Matthews conducts segment three of our interviews with him entailing his assertion of a cover-up of activities of a prior Sheriff Deputy, Fred Corder, and a then-16-year-old Donaldsonville High School female student regarding inappropriate text messaging and an allegedly-intentionally-botched “sting” operation to pursue prosecuting Corder.
As we indicated we would, we’re expanding the table to now include documents referenced in this video, which are all found on the last row of the updated table. Here’s that updated table:
Date (timeframe) of Document
Nature of Document
On or about February 19, 2018 through on or about March 2, 2018.
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.
Carl Cavalier addresses friends and supporters soon after 19th JDC Judge Don Johnson denied his Writ of Mandamus filed against the Louisiana State Police Commission.
After a 2 1/2-hour court hearing, Carl Cavalier’s Writ of Mandamus seeking to force the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) to conduct a hearing at which he may obtain his job back was denied by 19th JDC Judge Don Johnson. Here’s what Cavalier and other courtroom supporters had to say immediately after the hearing:
August 7, 2023: Carl Cavalier and his supporters provide their commentary soon after his court hearing wherein his Writ of Mandamus against the LSPC was dined by 19th JDC Judge Don Johnson.
Meanwhile, there has been a flurry of filings in the Ronald Greene criminal matter, not the least of which is one by Assistant District Attorney Hugo Holland seeking court approval (which he obtained) to provide LSP Trooper Kory York’s defense attorneys, J. Michael Small and T. Taylor Townsend, with the grand jury testimony of Dr. Jennifer Forsythe. Holland contends that testimony, “contains exculpatory information bearing directly upon the charge against Defendant (York) for Negligent Homicide.”
At this time, let’s provide a table of all of the recent filings in the Greene criminal matter:
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 which, in turn, as evidenced by the Bills of Particulars, were obviously provided to the Grand Jury.
We were unable to ascertain why Union Parish Sheriff Deputy Chris Harpen’s attorney, Eugene Cicardo, filed the transcript entailing his client into the public record; however, since he did, we believe we’ll supply that segment wherein District Attorney John Belton got his shorts all in a wad about Cicardo’s commentary regarding the state’s obligation to specify just what his client did that formed the basis for the indictments. Here are the exchanges, including Judge Rogers’ admonition to Belton that he was, “on the verge,” with Belton responding, “on the verge of what?”
Mr. Cicardo:
Be a man, stand up. Our law says be a — be a prosecutor.
Mr. Belton:
Your Honor, may I address the Court?
The Court:
You may.
Mr. Belton:
Just for the record, I don’t like to be attacked and not be resp — and not give a response. I’m fifty-nine years old. I’m not only a man of age.
The Court:
Mr. Belton. I think –
Mr. Belton:
But — no, no, no, I’m — I — if you don’t mind, Your Honor, can I — can I just for the record? I’m not — I’m not gonna argue, I just want to clear the Not just fif— a man in age, but I’m also a man I believe in terms of I’ve been doing this job for thirty — I’m in my thirty second year, Your And I have never been so insulted in open court.
The Court:
Mr. Belton, that’s not
Mr. Belton:
But Your Honor, I
The Court:
the time or the
Mr. Belton:
But, Your Honor, if you don’t mind, please —
The Court:
I do.
Mr. Belton:
If there’s an allegation on the record, I’d like to clear my name because —
The Court:
I didn’t hear anything, but just that —
Mr. Belton:
He said, Be a man and be a prosecutor. That’s what I am and he said it in a way that was offensive as if we’re not doing our job. That’s the way it came across and I think anybody in this courtroom can conclude the same thing.
The Court:
Mr. Cicardo —
Mr. Belton:
But Mr. Car- — Mr. Cicardo knows what his client is charged with and why. He and I have had private conversations —
The Court:
This is not argument, Mr. -
Mr. Belton:
But, Your Honor -
The Court:
Belton.
Mr. Belton:
it is an argument.
The Court:
Mr. Belton, that’s all.
Mr. Belton:
He opened the door, Your Honor.
The Court:
This is all!
Mr. Belton:
Your Honor, I — Your Honor, please don’t -
The Court:
You’re — you’re on the verge.
Mr. Belton:
On the verge of what, Your Honor?
The Court:
You know what you’re on the verge of.
Mr. Belton:
Right now I’m being — I’m being very professional, Your Honor.
The Court:
And I’ve asked you to stop and you shall.
Mr. Belton:
After I clear my name.
The Court:
There’s no name to clear. He was just making
Mr. Cicardo:
To the extent that what was -
Mr. Belton:
But, Your Honor — Your Honor -
Mr. Cicardo:
— but for the record, to the extent that Mr. Belton was offended or — they were not intended to have any offense toward him personally as a man or anything and I wa – — my comments weren’t made as to raise any offense.
Mr. Belton:
And I accept your apology.
Mr. Cicardo:
And as to that I’ll —
Mr. Belton:
And I accept your apology. Thank you.
The Court:
All right. Thank you.
Wow! All we can say is that, if Cicardo’s words were the most insulting words Belton has ever encountered in a courtroom in all of his 32 years of practicing, then we can only state that he must have been treated with kid glove throughout his entire career!
Well, August 22, 2023 promises to be a huge event entailing the criminal case of the Ronald Greene’s defendants, and we commit to attend and report upon what transpires that day.
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.
Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) attorney Lenore Feeney emphasizing a point at a recent LSPC meeting. Louisiana State Police (LSP) and its counsel, Ben Mayeux and Jennie Pellegrin, took exception to a recent filing by Feeney seeking the confidential settlement agreement pertaining to Carl Cavalier, a fired LSP whistleblower and former trooper, and compelling their appearances at a Court hearing in 19th JDC slated for Monday, August 7, 2023.
Subscribers and casual site viewers may recall our July 19, 2023 feature entailing the LSPC responding to fired LSP Trooper Carl Cavalier’s filing of a Writ of Mandamus against the LSPC seeking to force a hearing at which he may obtain his job back.
The LSPC asserts that Cavalier is engaging in an, “unauthorized use of a summary proceeding,” and it seeks an award of court costs, expert witness fees, and attorney’s fees associated with their defense of Cavalier’s filing.
As part of the LSPC filing, Lenore Feeney, LSPC’s attorney, subpoenaed records from the attorneys representing LSP, Ben Mayeux and Jennie Pellegrin, and also sought their appearances (along with LSP Col. Lamar Davis) for testimony at the hearing date of Monday, August 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in front of 19th JDC Judge Don Johnson.
As Burns references in the video below, the preceding document has been purged of documents which we’ve already supplied to our subscribers and viewers. We did that because LSP (and its counsel) had to file them (different judge in a different legal forum), but we strived to keep everything as simple as possible. Nevertheless, anyone is welcome to view LSP’s (and its attorneys) ENTIRE filings (to include Exhibits of historical Federal filings) by clicking on this link.
Now on to today’s video:
August 6, 2023: Burns provides overview of LSP’s filing leading up to the August 7, 2023 10:00 a.m. hearing before 19th JDC Judge Donald Johnson.
Here is the highlighted portion of the filing which Burns drew attention to entailing the requirements for subpoenaing testimony of a statewide elected official (e.g.. the Attorney General) or someone deemed a surrogate thereof:
LSA-R.S. 13:3667
Col. Davis was appointed by the Governor as the Department Head and Superintendent of the Louisiana State Police. His counsel, Pellegrin and Mayeaux, are appointed Special Assistants Attorney General and appear as surrogates for Attorney General Jeff Landry, a statewide elected official. Consequently, the Commission is required to comply with LSA-R.S. 13:3667(A)(l) before issuing a subpoena to compel Respondents’ attendance at trial. This statute provides:
“A party litigant in a civil case or in a criminal misdemeanor case seeking to compel the attendance of a statewide elected official, or the head of any department of the state of Louisiana appointed to the position by the governor, as a witness in a suit that arises out of, or in connection with, the person’s exercise of his duties as an official of the state, shall file a written motion with the proper court requesting a hearing on the matter. The motion shall set forth the facts sought to be proved by the person’s testimony, the relevance of those facts to the case, and the basis for the mover’s belief that such person has knowledge of those facts.”
The Commission failed to move for the requisite pre-subpoena hearing. Therefore, the subpoenas compelling production of records and attendance at the August 7, 2023 trial are unlawful and should be quashed.
As Burns indicated on the video, Sound Off Louisiana will attend tomorrow’s hearing and will strive to provide video coverage outside of 19th JDC entailing just what all transpired at the hearing.
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.