Sound Off Louisiana founder Robert Burns provides breakdown of May 23, 2022 court hearing before 19th JDC Judge Donald Johnson in matter of Burns v. LSP Col. Lamar Davis in his capacity as Custodian of LSP Records.
In today’s Sound Off Louisiana feature, founder Robert Burns updates subscribers and visitors on the court hearing conducted in Judge Donald Johnson’s courtroom on Monday, May 23, 2022 entailing Robert Burns v. Lamar Davis (as Custodian of Records of LSP):
Recap of May 23, 2022 court hearing in Burns v. Davis.
As stated in the video, on a scale of 1 – 10, Burns viewed the results of today’s hearing as a “10.” The next scheduled court hearing will be on Monday, June 20, 2022, and we’ll update our subscribers and site visitors after that court hearing, and we’ll provide links to filings in the case prior to the hearing.
If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply go to our home page and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or to the top of the right-hand column (desktops). 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.
Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) Member Sabrina Richardson, not long after she joined the Commission, openly challenges LSP Col. Lamar Davis entailing restoring leave for LSP Troopers for whom investigations take some time to transpire.
For the second time in his administration, Gov. Edwards is facing intense pressure to remove a member of the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC). It appears he intends to handle this latest pressure very differently than the way he handled the pressure previously, which transpired not all that long after he became Governor of Louisiana.
In the first case, Calvin Braxton, pressure mounted only six (6) months into his first term in office as Louisiana State Trooper’s Association (LSTA) attorney Floyd Falcon sent Gov. Edwards this letter dated July 11, 2016 calling upon Edwards to initiate proceedings to remove Braxton as an LSPC Commissioner.
Unlike most all appointments to Louisiana state boards and commissions, the LSPC is one in which appointees don’t serve at the pleasure of the Governor. Accordingly, the Governor has no authority to remove the individual outright. Instead, the Governor must convene a hearing, preside over that hearing, and it is the Governor who then makes the decision entailing whether the individual should remain on the LSPC or not.
Braxton and then-LSPC Executive Director Cathy Derbonne were holding the line against both the LSTA and LSPC members being permitted to make political campaign contributions. Though the efforts were led by Derbonne (who was acting on complaints filed by four retired troopers who were summarily expelled from the LSTA for filing the complaints), Braxton was very vocal in his support of her efforts.
On November 9, 2016, less than four months after Falcon sent the above letter, the Louisiana State Board of Ethics, acting on a filing by Derbonne with that agency, entered into this stipulation agreement wherein the LSTA and its then-Executive Director, David Young, agreed to pay a $5,000 fine for improper campaign contributions by the LSTA. That incident sent the LSTA into overdrive to ensure that Derbonne and Braxton were both flushed.
The LSTA succeeded in getting Derbonne out the door when, on January 7, 2017, the LSPC went into a closed-door executive session and strong armed a hurriedly slapped-together resignation letter from Derbonne.
Braxton nevertheless continued to be a thorn in the LSTA’s side. Accordingly, recently-retired LSP Lt. Col. Jay Oliphant, who had already placed the wheels in motion for Braxton’s ouster by authoring this June 2, 2016 incident report (181 days after the incident) in which then-Captain Oliphant essentially says Braxton is an egotistical, arrogant, power-hungry individual willing to throw his weight around to obtain special treatment for his family (namely his daughter entailing a DWI, which was the original “incident”), became arguably the most intriguing individual at LSP.
Obviously frustrated that Gov. Edwards was making no effort to initiate proceedings to remove Braxton, on June 17, 2017, the LSTA sent Gov. Edwards this follow-up letter openly asking if Gov. Edwards was going to set Braxton’s removal in motion by scheduling a public hearing to get Braxton removed.
When Edwards remained silent on the matter (at least to the LSTA), the LSTA went nuclear by contacting Fox8 (New Orleans) investigative reporter Lee Zurik, who, in turn, on July 17, 2017, commenced to blindside Braxton just before the July LSPC meeting with an interview request. The result was this bombshell investigative report wherein Zurik even relied upon Sound Off Louisiana video footage for commentary Braxton made to the LSPC after Zurik’s departure.
Importantly, Braxton has contended from the outset that, while he acknowledges that his daughter was arrested for DWI on December 4, 2015, he adamantly denies all of the other allegations Oliphant placed in that incident report which LSTA officials supplied to Zurik. Evidence certainly exists that Gov. Edwards may have been well aware that the incident report may have been largely fabricated because, according to Braxton’s June 24, 2019 deposition, he states that Gov. Edwards told him (see page 168 of the just-linked deposition) that he (Edwards):
Wasn’t even doing anything with this, that it’s over with.
Braxton’s quote of Gov. Edwards seems to justify and explain an important quote he made at the 6:43 mark of Zurik’s video above (which Zurik included as part of the Sound Off Louisiana footage). Let’s emphasize the quote that Braxton made at this point because we think it is very important, and nobody had a clue what Braxton meant way back then (the material in brackets [ ] is our take on the matter):
The people [LSTA] did what they did [fabricate a large portion of an incident report 181 days after-the-fact]. The Governor did what he did [intentionally didn’t act on the fabricated report]. I’m still here.
The LSTA’s nuclear attack with Zurik posed a huge problem for Edwards. He was being lambasted and lampooned in the media (and especially on conservative radio talk shows) about having kept such a dubious character as the incident report portrayed on the LSPC for as long as he had. Nevertheless, Braxton was making it crystal clear that he would not be resigning from the LSPC.
Enter State Sen. (then State Representative) Katrina Jackson. Edwards apparently dropped a dime on Jackson, who was serving as Braxton’s attorney, and sought help on the huge public relations nightmare with which Edwards found himself confronted. Again, according to Braxton’s sworn deposition (see page 192), Braxton claims that then-Rep. Jackson, without any authorization from him, authored this July 21, 2017 press release wherein it’s claimed that Braxton resigned from the LSPC. His deposition makes it clear that he “never resigned” from the LSPC and in no way granted Jackson authority to indicate that he did resign, much less draft a press release to that effect.
So, that’s how Edwards allegedly managed to give Calvin Braxton the boot without having to go through the formal hearing process as required by Louisiana’s Constitution entailing removal of LSPC members.
Judging by this May 16, 2022 Fox8 feature wherein Zurik resurfaces, it appears Edwards plans to “toe the line” this time around regarding any potential removal of LSPC Member Sabrina Richardson who, according to the Zurik feature, may have engaged in “criminal acts” entailing payroll at the New Orleans Police Department. In sharp contrast to Braxton, the calls for Richardson’s head are coming from crime and corruption watchdogs rather than from secretive (allegedly largely fabricated) letters from the LSTA. Also in sharp contrast to Braxton, Gov. Edwards’ office makes it crystal clear at the very end of the Zurik feature linked above that Louisiana’s Constitution will be strictly adhered to entailing Richardson. Let’s take a look:
We can only assume that Richardson has resisted any overture that she needs to resign from the LSPC, and we’ll point out again that, just as was the case with Braxton, Edwards’ only option is to seek a hearing for her removal. Also, he would have to preside over that public hearing, and he would be the ultimate judge to make the decision on whether Richardson is removed from the LSPC or not.
Richardson actually gave an early indication that she would challenge LSP Col. Lamar Davis’ authority when she openly challenged him about restoring leave if LSP Internal Affairs investigations drag on for extended periods. Davis countered by indicating that, by restoring leave when LSP Troopers engage in acts such as shoplifting, the public gets the perception that, “police officers are being treated special.” Let’s take a look:
2/11/21 LSPC Meeting: Richardson challenges LSP Col. Lamar Davis entailing troopers having leave restored when investigations drag on for extended periods of time.
Word is that there is yet another LSPC member with problems that may dwarf those of Braxton or Richardson, but it would be premature to publish anything on that matter at this time. Nevertheless, we’ll point out the fact that it is the LSPC which, obviously being controlled by LSP and formulated by LSP, and with all of its obvious shortcomings from a public accountability standpoint, issued LSPC Rule 12.9 denying the public the right to examine letters of counseling/warning. Why? Because the LSPC (read: LSP itself) does not “consider” them to be public record.
As Sound Off Louisiana subscribers and site visitors are aware, founder Robert Burns will be arguing before 19th JDC Judge Don Johnson tomorrow (Monday, May 23, 2022) regarding whether the LSPC can declare letters of counseling/warning, of which LSP Trooper Scott Lopez has two, to not be public record and it carry any weight. We’ll let everyone know how it goes soon after the hearing concludes.
If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply go to our home page and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or to the top of the right-hand column (desktops). 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.
Photo of a “purple truck” which Louisiana State Police (LSP) Trooper Scott Lopez represented to the St. Martin Parish Council’s Planning and Zoning Commissioners on January 6, 2022 had been observed dumping vegetative materials on farmer Billy Broussard’s 33-acre property located on Duchamp Road in Broussard, Louisiana.
We’ve already indicated that LSP Trooper Scott Lopez gave quite the performance before the St. Martin Parish Planning and Zoning Commission on January 6, 2022. One aspect of Lopez’s presentation drew particular attention on the part of SMPG’s legal counsel, Allan “Sprinky” Durand. That aspect that drew laser-like focus from Durand was Lopez representing that Broussard had been, “permitting other companies and people to dump on his property illegally.”
Let’s take (literally) just one minute to watch Lopez make those statements, for Durand to ask him to back them up, and Lopez doing so via a picture of a “purple truck.”
1/6/22: LSP Trooper Scott Lopez makes his statements about Broussard, Durand asks Lopez to back up his claim, and Lopez does so by referencing a picture of a “purple truck” dumping on Broussard’s property.
Beyond that, SMPG appears to have relied exclusively upon the representations of Lopez to substantiate its allegations that Broussard is bailing hay for sale and doing the same with cattle. Here’s a nine-second video clip of Lopez making that accusation of Broussard, which Broussard claims is flatly false:
1/6/22: Nine-second video clip wherein Lopez makes the claim that Broussard is bailing hay for sale and raising cattle for “sale and/or slaughter.”
Regarding the hauling of the vegetative materials, Broussard has contended all along that the only person besides himself who has ever been permitted to dump on his property is 16th JDC Judge Anthony Thibodeaux. Broussard’s attorney, Heather Duhon-Moore, called Thibodeaux as her first witness (he was taken out of order to facilitate him returning to his own courtroom) at the Preliminary Injunction hearing on Tuesday, May 3, 2022.
Thibodeaux testified that he was “desperate” to find a place to offload his own vegetative materials for his company, Anthony’s Tree Service and Stump Removal. He further testified that he began by merely hauling “just mulch” to Broussard’s property but added that he later delivered tree limbs and the like similarly to what Broussard himself was hauling to the property.
Thibodeaux testified that he had hauled vegetative materials to Broussard’s property “approximately 30 times” beginning about “a year and a half ago” and that he stopped “about a year ago” only because he was hearing that St. Martin Parish may have issues with Broussard’s site.
Thibodeaux also testified that Broussard’s willingness to allow him to haul vegetative materials from his tree service company to the 33-acre site was immensely helpful for him and that he hoped one day that availability may be restored. He testified that Broussard had never received “any compensation whatsoever” for permitting him to haul his vegetative materials to Broussard’s property. When asked why Broussard would permit such activity by Thibodeaux for no compensation whatsoever, Thibodeaux responded (to the laughter of much of the courtroom), “Well, I guess it’s because he just likes me.”
When asked what Thibodeaux did once he opted to no longer access Broussard’s property, he indicated that he began taking the vegetative materials to Possum’s Tree Service’s site to dispose of his vegetative materials. We should point out now that it is Possum’s Tree Service (though declining to name either the company or the owner) that SMPG Parish President Chester Cedars said has been “all for this ordinance, by the way.” Let’s take a look:
8/3/21 SMPG Meeting: Chester Cedars openly touts an unnamed tree service company (Possum’s) is “all for this ordinance, by the way.”
Starting to look just a tad suspicious (or maybe even devious)? Well, to use some bad grammar, “You ain’t seen nothing yet!”
When SMPG made its bold claims in the C & D letter issued on June 20, 2021 and up to the point of suing Broussard for alleged charging for others to dump (apparently based solely and exclusively on representations made by Lopez), they had no clue that the individual hauling in vegetative materials was Judge Thibodeaux, much less that Thibodeaux was not paying a dime to do so.
When Cedars found out that it was Thibodeaux, he contacted Broussard enraged and scolded him for not having the “common courtesy” to let Cedars know it was Thibodeaux. Broussard indicates that he responded, “I want to make sure I’ve got this straight. You issue me a C & D letter. Then you file a restraining order shutting down all of my farming activities, and you somehow believe that I owe some ‘common courtesy’ to you?”
It was at that point that SMPG, Lopez, and Dubroc became utterly desperate to come up with somebody (ANYBODY) whom they could assert had hauled in vegetative materials and who paid Broussard. After all, as Duhon-Moore pointed out upon SMPG attorney Lee Durio objecting to Moore even asking if Thibodeaux paid to haul in his vegetative materials, “Your honor. They make the claim in their filings that my client charged people to haul in vegetative materials.” Judge deMahy overruled the objection.
It was the fact that SMPG had been so emphatic in its pleadings regarding Broussard that he had engaged in commercial activity by charging people to haul in vegetative debris that caused Cedars, Lopez, and Dubroc to desperately need to come up with something to substantiate that allegation, and that’s how the infamous “purple truck” came into play.
We want to emphasize that, contrary to our prior assumptions that Cedars never told Lopez about the agreement of September 14, 2021 enabling Broussard to continue operations, Cedars’ testimony made it crystal clear that he and Lopez were quite literally joined at the hips in going after Broussard.
In referencing the purple truck at that January 6, 2022 meeting (one which Cedars missed and testified at the May 3, 2022 Preliminary Injunction hearing that he was undergoing and recovering from hip surgery at the time), Lopez, Cedars, and Dubroc (the neighbor owning the used car lot and who is responsible for supplying photos to Lopez, who, in turn, supplied them to SMPG) all collectively gambled that Broussard would never be able to uncover the owner of that purple truck.
Their gamble came up snake eyes as Broussard has an associate who tracked down the owner of the purple truck. His name is Arthur Trahan and, in the following recorded phone call between Broussard and Trahan of Monday, May 2, 2022 (the evening before the Preliminary Injunction hearing), everyone can hear Trahan reveal several facts, to wit:
1) He’s never gone on Billy Broussard’s property,
2) He almost never hauls vegetative materials but mainly hauls materials for construction,
3) That he has made deliveries to Billy’s Laotian neighbors,
4) That he knows LSP Trooper Scott Lopez “real well,”
5) That he also is related to Lopez’s one-time (perhaps still current?) supervisor, John Trahan,
6) That Lopez’s neighbors have blocked off Duchamp Road and told him, “Cuz, you can’t pass,”
7) That he responded to Duchamp Road being blocked off with, “You better unblock this road. They got people on this road trying to haul materials.”
Here’s that recorded phone call for everyone’s listening pleasure!
5/2/22 recorded phone call between Broussard and the owner of the infamous “purple truck,” Arthur Trahan.
Regarding the reference to the Laotian neighbors of Broussard above, we’re not surprised that their surrounding neighbors apparently didn’t want them receiving their materials. After all, as we’ve already pointed out, Dubroc’s family (who are direct neighbors to the Laotians) don’t even want the Laotians themselves being able to get to their property. We’ll repeat video evidence of that once again at this time:
Video file of a threatening action allegedly sent by a relative of Dubroc to one of the Laotian neighbors soon after they legally drove down a servitude to go to property they own.
There was yet another text allegedly sent soon thereafter. On it, a very young man is heard bragging about having, “chased after them with a hammer.” Let’s take a look at the video from that text, shall we?:
Another video file sent to the Laotian neighbors wherein one young man brags of having, “chased after them with a hammer in my hand.”
We believe that the conspiracy of just what all has transpired to target Broussard with false allegations is becoming increasingly clear, but we certainly have far more material to present in our next Broussard/Lopez update.
For now, however, we have to get geared up for our May 23, 2022 court hearing on our Writ of Mandamus entailing LSP Trooper Lopez. We welcome all of our subscribers and casual visitors (particularly the attorneys) to view the Opposition Memorandum to our Writ if anyone is so inclined.
If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future posts, simply go to our home page and scroll to the bottom (mobile devices) or to the top of the right-hand column (desktops). 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.
