info. He's not supposed to even know all info. And as far as an appeal is concerned, that would not have changed the fact that Weill and his cohorts were obstructing justice. See, appeal wouldn't fix the problem. They're the problem. ...
They clearly threw some charges together in an attempt to stop RSS from handling them. Accordingly.

Night KF, I'm headed to the bed.
It's been real...

KF. Lobbyists and reporters (journalists) are two different categories. Journalists 'claim' to be fair - at least when they work for reputable media outlets. As a previous big-time fan of Anna, how she has handled this case makes me question my previous opinion. And if she has been dining with one side (and letting JW pay the bill) while covering the story - I'm pretty sure I'll quit promoting her as a possible improvement at the CL.

99-15-53 is the primary authority in this case:

A district attorney, or other prosecuting attorney, shall not compromise any cause or enter a nolle prosequi either before or after indictment found, without the consent of the court; and, except as
provided in the last preceding section, it shall not be lawful for any court to dismiss a criminal prosecution at the cost of the defendant, but every cause must be tried unless dismissed by consent of the court.

There are limits to the judge's ability to withhold consent. However, all Judge Weill did was require the D.A. to submit his motion in writing. It would be interesting to see if the Supreme Court would rule whether Weill's requirement amounted to an illegal withholding of consent.

Weill doesn't need a motion - but he is correct in asking RSS to 'put it in writing'. Smith verbally said he wanted to drop the case; Weill said put it in writing with a reason. Smith refused. Weill correct. Get over it.

12:58 - thank you for your post. Saved me a lot of typing. The idiot that is trying to defend RSS seems to overlook an awful lot of points and facts.

As to Conway going back to the Grand Jury - Maybe (I realize that the legal beagle on here trying to defend RSS, or himself - whichever) Conway Twitty is going to add some additional felony charges. Bribery? Turner? How many new illegalities came out in testimony that would convict RSS with an unbiased jury? Additionally, how many new bar complaints came out in the testimony that someone should be filing now? Maybe Judge Roberts reports to the nuetered MS Bar some of the violations of professional conduct arose during this trial? (Making up an indictment without cause should be enough for RSS to lose his license - forget the other dozen.)

Now that we know the fix was in on this trail, how did they overlook a JPD employee? I pretty sure you guys will ignore just like Trump will ignore that Russia hacked the Democrats.

First question: did either side have on the questionnaire a question that asked if he or she works for law enforcement.

I watch a lot of TV and they always ask if the person knows the person charged. If a person worked for law enforcement in Hinds county it would be hard to talk their way past that one. Maybe we should make our future law enforcers watch more TV and less looking in the mirror.

KF,

There is a short questionaire for every juror, that includes the place of employment. I read the article in the CL where Mr. Waide claims that a "state actor" being on the jury may make it where the state cannot retry the case. That is absurd as Mr. Waide could have actually "read" the form where it said that the juror worked at JPD and exercised a preemptory challenge on her, or questioned her further to see if he could get her off for cause.

The CL article tries to imply that the juror was put on the jury on "purpose," as if the state was acting in a shady way. Both sides in every trial attempt to put jurors that they deem favorable to their side on the jury, just as they attempt to strike jurors that they deem unfavorable to their side.

Mr. Waide, how about this voir dire strategy for next time: READ THE FORM!

The juror is just an excuse both sides wanted to be able to use. If either side would have won the other side had an excuse. Nothing was going to be settled in this first trial. Nothing will be settled in the next one.

The interview with a fellow juror broadcast on WAPT at least gave the appearance that the "tainted" juror became upset and uncooperative after discovering that the other jurors were leaning to acquittal. It seems at that point that she revealed her bias and prior knowledge in order to hang up the jury and get a mistrial. Not accusing anybody at this point, but it sounds like a strategy designed to insure a guilty verdict or no verdict. If Smith wants to be a bulldog, this juror should be new meat!

this is based on 35 years experience as both a defense lawyer and a felony prosecutor, and around 100 criminal jury trials.

in Hinds County, jurors are asked to fill in a form that gives their employment, their spouses employment among several other things. it is a short form, about one third of a standard sheet of paper. I've been other jurisdictions that don't use such a form however.

I've never heard a criminal defense attorney fail to ask, in voir dire, if anyone works for law enforcement, has a spouse or other relative that works in law enforcement, are close friends with any member of law enforcement. it is inconceivable that both sides shouldn't have known her affiliation with JPD had she honestly answered on the form and during verbal voir dire.

It is equally inconceivable that the State "planted" her on the jury. her misconduct will not prevent a retrial. Waide is well known for trying to stretch a double into a triple and 98% of the time being tagged out at third.

Regarding Anna Wolfe, she is an excellent reporter who reports facts! It is sad to see those on this site who attempt to eviscerate others because they don't agree with opposing opinions! Sad.....

All true 6:35. But if she is so naive as to be flattered that Jim Waide and RSS would "return her calls and tell her things" and ticked because the AG office wouldn't , then actually have lunch with Waide and RSS DURING THE TRIAL, she is very wet behind the ears. And on top of that, stupid. Sorry. Pretty, which she very much is, doesn't win Pulitzers.

That old woah out woman blogging at 6:35 needs to give it a rest.

All I see in this text exchange is RSS trying to persuade a reporter to listen to his " side" and influence her including the use of flattery and trying to find a common way to bond with her.
Doing her job requires that she gets as much information from sources on the record and off the record as she can.
I don't read anything here to lead me to believe he was successful in influencing her and I would remind everyone that she has editors overseeing her work.
She very smartly responds as little as possible to get the interview.
That attorneys and politicians try to use the media to influence public opinion is hardly surprising. That one side or another is better or worse at providing the media with information or quotes they can use is not surprising.
This doesn't speak to any bias she may or may not have.
This doesn't speak to whether or not she believed anything RSS said to her or fail to check the veracity of what information he gave her.

As someone who always answered my call to jury duty and was always selected as a juror, I can tell you I often knew both attorneys and even knew one of the defendants. I also was very honest about my educational background as many would assume my areas of study would make me biased. I was always asked by the attorneys and the judge if I could and would be fair and base my decision on the evidence and law. I pledged to do just that and did to the best of my ability and listened to other jurors as well. It meant losing a friend in one case as they were in the wrong. That said, on one jury, one of the jurors had not been honest in voir dire. He frankly was a racist and would not rule against a white defendant. That was the only "hung" jury I was on. In the other five trials, jurors tried hard to meet out justice. So, I can't assume a juror in law enforcement is automatically prejudiced against RSS. It's possible but without more information, I can't be sure. I also was impressed with some judges and appalled by others.
It seems to me, that as is typical these days, people are awfully quick to jump to conclusions based on very little other than their own biases, particularly political biases, and anecdotal experiences. The truth and justice are casualties.

8:38, you need to get a real life. Hanging around outside of the court house is not a real life. Frankly, it is your opinion only if a person is a racist. They may have other reasons for coming to a decision that you are just not intelligent enough to understand.