Legal News

The hearing lasted most of the day, with Judge Biggers making only one significant ruling: that he wouldn’t dismiss the indictment. The hearing will pick up again today.

Despite the lack of rulings, the day produced some fireworks. Confessed briber-turned-government-witness Tim Balducci took the witness stand, squaring off against Scruggs’s lawyer, superstar San Franciscan John Keker. Click here for a very good read from the Northeast Mississippi Journal’s Patsy Brumfield (gavel bang: Rossmiller). An in-the-courtroom gem from Brumfield:

Through it all, Dickie Scruggs – who looks like he hasn’t eaten a square meal since their Nov. 27, 2007 indictment – maintained this surreal expression on his face, which looked like he was wearing makeup. It was this fixed smile and got kind of creepy after two or three hours.

But frankly, his life is on the line. He faces something like 75 years in prison, which would just about do it for a 61-year-old man. His beloved son’s prospects and Backstrom’s are the same at this stage.

The investigation is looking into whether several associates of Scruggs induced Delaughter to rule in favor of Scruggs in a fee dispute by promising, in return, that Lott would recommend Judge Delaughter for a seat on the federal bench. At the hearing in Oxford yesterday, Balducci testified that Scruggs tried to use the Senator to influence Delaughter.

Indeed, in early 2006, Mr. Lott called the judge and discussed his interest in the federal bench, those people say. Seven months later, in August 2006, Judge Delaughter delivered a ruling widely considered favorable to Mr. Scruggs.

Aides to Lott, who now works as a lobbyist, said in November that the Republican senator’s resignation had nothing to do with the Scruggs indictment.