Month: August 2023

Louisiana Attorney General (and candidate for Governor) Jeff Landry.

Today, Monday, August 28, 2023, we are continuing our series on C. J. Matthews’ quest to become the next Sheriff of Ascension Parish in the October 14, 2023 election.

As folk are aware, we published this “sidebar” on Thursday, August 24, 2023 as a result of much ado being made (at least by blogger Wade Petite) about Matthews’ off-the-cuff comment that incumbent Sheriff Bobby Webre is not a high school graduate.  As will be very briefly stated in the video to follow momentarily, we firmly believe that Webre indeed is not a high school graduate (as irrelevant as that is), and our contention is based on the following three facts:

1.  The Webre campaign has declined to respond to our open invitation to email a photo of the high school graduation certificate.

2.  Of the tens of thousands of hits our Matthews features have obtained, surely one or more of them is from the East Ascension High School Class of 1982 and, if so, it would seem we would obtain correspondence letting us know that Webre did graduate along with those sending us the correspondence.  We have received no such correspondence.

3.  Petite has made no effort whatsoever to substantiate his claim that Webre did graduate as he published that he did.

Now, time to get eyes back focused on the real issue at hand and, for that, here’s Episode five (5) of our series with C. J. Matthews and what he alleges (and to which we wholeheartedly concur) is a complete cover-up of the salacious texting and [(Matthews-asserted) intentionally] botched  sting operation at which Corder actively tried to meet with the juvenile victim ostensibly to subsequently perform oral sex on him, which she asserted he “continuously” asked of her:

August 28, 2023:  Matthews outlines the contents of this February 12, 2019 Attorney General Investigation Memo and also this November 4, 2019 Attorney General “Closeout Memo.”

Entailing the two documents linked above, we also want to add them to our cumulative table of all Corder documents.  Here’s the updated table:

Now, entailing Matthews’ contention that AG Jeff Landry’s Office only reopened the investigation because Advocate reporter David Mitchell was calling the AG’s Office about the matter prior to Mitchell publishing this January 20, 2019 feature about the whole matter, Burns indicated that he’d had a very similar experience wherein Attorney General Jeff Landry went to great lengths to announce his office was opening an investigation entailing this matter, which attracted the strong attention of KLFY (Channel 10 in Lafayette – see their video production on the preceding link).

About 90 days later, Burns received a call from a reliable and very well-trusted source within Landry’s Office who said, “Mr. Burns, I feel someone owes it to you to let you know that we never began any investigation at all of that matter.”  Burns expressed appreciation to his source and told the source that, “You’re not telling me anything I didn’t strongly suspect to be the case, and I merely assumed Landry closed the investigation 10 minutes after the KLFY camera crew left.”

Now, let’s provide some of the material from the AG Investigation Memo at this time:

Corder responded by asking if she was into older men….. Corder told her he had a wife but she wasn’t doing the things he wanted done sexually. Corder then asked <redacted> if she would perform oral sex on him.

<redacted> advised over the next few days Corder would text her and continuously asked for oral sex…

Corder texted her and asked for a picture of her buttocks or vagina. <redacted> told Corder that she didn’t want to do that and he responded with if you send me a picture of yours, I will send one of myself.

<redacted> stated that she sent Corder a picture of her breast and waited for Corder to respond with a picture. When he didn’t <redacted> asked Corder why did he respond (sic) with the picture of his penis like she asked and Corder responded by stating that he’s a police officer and he would get into trouble.

<redacted> advised she knew something was strange because she has had many contacts with police officers and no police officer has ever asked her for her number much less sexual activity.  <redacted> advised after a few days of chatting with Corder she decided to stop the conversations between them because she did not want the kind of relationship that Corder wanted with Corder.

As Burns indicated on the above video near its end, it’s up to Ascension Parish voters, but the facts have been laid pretty bare by Matthews entailing State Representative candidate (and former Ascension Parish Sheriff) Jeff Wiley.

The same can be said for incumbent Ascension Parish Sheriff Bobby Webre, who is running for re-election, and last but not least about Gubernatorial candidate (and current AG) Jeff Landry.

While we hate to admit this, barring some huge unforeseen development, Landry will prevail in his quest for Governor, and that will be his third straight statewide election in which he prevails without having to engage in the first debate.  Yes, we are predicting that he will decline to participate in this Statewide debate of next Thursday, September 7, 2023.

In all fairness, we should note that, in his 2015 campaign for AG, Landry was more than willing to debate incumbent James D. “Buddy” Caldwell; however, Caldwell, believing Landry could not beat him in the race for AG, told the Landry camp there would be no debate.  In the 2019 race for AG, Landry had no meaningful competition, so no debate took place in that race either.

We further predict that Landry will decline any future debate invitations (to include a debate in a Landry-Wilson runoff — if there even is a runoff with the latest poll showing Landry with a staggering 20 percent of the black vote) because he’s been the “ordained candidate” for Governor by the Louisiana GOP “big wigs” for a long time.  Further, his top advisor (whom Burns knows well) is extremely shrewd.  Actually, Burns would much prefer the advisor as Governor and, one day, that may be a distinct possibility in our minds.  Knowing he will hold a key position in the near-certain upcoming Landry administration is at least some measure of comfort and solace in what otherwise is an upcoming development (a Landry landslide)  that certainly gives us pause for concern.

He himself (the advisor) is a champion debater, but he knows full well that  Landry is anything but, and we have no doubt he’s advised Landry that, unless and until another candidate appears to be nipping at Landry’s heels (which now appears about as likely as us purchasing a winning Powerball ticket in Wednesday’s drawing), Landry won’t be participating in any debates.

While that’s a sad development, we have to admit that it’s a near-sure-fire way for Landry to become Louisiana’s next Governor and there’s nothing but downside for him in appearing on any debate stage.

As stated in the above video, hang tight for Episode six (6) of the Matthews series.  It will focus on our good friends over at Louisiana State Police and how they reacted to Matthews’ extensive findings and presentations to them!  Normally, it would be a huge feature, but when anyone considers the abject disastrous  train wreck that is LSP, as we said on the video above, it’s about par for the course at LSP!

If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply click on ANY post (this one is relatively short and requires less scrolling) and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or look at the upper right-hand column (desktops).  Simply supply your email address within the subscribe box.  You’ll then receive an automated email from Word Press, and all you have to do is click on the blue “confirm follow” bar contained within that email, and you’ll begin receiving great posts such as the preceding one above.  Note:  In order to view videos associated with the post, you MUST still click on the headline lettering as Word Press does not facilitate embedded videos in its email distribution.

Ascension Parish Sheriff candidate C. J. Matthews.

On today, Thursday, August 24, 2023, it was our intent to film segment five (5) of the C. J. Matthews series entailing the allegedly-illegal salacious texting between former Ascension Parish Sheriff Deputy Fred Corder and a 16-year-old Donaldsonville High School student.

Matthews is a candidate for Sheriff of Ascension Parish in the October 14, 2023 election, and he has provided us with overwhelming evidence that former Sheriff Jeff Wiley, who is running in that same election for State Representative, along with incumbent Sheriff Bobby Webre, who is running for re-election, actively participated in a cover-up of any investigation of Corder; furthermore, he alleges that a sting operation to catch Corder attempting to actually meet with the 16-year-old was intentionally botched in order to enable Corder to avoid prosecution.

Instead, Matthews felt compelled to respond to this feature published yesterday (Wednesday, August 23, 2023) by Pelican Point blogger Wade Petite.  Matthews contends the feature is nothing short of a hit piece and fires nothing but blanks because Webre and Petite want to create a distraction from the massive number of hits this blog has obtained entailing the Corder matter.  Let’s see what Matthews had to say on the matter:

Matthews addresses Petite’s “dual hit-piece feature” which Matthews asserts is a means to “bury heads in sand” on the Corder matter.

As is obvious from the video above, Sound Off Louisiana founder Robert Burns, after first indicating that he can’t believe we’re seriously talking about a squabble over whether Bobby Webre graduated high school or not, also made it clear he’s providing the “proof in advertising” that he asserts entailing his own educational background.  Burns also made it clear that, were he a voter in Ascension Parish (he is a registered voter in East Baton Rouge Parish), he could care less whether Bobby Webre has a high school diploma or not but would be extremely concerned about the damning documents Matthews has provided entailing both Webre and Wiley.

Though Burns has lost his high school diploma, he did provide his LSU diploma as well as the LSU Medal he received in December of 1985.  Burns also indicated he has a policy of not criticizing other bloggers but goes to great lengths to focus on the fact that Sound Off Louisiana accepts no advertising, accepts no donations, and is, “a money-losing operation.”  Since Matthews chose to directly attack Petite’s credibility, we did publish his attack, but we wanted to launch a pre-emptive strike against any ensuing attack which Petite or Webre may opt to make entailing Burns’ credibility or that of this blog.

Now, as Matthews indicated that he would, here is a photo of his own diploma from East Ascension High School, Class of 1987:

C. J. Matthews’ East Ascension Parish High School Diploma.

As indicated in the video above, it’s our contention that, irrespective of whether Webre graduated high school or not, he should know the difference between a resignation letter, which should be a voluntary letter drafted by the employee, and this de facto termination letter which Webre himself wrote yet chose to label a “resignation letter” from Matthews.  In fact, if Webre did graduate high school, it only makes his labeling of the preceding letter all the more baffling!  We’ll also point out the fact that the “resignation letter,” which is unquestionably a de facto termination letter, was not even drafted on Ascension Parish Sheriff letterhead!

At any rate, as indicated on the video above, we stand ready to receive a photo (or other pertinent proof) of Webre’s high school graduation diploma, and we’ve told the Webre camp to email such documented proof, and we will be more than happy to publish it and to also have Matthews respond to its production.  That proof may be emailed to [email protected].

Now, here’s the final aspect of today’s post, which are the words which Matthews said which prompted the second component of what Matthews labels as a “dual hit piece” by Petite:

Matthews’  Facebook post, which prompted this terse “Letter to the Editor” written about Matthews from former colleague Lt. Col. Mike Toney and published in the Pelican Post on Wednesday, August 23, 2023.

As we indicated, this feature constituted basically an, “interruption in our regularly-schedule programming,” which will be segment five (5) of the Corder scandal.  That feature will now be published sometime next week.  In the meantime, here are links for Segments 1 – 4 for the benefit of new subscribers and those who may have missed what has smashed all of Sound Off Louisiana click records:

Segment One:  Ascension Parish Sheriff candidate C. J. Matthews attacks former boss (incumbent Sheriff Bobby Webre) in alleging Malfeasance in Office, cover-up of sexting and receiving pornographic images by former Deputy Fred Corder.

Segment Two:  Ascension Parish Sheriff candidate C. J. Matthews openly asks, “What if this was your daughter?” entailing former Deputy Corder’s texts and whether parents would be content for it to be, “just swept under the rug.”

Segment Three:  Ascension Parish Sheriff candidate C. J. Matthews says former Sheriff Jeff Wiley “extorted” him to “shut my mouth” about salacious texts between Deputy Corder and a 16-year-old Donaldsonville High School female student.

Segment Four:  Ascension Parish Sheriff Webre tells Capt. Matthews he’s resigning, then rehires him after attorneys make clear litigation is forthcoming, then tells him 90 days later that Matthews can retire, “only if I’ll allow it.”

If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply click on ANY post (this one is relatively short and requires less scrolling) and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or look at the upper right-hand column (desktops).  Simply supply your email address within the subscribe box.  You’ll then receive an automated email from Word Press, and all you have to do is click on the blue “confirm follow” bar contained within that email, and you’ll begin receiving great posts such as the preceding one above.  Note:  In order to view videos associated with the post, you MUST still click on the headline lettering as Word Press does not facilitate embedded videos in its email distribution.

Prominent Civil Rights attorney Ben Crump, appearing in the immediate aftermath of a Court Hearing in Third JDC in Union Parish on the LSP in-custody death of Ronald Greene on May 10, 2019, fields a question from Sound Off Louisiana founder Robert Burns.

Today (Tuesday, August 22, 2023) was a critical day for the criminal case of those charged in the in-custody death of Ronald Greene.  Let’s quickly summarize the results of today’s arguments before Third JDC Judge Thomas Rogers:

Defendant Union Parish Sheriff Deputy Chris Harpin [facing two (2) counts of Malfeasance):

 Harpin filed a Motion to Quash.  Judge Rogers set a September 25, 2023 deadline for Hugo Holland, Assistant District Attorney, to file an Opposition Memorandum.

Harpin also filed for the Production of a Grand Jury transcript.  Judge Rogers issued an Order calling for both a Status Conference and a Contradictory Hearing, both of which will be heard in open court on October 12, 2023 at 2:30 p.m.

Defendant LSP Lt. John Clary [facing one (1) count of Malfeasance for which an appeal of Judge Rogers’ denial of a Motion to Quash is pending before the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals]:

Judge Rogers granted Clary’s Motion to Sever and his Motion to Discovery for the Grand Jury Transcript (the State agreed to provide portions under seal).  As with Harpin, there will be a Scheduling Conference on October 12, 2023 at 2:30 p.m.

Defendant  LSP Trooper Kory York [facing nine (9) counts of Malfeasance and one (1) count of negligent homicide.]

Let us begin by providing a brief recap of the nature of Defendant York’s Motion for a Kastigar Hearing.  It is taken from this feature.

We have already provided extensive detail on why York has requested a Kastigar hearing, and anyone is welcome to read York’s attorneys’ contentions here, but the bottom line is that they indicate that York’s Fifth Amendment Right against Self-Incrimination (made applicable to State matters via the Fourteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution) have been violated through inclusion of quotes made by York from an Internal Affairs report dated October 20, 2020 which were incorporated into the Stoughton report.

York’s defense attorney, J. Michael Small, repeatedly emphasized that the State should “never” have provided that Internal Affairs report to Seth Stoughton, a use-of-force expert who is also a PhD from South Carolina whose credentials include teaching classes at Yale and Harvard.  Small also emphasized that the State has admitted that it was at fault in having done so.

Small argued that the damning material York uttered in that Internal Affairs report which was incorporated into Stoughton’s report included him having stated upon his immediate arrival at the scene:  “Code four, everything under control.”   He also cited York having stated that he felt he was, “never in danger” during the Greene encounter.

Small stressed that the Stoughton report was “infected” by material Stoughton received from the Internal Affairs report.  Beyond York’s statement that he never felt he was in danger during the Greene arrest, Small pointed out that, “Footnote 359 of the report that states that none of the troopers ever felt threatened or were ever in danger,” during the Greene arrest.

Small emphasized that the Internal Affairs report, “should have stayed at LSP,” and he indicated that it was “unclear” how the State even got the report.  He indicated there had been “speculation” that it was all part of the material which the Feds provided to Union Parish DA John Belton when they transferred the whole matter over to Belton.

Assistant DA Hugo Holland, who acknowledged that the State bears the burden of proof that York’s position was unaltered by this blunder (our word, not Holland’s) by the State, also apologized that he could only offer an affidavit from Stoughton (which was not even notarized) but that Stoughton had been, “out of the country” and so the seven-statement affidavit, which was entered into the record, was all he could provide.

Small attacked the affidavit as, “not having an eighth point which would have revealed whether Stoughton listened to the interview  between Trooper York and Sergeant Mike Talley,” who conducted the interview with York and ultimately authored the Internal Affairs report.  Small stated that he personally believes that Stoughton did listen to an audio of the interview.

Holland indicated that, if that was a major sticking point, he (Holland) had no objection to holding the record open and obtaining another affidavit from Stoughton specifically stating whether he did or did not listen to the interview between Talley and York.

Judge Rogers asked if that was agreeable to Small, and he responded that it was fine, but he also stressed that, whatever may come out of that additional affidavit, his client’s position was “strong,” and that the added affidavit would not be “dispositive,” and that his client was entitled to have the indictment counts against him quashed as a result of the, “provisions of Garrity” combined with the, “strength of the arguments of case law I’ve presented to this Court.”

Holland attempted to argue that there was no evidence that the Grand Jury was ever exposed to the statements made by York and, further, that Stoughton placed in his affidavit that he would have come to the same conclusions with or without Talley’s internal affairs report.

Judge Rogers indicated that, in order to not grant a Motion to Quash the indictment counts, he would need to arrive at the conclusion that York was in the same identical position he would have been had Stoughton not been provided with Talley’s Internal Affairs report, and he asked Holland to state to him what arguments he could make to result in him coming to that conclusion.   Holland responded by stressing the seven itemized points contained in Stoughton’s affidavit.

In what brought the most vocal response of approval from the courtroom packed with Ronald Greene supporters, Judge Rogers asked of Small (after indicating he’d watched the videos), whether a “use-of-force” expert’s testimony was even necessary or whether, “common sense” may apply to dictate that sufficient probable cause was present to pursue the charges and obtain the indictments.

It was at that point that Small opted to use some major firepower, and he stated that the State had let the “cat out of the bag,” and emphasized that there was no way to place that cat back in the bag.  Small, without referencing Belton directly, clearly emphasized what a colossal blunder had transpired in the matter regarding Stoughton having been provided with a copy of Talley’s report.

Small even went so far as to rhetorically ask, “Was it intentional?”   Belton, notwithstanding his prior umbrage taken to Harpin defense attorney Eugene Cicardo at a prior court hearing wherein Cicardo indicated that Belton just needed to, “be a man” and provide the particulars on the nature of the specific acts that formed the predicates for Harpin’s indictment counts, curiously had no reaction at all to what, to us at least, would seem a far more inflammatory inquiry from Small.

We sincerely hope that our justice system has not sunk to such a low level, but we’ll also confide that some key people whose opinions we value have indicated their beliefs that it was intentional.  One such individual stated, “Remember who State Police went running to the second those videos were released?  It’s my belief that Belton reassured them that, he may have to take an action, but he would find a way for the troopers to have easy outs.”  We asked him why he felt that way, and he responded with, “because nobody can be that stupid!”

Again, we hope it was mere sloppiness on Belton’s part rather than such a low point of our criminal justice system and, despite our criticisms of Belton, we are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that it was not intentional and, in sharp contrast to the “be a man” episode, we believe it behooved him to make a public statement that it was not intentional on his part!

At any rate, Small emphasized that the report was “off limits,” and that Belton’s (though again not mentioning him by name) act of providing it to Stoughton caused Stoughton’s opinion to be “tainted,” and that the Court should, “conform to Garrity and us pack up.”

Judge Rogers wrapped everything up by indicating to Holland that what Small emphasized certainly constituted, “a problem.”   He granted a 10-day period for the additional affidavit to be entered into the record.

He also indicated that he’d previously made known that he leaves for vacation on August 31, 2023 and that he would not issue a ruling on the Kastigar Motion until after he returns from vacation (he did not specify when that would be) and he’d had time to thoroughly review the whole matter and all of the arguments made along with providing consideration to the added affidavit from Stoughton.

Thus, it would appear to us (speculation of course) that a ruling may not be forthcoming until late September to possibly even early October.

Whenever his ruling is made, however, we commit to alert our subscribes and casual site visitors of what that ruling is.

Let us wrap this feature up by providing the entirety of a press conference hosted by newly-installed national civil rights attorney Ben Crump, which was held immediately after the court hearing.  Here’s that video:

National Civil Rights Attorney Ben Crump hosts press conference immediately after court in Third JDC in Union Parish on Tuesday, August 22, 2023 entailing the arrest and in-custody death of Ronald Greene on May 10, 2019.

Since Crump emphasizes the need to, “watch the video,” long-time subscribers will recall that we published this feature of a consolidated video of the Greene arrest, and we will present that consolidated video once again:

Consolidated video of the chase, apprehension, and in-custody death of Ronald Greene on May 10, 2019.

If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply click on ANY post (this one is relatively short and requires less scrolling) and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or look at the upper right-hand column (desktops).  Simply supply your email address within the subscribe box.  You’ll then receive an automated email from Word Press, and all you have to do is click on the blue “confirm follow” bar contained within that email, and you’ll begin receiving great posts such as the preceding one above.  Note:  In order to view videos associated with the post, you MUST still click on the headline lettering as Word Press does not facilitate embedded videos in its email distribution.