Hood: Prosecuting Langston, et al, on state charges "would be like prosecuting a relative."
Attorney General Jim Hood granted an interview to The Clarion-Ledger Editorial Board today and said that it would create the "appearance of impropriety" for him to prosecute state judicial bribery charges against Joey Langston, Steve Patterson and Tim Balducci after they entered plea bargains in the federal judicial bribery case in Oxford.
"It would be like prosecuting a relative," said Hood, who said that he believed that those who were guilty of judicial bribery charges "should go to jail." But Hood said that he was "too close" to those defendants and to Oxford lawyer Dickie Scruggs and his "family" to prosecute the case. Hood said the local district attorney had "everything he needs" to prosecute the case and that his office "would help any way that we can," but that he would not personally be involved with any such prosecution.
Sid Salter
Clarion Ledger
2/18/8
Posted February 18, 2008 - 3:04 pm
REQUIRED READING. I am speechless, but I am going to rant anyway.
Hood says pursuing state charges for bribery would be like “prosecuting a relative” asserting that he’s just “too close” to them.
He then pawned prosecution on state charges off to a DA. But where do you prosecute? Booneville (Langston country)? Hinds County (Judge DeLaughter country)? Oxford (Scruggs/Lackey country)? The Coast (Rigsby country)?
Where exactly does this happen? I know if it was done in Hinds County, a trial wouldn’t happen for three years, unless you somehow magically got Frank Melton involved. In that case, it’d only take 59 days from beginning to end.