02 February 2009
bridgett brown's latest petition offers a glimpse into how organized crime gangs operate in central louisiana
UPDATE: unethical alexandria, la. attorney greg aymond, in full damage control mode, attacked this post from his blog. however, the discerning reader should note, that he did not deny what we wrote either. - at least in the version that we saw.
Sometime in 2005, at the dedication of the police memorial for fallen Police Officers, Chris Roy Sr. approached Kelvin Sanders and stated that the City did not need to hire their own lawyers to represent it in the CLECO controversy that "they" could represent the City and Sanders responded that would be inappropriate "that a first year law student could see through the conflict."what needs to be done here is a complete investigation of this case by some outside, non-local and non-louisiana state, agency.
The City then hired Intervenor [bridgett brown] along with Attorney John Sharp, Attorney Craig Davidson and Phillip Hunter in a contingency contract that stated that Intervenor would receive ten (10%) percent; John Sharp ten (10%) percent; Craig Davidson ten (10 %) percent; and Phillip Hunter five (5%) percent, of any over billings recovered.
In the spring and summer of 2006 on three different occasions [jacques] Roy and Chris Roy Sr. who represented [samuel] Sansing contacted Intervenor and tried to pressure her into withdrawing from the case so that EMS [EMS is owned by David Pugh and employed Samuel Sansing who are former employees of CLECO] could increase its percentage of fees and on at least one occasion during the same period Roy and Chris Roy Sr. personally visited Intervenor to pressure her to give up her contract so EMS could increase the amount of its fees in its new contract, and Intervenor refused.
Sometime in 2006 Attorney Michael Johnson who represented David Pugh came to see Intervenor and tried to pressure her into withdrawing from the case so that EMS could increase the amount of its fees in its new contract, and Intervenor refused.
wst... note: this paragraph resonates with us -- we made some posts critical of the city of alexandria renewing its channel 4 and city website management agreement with kja communications group, which is owned by david pugh.
mr. pugh contacted his attorney, michael johnson, who in turn contacted his good friend, unethical alexandria, la. attorney greg aymond, who in turn contacted us, attempting to pressure and intimidate us into retracting our post(s) and then to unequivocally support the kja contract renewal.
we told mr. aymond to go jump in the lake; that we are not interested in being a part of, or working with, the criminal network.
as a result, mr. aymond began to attack us from his blog and stepped up his attacks when it was revealed exclusively from this blog that alexandria, la. mayor jacques roy's brother, state representative chris roy, jr., awarded a tulane legislative scholarship to the daughter of samuel sansing.
it's unknown what, if any, consideration mr. aymond received then or has or is receiving in his attempts to subvert and propagandize the local blogosphere.
Intervenor believes that sometimes in the spring and summer of 2006 Roy, Chris Roy Sr., and Michael Johnson went to Phillip Hunter and pressured him to withdraw from the case in which he did,
As a result of Phillip Hunters withdrawal from the case, the City approved the new EMS contract at twenty (20%) rather than the original fifteen (15%) percent it was scheduled to receive.
Sometimes in October 2006, while Jacques Roy was in involved in a special election for Mayor of Alexandria, Roy, Pugh, Sansing, Attorney Aaron Siebeneicher, Intervenor, John Sharp, and City Attorney Kelvin Sanders, Craig Davidson and David Pugh met to discuss how much money EMS believed that CLECO owed the city and at that meeting Kelvin Sanders again expressed to Roy that if he won the mayor’s race, he would have a conflict and should not participate in the CLECO case.
Sometime in December of 2006 [mayor roy was sworn into office on 04 december 2006] Roy in a meeting in which Sanders was present, indicated that he was setting Notice of Deposition of Board members of CLECO in the CLECO vs. Sam Sansing, et al and Sanders again warned Roy that he should not be participating in either the City Of Alexandria vs. CLECO and CLECO vs. Sam Sansing, et al.
At all times after his election Roy continually acted as the City of Alexandria lead attorney in City of Alexandria vs. CLECO directing all discussions and legal tactics.
Sometime in early March of 2007 Intervenor received a phone call from Tommy Antoon who stated he was calling on behalf to the Mayor and told Intervenor that if she would not fight her removal from the case and “send her resume”, she would receive city legal work. Intervenor declined the offer.
wst... note: this might have been one of the phone calls ms. brown was referring to in her 13 march 2007, address to the city council, when she said "i've gotten calls from several people in the last two weeks, explaining to me that 'dont worry you'll get an hourly wage and you'll get a couple of hundred dollars for the work that you've done.'"
Sometime in March of 2007, Intervenor, City Attorney Charles Johnson, Attorney Kelvin Sanders, Malcolm Larvardain and Attorney Edward Larvadain, Jr., met for lunch and at that meeting, Johnson informed Intervenor that Roy was acting as the City Attorney in this case and that even he was not allowed to “touch it” and that no African-American lawyers would make any money out of this case and that Intervenor would not receive her contingency fee because it should have gone to EMS.
wst... note: this is perhaps the most fascinating paragraph in ms. brown's amended petition. a preceding paragraph --paragraph 36, (see also paragraph 39) of the petition states that ms. brown was terminated by the city attorney, mr. johnson, by letter she received on 28 february 2007.
now here it is less than a month later and she is having lunch with him? how many people have lunch with someone who just terminated their employment, especially under such contentious circumstances?
also is ms. brown suggesting that mr. johnson while lamenting that "no african-american lawyers would make any money" out of the case was leaking information to her and others? is ms. brown suggesting that city attorney johnson was violating the protective order that issued on 19 january 2006?
additionally, in that 13 march 2007, city council meeting, ms. brown addressed the council and made her argument that she was still in the cleco case. the city attorney, mr. johnson, in his response to ms. brown's statement said that "very little of it was true factually, very little of it was accurate legally." ms. brown also played "the race card" and was called on it by city attorney, johnson. looking back at the meeting now, we wonder if what we were really witnessing was a dog and pony show.
During the mediation Council members had to separate Roy and John Sharp who were arguing, Sharp rebuked Roy for participating in the mediation as he had a conflict, however, Roy ignored Sharp’s recommendation and according to the Alexandria Town Talk:
wst... note: this paragraph doesnt make any sense because the preceding paragraph, paragraph 42, says in part that, "no council member were allowed to participate in the mediation." the mediation was held on 26 and 27 march 2007 and around six months later, on 06 september 2007, the city council issued a cryptic statement at mayor roy directing him to cease and desist all involvement in the cleco case.
at this point, how can any alexandrian, after witnessing all these back-and-forth lawsuits, allegations, bizarre behavior and so forth, really believe that the cleco case has been handled in an honest and forthright manner by all party's involved without all the party's being first subjected to some sort of independent investigation verification?
Posted by wst... at 07:00