2014-02-27 Transcript of Hearing

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
IN RE:
JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL
FILE NUMBER: 13-DB-059
A hearing was held in the above captioned
matter on Thursday, February 27, 2014, at
Associated Reporters, Incorporated, 2431 South
Acadian Thruway, Suite 550, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana 70808, beginning at 8:05 A.M.
BEFORE:
Susan Erkel
Certified Court Reporter
In and For the State of
Louisiana
ASSOCIATED REPORTERS, INC.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
A P P E A R A N C E S
FOR THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL:
LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD
DEPUTY DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
4000 S. SHERWOOD FOREST BOULEVARD
SUITE 607
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70816
(225) 293-3900
BY: DAMON S. MANNING, ESQ.
FOR THE RESPONDENT, JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL:
RICHARD L. DUCOTE, ESQ.
4800 LIBERTY AVENUE
FLOOR 3
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA 15224
(412) 687-2020
HEARING COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
JANE R. GOLDSMITH, ESQ., CHAIR
VIRGINIA G. BENOIST, ESQ., LAWYER MEMBER
ROBERT NELSON, PUBLIC MEMBER
ALSO PRESENT:
SUSAN KALMBACH, ESQ.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
THOMAS FLANAGAN, ESQ. (PRESENT DURING THE
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER)
DARLENE NELSON
ROXANNE DUPUY
THERESA ROBERTSON
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
I N D E X
PAGE
CAPTION.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
APPEARANCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
INDEX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
PROCEEDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
EXAMINATION OF JUDGE DAWN AMACKER. . . . . . . 58
EXAMINATION OF JUDGE DEBORAH GAMBRELL. . . . 168
EXAMINATION OF JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL. . . . . . 265
ODC EXHIBITS:
1 COMPLAINT FILED BY JUDGE DEBORAH GAMBRELL
OF THE TENTH CHANCERY COURT, DISTRICT OF
MISSISSIPPI, WITH ATTACHMENTS.. . . . . . 55
2 RESPONDENT'S OCTOBER 17, 2011 INITIAL
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT, WITH ATTACHMENT. . . 55
3 ODC'S APRIL 25, 2012 REQUEST FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE FROM RESPONDENT. . . . 55
4 RESPONDENT'S MAY 24, 2012 SUPPLEMENTAL
RESPONSE.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5 AUGUST 13, 2007 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY EMERGENCY RELIEF IN MICHAEL T.
BOYD VERSUS RAVEN W. BOYD, CASE NO.
06-0136, CHANCERY COURT OF MARION COUNTY,
MISSISSIPPI.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6 JUNE 2, 2008 ORDER TO SEAL FILE IN BOYD
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
VERSUS BOYD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7 SEPTEMBER 2, 2008 AGREED JUDGMENT IN BOYD
VERSUS BOYD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
8 SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 SHOW CAUSE ORDER IN
BOYD VERSUS BOYD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
9 OCTOBER 6, 2011 ORDER FOR CONTEMPT IN BOYD
VERSUS BOYD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
10 JANUARY 14, 2013 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
PROVIDED BY JUDGE DEBORAH GAMBRELL, WITH
ATTACHMENTS:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
(A) COPY OF ONLINE PETITION FILED WITH
MARION COUNTY CHANCERY CLERK OF COURT
ON AUGUST 23, 2011;
(B) AUGUST 14, 2011 EMAIL FROM HEATHER
LYONS TO JUDGE GAMBRELL'S COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, BARBIE PARHAM,
"SUBJECT: EXPECTING JUDGE GAMBRELL TO
PROTECT CHILDREN".
11 OCTOBER 11, 2011 CORRESPONDENCE FROM JUDGE
DAWN AMACKER OF THE 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA, WITH
ATTACHMENTS:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
(A) AUGUST 22, 2011 LETTER TO RESPONDENT
FROM JUDGE AMACKER'S ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANT, MICHELLE SIMON, RETURNING
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
THE ONLINE PETITION FAXED TO JUDGE
AMACKER, AND INSTRUCTING RESPONDENT TO
CAUTION HER CLIENT AGAINST EX-PARTE
COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE JUDGE;
(B) COPY OF ONLINE PETITION FAXED TO JUDGE
AMACKER FROM RAVEN BOYD'S FAX LINE.
12 MARCH 28, 2012 CORRESPONDENCE FROM JUDGE
DAWN AMACKER, WITH ATTACHMENTS:.. . . . . 55
(A) ARTICLE ENTITLED, "MAKE LOUISIANA AND
MISSISSIPPI COURTS PROTECT [H] AND
[Z]!", POSTED ON
HTTP://WWW.THEPETITIONSITE.COM/1/MAKE-
LOUISIANA-AND-MISSISSIPPI-COURTS-
PROTECT-[H]-AND-[Z]
(B) RESPONDENT'S AUGUST 17, 2011 ARTICLE
ENTITLED, "JUSTICE FOR [H] AND [Z]",
POSTED ON HTTP://WWW.EYESEEONLINE.COM/
2011/08/1816
(C) RESPONDENT'S AUGUST 25, 2011
BLOG/ARTICLE ENTITLED, "JUSTICE FOR
[H] AND [Z]", POSTED ON
HTTP://SHEEPLESSINAMERICA.BLOGSPOT.COM
13 JANUARY 22, 2013 CORRESPONDENCE FROM JUDGE
DAWN AMACKER, WITH ATTACHMENTS:. . . . . . 55
(A) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION REQUESTED
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
7
MOTION TO RECUSE FILED BY RESPONDENT
IN ELIZABETH VARLEY KEISTER VERSUS
ROBERT SCOTT KEISTER;
(B) ORDER OF RECUSAL SIGNED BY JUDGE
AMACKER ON JUNE 5, 2012;
(C) MOTION TO RECUSE FILED BY RESPONDENT
IN SCOTT EDWARD CULLEN VERSUS
KRISTIANN MARIE PROBST CULLEN;
(D) ORDER OF RECUSAL SIGNED BY JUDGE DAWN
AMACKER ON JUNE 28, 2012;
(E) MOTION TO RECUSE FILED BY RESPONDENT
IN BECKY NEVLE RUSSELL VERSUS TIMOTHY
RUSSELL.
14 WRIT APPLICATION FILED BY RESPONDENT WITH
THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF OF
RAVEN MAURER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
15 AUGUST 31, 2011 NEWS RELEASE REPORTING THE
LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT DENIED STAY AND
DENIED WRIT IN RAVEN SKYE MAURER VERSUS
MICHAEL THOMAS BOYD (SEE P.2 OF NEWS
RELEASE).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
16 APRIL 9, 2013 OPINION OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI IN
RAVEN SKYE BOYD MAURER VERSUS MICHAEL
THOMAS BOYD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
8
17 COPIES OF "TWEETS" FROM RESPONDENT'S
TWITTER ACCOUNT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
18 TRANSCRIPT OF RESPONDENT'S MARCH 20, 2012
SWORN STATEMENT TO ODC. . . . . . . . . . . 55
19 PETITION WEBSITE ENTITLED "JUSTICE FOR [H]
AND [Z]", FOUND AT
HTTP/WWW.CHANGE.ORG/PETITIONS/JUSTICE-FOR-
[H]-AND-[Z].. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
REPORTER WAS UNABLE TO OBTAIN AN INDEX
FROM RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL PRIOR TO
SUBMISSION OF THIS TRANSCRIPT. SEE
REPORTER'S NOTE BELOW.
1 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
7 OBJECTED/PROFFERED. . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
9 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
10 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
12 ADMITTED.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 364
REPORTER'S PAGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
REPORTER'S NOTE:
Court Reporter does not have possession of
any exhibits which were introduced and
admitted into the record. Counsel for ODC and
Respondent retained possession of their
respective Exhibit Books in order to redact
specific information as instructed by the
Hearing Committee Chair.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
P R O C E E D I N G S
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Good morning everyone. My name is
Jane Goldsmith. I'm the Chair of the
Committee today. I have with me Virginia
Benoist and Robert Nelson. There's a
couple of things I just wanted to mention
before we got started. First of all, like
I said, I am the Chair of this Committee,
but I'm only the voice of this Committee
so I very much value the input from my
team here. So there are times when we
will have to confer. We may do it in
here. We may do it out of the presence of
everyone else depending on the issue. So
I just ask that you be patient with that
process. It's just a product of the
Committee Hearing.
The second thing I wanted to mention
is we have read all of the memoranda
that's been submitted. We appreciate all
of the hard work that has gone into those
pleadings. We've looked at your exhibits.
We do take this process very seriously.
You have our full attention. We want to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
hear you argument. We want to hear your
witnesses and so we're prepared to do that
today. If you have any questions, please
let us know. We'll try to come up with
some answers. With that being said, I
think I'm just going to have everyone
introduce themselves for the record.
MR. MANNING:
Damon Manning on the behalf of the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
MR. DUCOTE:
Good morning. May it please the
Committee, Richard Ducote, counsel for Ms.
McCool, the respondent.
MS. MCCOOL:
Nanine McCool.
MS. KALMBACH:
And I'm Susan Kalmbach also with the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Good morning. Mr. Manning, I think
I'll hand it over to you.
MR. MANNING:
Yes. Madam Chair, thank you and to
your Committee thank you for your time and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
your volunteering to provide this service.
Mr. Ducote and I have had quite a few
conversations about you know how we wanted
to -- what issues we wanted to address,
housekeeping measures before we get to the
live witness testimony. And I think that
we would like to go ahead and address some
of those today.
One of the things that we will both do
is make a very brief opening statement and
Mr. Ducote asked, and I'm fine with it, if
we could do the opening statement maybe
just to kind of set the context and tone
before we start addressing exhibits and
things like that that we wanted to take up
early on. But before even getting into
the opening statement, I spoke with Mr.
Ducote yesterday I think about this and
we're in agreement and I would think the
Committee would understand and agree also,
there is a real concern about us creating
a public record here today that contains
or will contain possibly the names of
these two minor children. They're also
mentioned even in ODC exhibits, maybe even
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
13
in the formal charges and responses. And
to the extent that there can be either an
order for us or the Board to redact the
names of those minors because number one,
they are minors; and number two, under the
statute, the basic rights for victims and
witnesses, they at least are alleged to be
victims of sexual abuse so we want to
protect their identities at all costs.
So again, and we also discussed
whether or not it would have been better
or more appropriate for us to redact some
of those ahead of time and I think we
agreed that that may have caused some more
confusion because there are exhibits that
will have their first names and
information that you can identify them by,
but if we had redacted them ahead of time
it could have posed some questions or
problems about whether or not the exhibit
we're introducing is actually talking
about the child or the children or the
family that is the subject of the
underlying proceedings. So I think we're
in agreement on what I had said. So
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
again, I bring it up either the Rule 19
allows for some type of protective order
and/or what I have seen the Board do
before, as well as the Hearing Committee
Chair, just order that in the transcript
and any exhibits or pleadings that those
names, that the identified minors be
redacted or protected. So I would ask
that. I would make that motion or request
at this time.
MR. DUCOTE:
And we certainly join in that and just
to clarify a little bit, there was a
question about whether certain information
was out in the public or not and it is our
position as we show the exhibits that the
names of the children were publicly
available through the Mississippi College
of Law and Judicial website as well as the
Chancery Court in Mississippi's own
website. We just -- the ODC, the
complaint mentions the kids names and
references it and the petitions and the
other documents and exhibits mention the
names as well so that the names, if we'd
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
15
start redacting, we couldn't -- we'd have
to unredact to show that we're talking
about the same people. So I think what
we're doing is stipulating that the names
of the kids involved and the names of the
parents are in fact the same people in all
situations where the Boyd's and the
Maurer's are at issue. It's the two kids.
So certainly that's fine to redact it if
that issue arises.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I think we're fine with that. I would
ask that if you want a protective order, I
would request that someone submit to me a
protective order. And I think -- I don't
know where the burden of redaction's going
to be. I don't think it should be on the
Committee. We're not as familiar with the
documents as the two of you are. So if
you decide who's going to have the
responsibility of redacting, I'm certainly
okay with that.
MR. DUCOTE:
And we can work that out.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
16
Okay.
MR. MANNING:
Okay. Next I think we'll just kind of
want to frame the case and what we intend
to present by way of testimony and
evidence here today. And not to belabor
what the charges are because I know the
Committee's has had an opportunity to read
the charges, the answers, the pre-hearing
memos, supplemental memos and so I know
you're familiar with that. But kind of in
a nutshell, the case deals with two or
three, actually, proceedings. They're
related proceedings. They involve many of
the same parties in Mississippi and then
in Louisiana.
There are issues and I believe those
cases, all of them, are still pending and
are stayed/pending in both states as we
sit here today. The Judge in Mississippi
who is presiding or was presiding over
that case who is the complainant in this
is Judge Deborah Gambrell of the Chancery
Court. She will be called to testify
today. In Louisiana it's with Judge Dawn
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
Amacker. I think recently or at some
point, both Judges have recused themselves
from the underlying proceedings. But we
will be talking about mostly a point in
time where those two Judges were presiding
over the respective proceedings in those
states.
There are -- there is conduct alleged
in the charges that Ms. McCool, the
respondent, used other people to do what
she could not do herself. One of the
things as a lawyer that you cannot do is
you cannot have ex-parte communications
with the Judge during the proceedings.
You will hear testimony from the Judges
and from Ms. McCool and through the
exhibits where we plan to prove that in
the Louisiana proceedings where Ms. McCool
was counsel of record and in the
Mississippi proceedings where she is not
licensed and was not acting or admitted
pro hac in those proceedings yet it
involved her Louisiana client, she
solicited others to have ex-parte
communications for the intended purpose of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
influencing those Judges' future decisions
in those cases. One of the ways that Ms.
McCool sought to accomplish that goal was
through false and inflammatory statements
made in public forums, primarily the
internet and social media. So we plan to
introduce testimony and exhibits that will
prove those issues.
That being said, I did outline several
I think key topics and issues that I
wanted to cover briefly and one I wanted
to say, this case is not and has never
been about the First Amendment or free
speech. It is not about trying to abridge
or trying to prohibit or we have not even
charged Ms. McCool with simply criticizing
Judges, although there is a rule that says
you cannot attack the credibility or
integrity of a Judge falsely or with
reckless disregard. That's in 8.2.
That's not the rule charged here. While
there may have been some comments that go
to the integrity of those Judges that will
be in the record and that are apparent
from the testimony in the exhibits, again
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
19
we're not simple charging Ms. McCool with
criticizing Judges. Yesterday I received
a copy of Ms. McCool's supplemental
pre-hearing memo and I know it was filed
into the record and I believe the
Committee has had a chance to see it
already. On page 2 of the memo, the
respondent states and I'll quote, it says,
"The ODC cites no authority for the
proposition that a Louisiana attorney
cannot criticize a Mississippi Judge to
whom she owes no legal duty." And I'll
end the quote there.
As I said though, we have not charged
Ms. McCool with simply criticizing Judge
Gambrell in Mississippi. She's charged
specifically with making false statements
and with soliciting others to initiate
improper ex-parte communications with
Judge Gambrell in Mississippi and with
Judge Amacker in Louisiana. Canon 1 of
the Code of Judicial Conduct states, and
again quoting, "An independent and
honorable judiciary is indispensable to
justice in our society." Independent and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
20
honorable. So consequently under our
rules and under the rules that Ms. McCool
is charged with violating, 3.5(a)
prohibits lawyers from seeking to
influence Judges by means prohibited by
law. And 3.5(d) prohibits lawyers from
having ex-parte communication with Judges
during the proceedings. Some of the -- a
couple of the cases cited in ODC's
pre-hearing memo and we have the citations
for them, but one is In Re Lee and in that
case the Louisiana Supreme Court stated
that the language of Rule 3.5(b) clearly
and broadly prohibits all ex-parte
communication with a Judge during the
course of a proceeding. And in the matter
of In Re Harrington, the Supreme Court
noted that under the ADA model rules, ex-
parte communications are barred even if it
is not clear that the lawyer intended to
influence the Judge. So let me stop for a
minute.
What you have in the charges and what
you'll hear through the testimony and see
through the documentary exhibits is two
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
rules. You have 3.5(a) that says you
cannot seek to influence a Judge by means
prohibited by law. And then 3.5(b) says a
lawyer cannot have ex-parte communications
with a Judge during the pendency of the
case. The court has made clear that their
rules have the effect of substantive law.
So 3.5(a) and 3.5(b) can be considered
together in this case because when you
have ex-parte communications with the
Judge during the pendency of the case and
the intent is to influence the Judge's
future rulings in that case, you have not
only violated 3.5(b), you have violated
3.5(a).
So again, picking up in Harrington,
the court said, "That a lawyer need not
represent a party to a case to be subject
to Rule 3.5(b) prescription against ex-
parte communication. It is thus clear
that the intention of the model rule
adopted in Louisiana verbatim is that the
communication need not be made by the
attorney while representing a client and
in fact, need not be made with the intent
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
22
to influence the Judge. So that's
important because if you remember when I
discussed what was contained in Ms.
McCool's supplemental pre-hearing memo,
she says that ODC cites no authority for
the proposition that a Louisiana attorney
cannot criticize a Mississippi Judge to
whom she owes no legal duty. She's not
charged with that. She's charged with
making false statements and soliciting ex-
parte communications with that Mississippi
Judge.
So the Court's instruction in
Harrington makes clear that that is
prohibited under our rule whether she is
counsel of record or whether she was a
party in those proceedings. She is an
attorney and she had ex-parte
communication or solicited others to do
so. So despite what I anticipate you will
hear today from Ms. McCool, a lawyer does
not have a first amendment right to have
ex-parte communications with a Judge,
especially when the communication is an
effort to influence the Judge's decision
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
in a pending case.
I will wrap up -- I'll try to be brief
here. What you will see and hear is that
while Ms. McCool engaged in efforts on the
internet and social media to promote the
Judge's handling of the pending cases, you
will she that she then solicited others to
contact the Judges rather than her picking
up the phone and contacting the Judge
herself. So Rule 8.4(a) of the Rules of
Professional Conduct says it's not only
unprofessional conduct for a lawyer to
violate or attempt to violate the Rules of
Professional Conduct, it's also misconduct
for the lawyer to violate those rules by
knowingly assisting or inducing others to
do so or by doing so through the acts of
others. And that's what we have here. We
have a lawyer who induced and assisted
others in violating the rules.
When Ms. McCool disagreed and when her
client, her primary client, Raven Boyd
disagreed with Judge Gambrell and Judge
Amacker's rulings in these related cases,
while the cases were still pending, what
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
24
Ms. McCool did was then turn to the
internet and social media to influence the
Judges. So the evidence will show clearly
and convincingly that Ms. McCool created
an online petition and posted online blogs
and articles where she discussed the
domestic proceedings pending before Judge
Gambrell and Judge Amacker. They were
both sealed. Those proceedings are under
seal. They deal with minors. They deal
with very upsetting allegations of sexual
abuse of minor children in the
proceedings.
So those proceedings were discussed
online. She didn't just discuss the
proceedings. She published the names of
the minor children involved in the cases,
photographs of the minor children involved
in the cases. She linked to audio
recordings of the minor children being
interviewed by their mother about the
alleged sexual abuse at the hands of their
father despite the fact there was an order
sealing the record in Mississippi and an
agreed judgment that said these recordings
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
will not be disseminated. This was done
through the party, Raven Boyd, in
Mississippi and through Ms. McCool's
actions.
She made, Ms. McCool that is, made
false and misleading statements about
Judge Gambrell and Judge Amacker's rulings
in the domestic case. She listed the
telephone numbers for these Judge, their
staff. Email addresses, fax numbers for
Judge Gambrell and Judge Amacker and the
Louisiana Supreme Court while a writ was
pending at the Louisiana Supreme Court.
And then she took it that next step. She
instructed those following her through
social media and through these online
efforts, she instructed them to sign the
online petition and to call the Judges and
voice their outrage. The outrage that was
generated through these inflammatory and
often times false and misleading
statements that were made on the internet.
So as I said, Ms. McCool used others
to do what she could not do herself. So
she violated Rule 3.5(a) and (b) directly
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
and/or through Rule 8.4(a). And that's
the rules that are at issue, primarily,
as well as the fact that her conduct was
prejudicial to the administration of
justice which is Rule 8.4(d). It is
prejudicial when you are seeking to
influence the Judge whether it's the
Judge's ruling on evidence or on
substantive issues to do so through
prohibited means that's contrary to the
administration of justice.
You will see multiple motions to
recuse Judge Dawn Amacker in other
unrelated proceedings in the 22nd Judicial
District in Louisiana. And in those
motions Ms. McCool made other false
statements about Judge Amacker. Those
will be offered into evidence and there
will be testimony about those. And
lastly, let me just bring out that on page
5 of Ms. McCool's supplemental pre-hearing
memo she states, "The appearance of
impropriety is not a proper basis for
recusal." Let me point out though that
again, looking at the Code of Judicial
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
Conduct, Canon 2 says, "A Judge shall
avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in all actions." And when you
see Judge Amacker's reasons for
voluntarily recusing herself in these
other cases, she expressly, in writing,
writes out her reasons for recusal which
include to avoid the appearance of
impropriety.
So when Ms. McCool subsequently says
in motions that Judge Amacker is --
referring to Judge Amacker's court,
"Expressly admitted its extreme prejudice
and bias in recusing herself in other
cases," it's just false. It's not true.
And you'll see that from the documents
themselves. The signed orders. The
testimony in the documents that ODC will
present today will clearly and
convincingly address these issues and
prove that these rules have been violated
and that the misconduct charged did in
fact occur. Thank you.
MR. DUCOTE:
There's one other issue that Mr.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
Manning and I addressed yesterday that we
agreed to clarify with the panel. That
is, and I think the context of this is
best illustrated by ODC's statement at
page 1 under the case summary it says,
"Underlying this complaint is lengthy and
contentious custody and visitation
proceedings that remain pending in the
Mississippi matter of Michael T. Boyd
versus Raven Boyd Maurer. In those
proceedings Raven Boyd accuses Michael
Boyd of sexually abusing their minor
children. Guardian ad litem, John
Smallwood, investigated the allegations
and apparently found no merit." And I
think I had raised the concern to Mr.
Manning that it appeared that the ODC was
attempting to place in context the
accusations against Ms. McCool against a
background of the underlying sexual abuse
allegations being false and therefore
whatever she did had no support to the
extent that that support was relevant in
the facts of the case.
And we wanted to assure the panel, and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
29
I'm sure he'll make a statement in this
regard too, that it is not the position of
the ODC that the kids were not abused.
That that really doesn't have anything to
do with the allegations. That this was an
attempt to simply talk about some of the
facts. That's why we have disputed some
of the exhibits and some of the requests
for factual stipulations because there's
so many issues here that could maybe take
us down a road we don't need to go. And I
think it's clear that what we have agreed
and we want the panel to understand is
that there is not a contention on the part
of the ODC that the sexual abuse claims
lack merit.
MR. MANNING:
Right. The contention is that there
has never been an adjudication of guilt or
a final adjudication of innocence, if you
will, on those allegations. They were
made repeatedly in the domestic
proceedings and through law enforcement
and there has never been a finding of
guilt that those allegations are proven in
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
any arena. But, I will say that I agree
with Mr. Ducote's premise that we are not
seeking to place that fact in dispute here
today. We are not litigating whether the
sexual abuse did or did not happen as a
fact. And while I know that we all hope
and pray that it did not happen, it almost
seems a bit callous to say that we have to
kind of push the thought of that aside,
but we really do because we're not
litigating that issue. That is just part
of the backdrop that we find ourselves in
these proceedings.
MR. DUCOTE:
Right. And just to be clear, it's my
understanding that the ODC's position is
not that any question about the merit of
the sexual abuse allegations has cast any
sort of context, negative context, on what
Ms. McCool did. I guess that would be a
fair way of saying it.
MR. MANNING:
I don't object to your comment. I
will say that there may be a question or
two where that issue is touched upon on
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
31
Ms. McCool's testimony.
MR. DUCOTE:
Does that make sense?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes. Thank you.
MR. MANNING:
Thank you.
MR. DUCOTE:
Now, May it please the Committee, and
you will note from my pre-trial motion and
in the writ that I filed with the Supreme
Court, writ was denied, I take the
constitutional issues very seriously here
and particularly the issue of notice and I
think it's unusual to have one count
consisting of 17 pages. I've really made
an effort to ascertain because there are
so many facts and so many representations
of things in those 17 pages what exactly
was alleged. And I would refer the
Committee to the pre-hearing statement of
the ODC, under the first page, Count I,
and I think Mr. Manning has succinctly set
forth the meat of this complaint and it
reads as follows: "Respondent, Joyce
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
Nanine McCool used the internet and social
media to disseminate false, misleading,
and inflammatory information about Judge
Deborah Gambrell and Judge Dawn Amacker
and/or cases before them."
Now there are throughout these
proceedings very crucial legal issues and
very crucial factual issues. Now of
course, the ODC has the burden of proving
their complaint by clear and convincing
evidence both factually and legally. One
of the basic premises in the definition
section of the Rules of Professional
Conduct, is the fact for something to be
made knowingly false and you have to know
for fact that something is false for it to
be actionable or that the circumstances
would lead a reasonable person to conclude
that the fact was false.
Now if we just take this first
sentence, there a number of problems with
this charge in the complaint that stems
from this first sentence. "Used internet
and social media to disseminate false...,"
well let's set aside "false" and just go
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
to the next words, "... misleading and
inflammatory." Now I don't see anything
in the disciplinary rules that talk about
misleading information. What is
misleading? By who's standard? You know
there are all sorts of things here that
are subject to interpretation. Somebody
might think it's misleading. Somebody
might not think it's not misleading. So I
think we have to just disregard any sort
of charge of misconduct based on something
being misleading.
If something was knowingly false that
may be actionable. That meets the
definitions under the disciplinary rules.
Misleading, we could be here for weeks
talking about misleading and mislead who
to think what? So I think you need to be
conscious of that. The next word,
"inflammatory". Now "inflammatory" again,
that doesn't appear anywhere in the Rules
of Professional Conduct and inflammatory
is totally subjective. Anybody who is on
the losing side of a case can say
something that is considered by somebody
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
to be inflammatory. So again, somebody
saying something inflammatory is not
actionable.
And then it says about Judge Deborah
Gambrell and Judge Dawn Amacker. Well
first of all, Judge Gambrell's a
Mississippi Judge and I go back to the
issue that as Ms. McCool was not
practicing law in Mississippi she had --
she did nothing in Mississippi. That she
has no -- there's no application to under
the disciplinary rules for a conduct in
Mississippi and they've cited no authority
for that as it relates to Judge Gambrell.
Now the second thing with Judge
Amacker, and we'll get to the factual
issues about that and we'll just do that.
"And/or cases before them." Well, if we
apply the terms "false" -- well if there's
something knowingly false that was
actionable about "cases pending before
them", that may be something. But
misleading and inflammatory about cases
before them, I don't see that that has
anything to do with the Rules of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
Professional Conduct and that it's so
subjective that that's not actionable.
You will hear that there was improper
ex-parte communication. You will hear
that there were violations of rules, but
unfortunately, those are committed by the
Judges. Judge Amacker has two attorney's
here representing her as a witness. And
you know Ms. McCool is running against
Judge Amacker in November. There are a
lot of issues here about motive and how
some of these things were handled. And I
just need to alert the panel that I intend
to question the witnesses, be they Judges
or anybody else, about their own
violations of their applicable ethical
rules. Okay.
Then the next sentence says,
"Respondent further used the internet and
social media to solicit and encourage
others to make direct ex-parte contact
with these Judges in an effort to
influence their decisions in sealed
pending domestic litigation." I first
want to address this issue of "sealed".
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
36
And I briefed this I think quite
adequately. The Mississippi case, to the
extent that it was sealed, was the facts,
the names, the details of the case, were
accessible both with Mississippi College
of Law website where the brief and the
appellate decision was readily available
to the public and the Chancery Court's own
website where all that was ascertainable.
The second thing is, when a case is
sealed, all that means and I cited the
Mississippi Supreme Court case on this as
well as other cases from around the
country, all that means is if somebody
goes to the Clerk of Court's Office and
says I want to see this file, they can't
give it to them. It does not in any way
mean that people can't discuss the case,
that people can't disseminate information
that they have independently of going and
getting something. For example, if this
piece of paper is in evidence in a sealed
file and I have a copy of the piece of
paper that I have independently, that I
didn't go and get from the sealed files,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
37
there's nothing whatsoever that prohibits
me from talking about and sharing this
piece of paper simply because it's in a
sealed file. If I have a photograph
that's in evidence somewhere and in a
sealed file, there's nothing in the world
that prohibits me from talking about and
posting the photographs. And that's an
important issue. There's a lot of law on
that. The Mississippi Supreme Court
itself has already addressed that.
But the fact that the records were
sealed or pending domestic litigation is
irrelevant for the purposes of this
complaint. I think that probably the
issue that you're going to struggle with
the most is this question of ex- parte,
ex-parte communications. And ex-parte
communications, and again the ODC cites no
authority for the proposition that the
type of communication that was promoted
here is prohibited ex-part communication.
What was it that Ms. McCool asked the
public, the electorate to do? To hold the
Judge's accountable to do what; listen to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
evidence; apply the law; protect children.
Judges, we put you in office. We expect
you to listen to evidence and apply the
law and protect children. That's it.
That's it.
Now in the Stanford Law Review article
that I've provided to the panel, the Bars
are now struggling with this issue that
has been spawned by the internet. If the
internet is a participatory forum for
people to express outrage and to hold
Courts accountable. And as the Law Review
article addresses, the disciplinary rules
have not found a way to really address
this issue yet. Now maybe they should.
Maybe it's a problem that people are
learning about cases, contacting Courts,
expressing outrage. And I attached in the
supplemental memo a whole host of things.
Just a smidgen of the stuff that's now
available over the internet about holding
Judges accountable and the actions that
have resulted. And there is no authority
cited to say that that particular, and
it's a very narrow situation. This was
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
not a situation where people were
contacting the Courts and saying oh,
listen to this; did you know that this
father did this or that this child said
that? It was just listen to evidence,
apply the law and protect children. And
you know somehow that's all offensive.
The Judge's -- we can't have people asking
us to do that. Well, and we'll deal with
them on an individual basis, but that
simply is not prescribed ex-parte
communication.
Now the third sentence, "Respondent
also made false and misleading statements
and multiple motions to recuse Judge
Amacker that she filed in unrelated
proceedings. Again, we're bound by the
same definition for making knowingly false
statements. Now what happened here? Now
there are three problems with this
particular sentence. This first is you
will hear that prior to Judge Amacker
recusing herself or prior to Ms. McCool
filing a motion to recuse Judge Amacker,
she absolutely was biased and prejudiced
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
40
against Ms. McCool. And how do we know
that? Because Judge Amacker is having
herself ex-parte communications with Judge
Gambrell in Mississippi bad mouthing Ms.
McCool and attempting to -- and you'll see
what was happening -- and once she did
that, she was biased and prejudiced. So
if she was simply applying the Code of
Judicial Conduct, she would have recused
herself at that point to avoid the
appearance of impropriety.
Second of all, the Code of Judicial
Conduct Canon 2(b) says that a Judge
cannot, unless solicited by the
Disciplinary Board, just be feeding them
information. Well after Judge Gambrell
files the complaint against Ms. McCool as
a result of Judge Amacker's little
telephone call ex-parte to Judge Gambrell,
Judge Amacker is then sending negative
information, unsolicited, to the
Disciplinary Board. She never herself
files a complaint against Ms. McCool. And
you'll hear that the -- what went on in
the deposition with Judge Amacker. So she
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
41
doesn't do any of that. So at the point,
here Ms. McCool is litigating a number of
cases in Judge Amacker's Court unaware
that Judge Amacker has already made phone
calls to Judge Gambrell and has already
been sending stuff to the Disciplinary
Board, clearly evidencing bias and
prejudice against Ms. McCool which would
be grounds for recusal.
Ms. McCool learns of this, files a
motion to recuse Judge Amacker based on
what she now learns Judge Amacker has been
doing behind the scenes. Okay.
(Statement redacted per instruction of
Hearing Committee Chair.)
MR. MANNING:
Let me raise an objection at this
point and I apologize for interrupting
you. We've objected prior to today to
exhibits or references to (redacted). I
think the law in Louisiana and Mississippi
is very similar and clear. Those matters
are strictly confidential unless there is
an order by that State's Supreme Court
imposing discipline for some misconduct.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
42
We don't have that in either instance. So
I am concerned about the continued efforts
to raise (redacted). And again, this is
not the first time that I've raised the
issue. So I do apologize for interrupting
right now. But it needs to be raised at
this point because apparently he's going
to discuss it right now.
MR. DUCOTE:
Well and we could pretermit this
discussion down the line a little bit and
I'll pass. This is one of the issues with
the exhibits I filed in the supplemental
memorandum, the communication from the
Mississippi Committee --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Can I interrupt you for one second?
It's just we need a moment.
MR. DUCOTE:
Okay.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I apologize.
(Off the record.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I'm not familiar with everyone who is
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
43
in the room. We wanted to go ahead and
kind of have in chambers discussion with
counsel. Would that be okay?
MR. MANNING:
That is fine.
MR. DUCOTE:
Certainly.
MR. MANNING:
I'm glad you raised that, Madam Chair.
I think I at least know who everyone is in
the room except for the last lady that
entered. So I don't know if she's
potentially a witness here today or not.
I'm not sure of what her identity is.
MS. DUPUY:
I'm on a hearing committee and I'm
just observing.
MR. MANNING:
Never mind.
THE COURT REPORTER:
Who is the other lady? I'm sorry.
MS. NELSON:
Darlene Nelson. I'm observing as
well.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
44
Could we have everyone step out except
for counsel? Would that be okay?
(Off the record.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay. We're back on the record. My
apologies for all the in and out. Like I
said, we just want to make sure we confer
and everything. Okay. We've taken a
recess just to discuss an issue that had
come up and we, after conferring, we want
to put -- should this be on the record?
MS. BENOIST:
Well, we could go off the record --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes.
MS. BENOIST:
-- and tell them and then go back on
the record.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Let's go off the record. My
apologies.
(Off the record.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay. We're back on the record.
Thanks to everyone for your patience and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
45
coming in and out of the room. Again, I
apologize. We took a brief recess to
discuss whether certain evidence can be
admitted. Following a discussion, we have
decided -- and let me say for the record,
there was evidence that Mr. Ducote wanted
to admit. We had discussed the issue. We
have decided that because of the
confidentiality of what was wanting to be
admitted, we have decided not to allow it.
We will allow the conduct to be discussed
and allowed into evidence, but references
to particular confidential matters that
are confidential as a matter of law will
not be allowed into evidence.
We're also going to ask that any
references to the confidential matters on
the record thus far will be identified and
stricken from the record. At some point
we will allow Mr. Ducote to proffer, and
we're going to it under seal just to
hopefully address all the concerns here
today and that evidence will be allowed in
under a proffer, but not in any other way.
MR. DUCOTE:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
46
And again, it's my position that the
actual full argument concerning the
constitutional issues and due process that
was discussed off the record, if I could
include that in my proffer. Perhaps Mr.
Manning wants to make a co-proffer or
something at the same time just so the
record is complete as to why we're asking
for this to be admitted and what the ODC's
position was. And so if there's any
question in the future it can be dealt
with.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
That's fine.
MR. DUCOTE:
Thank you. Okay. So if I could
complete my opening statement here. So we
were on the issue of the recusal motions
and why it was that ODC says that there
were false statements made in the recusal
motions. And the reasons those are not
false statements and that Ms. McCool was
perfectly and reasonably justified in
interpreting those recusal orders by Judge
Amacker to be admissions of bias and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
prejudice is based on several points.
First of all, she alleged the bias and
prejudice based on the conduct that's
mentioned in the motion. Two, Judge
Amacker in recusing herself never denied
the allegations of fact in the motions.
Three, Judge Amacker in her order used the
grounds of the appearance of impropriety.
And as we briefed in our supplemental
memo, the appearance of impropriety is not
a proper lawful ground for a Judge to
self-recuse in a case. And as the Lemoine
case says, Judge's have a duty to sit
unless there's actual bias and prejudice.
And there are other grounds in the Code of
Civil Procedure in terms of relationships,
business relationships, familial
relationships, that sort of thing. But
this only dealt with the allegation of
bias and prejudice.
So if in fact Judge Amacker does not
deny it and says well I'm just doing it on
the grounds of appearance of impropriety,
it's our position since you can't lawfully
do that, that that was just face saving
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
and soft pedaling it so that she wouldn't
admit that she was biased and prejudiced.
Now, the other point finally is that's
she's inconsistent even after she recuses
herself in a number of cases based on that
same process. Then there are other cases
where she refuses to recuse herself and
sets it before a hearing before another
Judge. So if it actually was the
appearance of impropriety, then she would
have done it all the way through. And the
very fact that she refused then suddenly
to recuse herself and required it to be
sent to another Judge to be heard was --
and it's sort of an ironic sort of way,
punishment of Ms. McCool to make her go
through extra steps as evidence of bias
and prejudice. So that's that issue.
So you know it's our position that
there are those legal and factual reasons.
There's no way that ODC can prove any
actionable violations of the rules by
clear and convincing evidence.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay. Thank you.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
MR. DUCOTE:
And I think at this time what we would
like to do with the Committee's permission
is to go through exhibits and you have the
exhibit books in front of you and
designate what we are stipulating to --
let's see this is ODC and this is ours. I
think you have ours?
MS. BENOIST:
Yes, I do.
MR. MANNING:
There have been some recent
conversations but I don't want to
misinterpret what we talked about
yesterday with Mr. Ducote. I'll simply
state this and then I'll make an offer.
Previously when ODC identified its
exhibits by number and by description and
then subsequently provided a complete copy
of the exhibits to the respondent through
her counsel, we asked if there was any
objection to ODC's exhibits. The response
at that time was that there was no
objection as to authenticity, but there
was objection regarding all of ODC's
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
exhibits as to relevance and hearsay
actually.
We had some subsequent discussions
even as recently as yesterday and I'm
going to say that I'm not exactly clear
what Ms. McCool's position today is on the
admissibility of ODC's exhibits. So
before I guess going through the 19
exhibits with the attachments, I would at
this time if there is no objection today,
offer ODC Exhibits 1 through 19 into
evidence in these proceedings.
MR. DUCOTE:
And originally I objected on the
grounds relevance. My position today is
that I think that the Committee should
hold ODC to what they alleged in paragraph
1 of their pre-hearing memorandum as being
what their allegations are and that's what
they're required to prove. The -- I think
at this point all of the exhibits are
relevant to something in these complaints
or these allegations in Count 1, but I'd
object and as these things come up and
will be addressed, I do object to much of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
what's in there as secondary hearsay.
For example, Exhibit 1 is the
complaint that Judge Gambrell filed.
Well, it's relevant to show that she filed
a complaint. We're going to ask her about
some of the things that are said in there,
but there's also a lot of hearsay in the
letter itself. So I think if we're clear
and can agree that hearsay statements
contained in these exhibits are not being
offered as to prove the truth of the
matter in the exhibits then I don't have a
problem with that.
Second of all, for example with the
petitions and some of the other online
postings, there are comments that other
people post or other people say on the
petitions. Well I think that -- and I
think we're in agreement that it's not the
ODC's position that Ms. McCool wrote these
things unless they're clearly established
that she wrote it and that the fact other
people may have said something is not
probative of any of the facts of her
conduct, but it's part of the I guess res
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
52
gestae of that particular exhibit. So
with that understanding, I don't have any
objections to any of the exhibits on
relevance terms.
MR. MANNING:
I'm still not sure if they can come in
at this point or not. Can I just in
response, and I know we eventually have to
start getting to the witness testimony,
the Louisiana Supreme Court in 2004 in the
case involving -- it's the Stamps decision
-- S-T-A-M-P-S. It involved husband and
wife, Jerry Jackson Stamps and Teresa Lynn
Witt-Stamps, re-hearing denied June 25th,
2004. There was an issue of hearsay.
Since as I understand the only objection
that they maintain may be to some hearsay
embedded in some of these exhibits, that
issue came up in the Stamps decision. And
in the Court's discussion, first they
address some evidentiary issues. And I'm
reading directly from the Court's opinion.
They discuss evidentiary issues and they
say "Respondent's argue the Hearing
Committee erred in considering various
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
53
evidence which they contend are subject to
hearsay objection. Specifically
respondent objects to certain
unauthenticated records..." We don't have
that issue here. They've stipulated to
authenticity. "... as well as evidence
and the findings of fact in another
disciplinary case." And further down the
Court gets in to the legal holding and it
says, "In general, disciplinary
proceedings are subject to the provisions
of the Code of Evidence, Supreme Court
Rule 19, Section 18(b). However, in the
matter of Quaid which 646 So.2d 343, the
Court notes, "We observed that the unique
position of this Court as trier of fact in
disciplinary proceedings lessened the need
for strict application of those provisions
of the Code of Evidence such as hearsay
which were primarily intended to govern
jury trials." And then in closing it
says, "We note however that the purpose of
Rules of Evidence primarily intended to
govern jury trials, particularly the
hearsay rules are less compelling in the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
context of imposing discipline on members
of the legal profession. This Court
retains power to determine the ultimate
question of admissibility under its
original jurisdiction as the triers of
fact in disciplinary proceedings and it
may well be more appropriate in
disciplinary proceedings to be guided, but
not confined by strict application of the
Code of Evidence."
And lastly it says, "Unlike a lay
jury, this Court in its role as trier of
fact in disciplinary cases has the ability
to consider the entire record and evaluate
and weigh the probative value of evidence
based on the totality of the
circumstances."
So with that being said --
MR. DUCOTE:
And I think that's what I said. I
mean I don't disagree with it. I think I
just threw out that caveat when you
consider these things, I think
particularly since the issues are more
narrowed now. So I'm fine with that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
55
representation. I don't think we need to
belabor that any further.
MR. MANNING:
So again, is there an objection to my
offer of ODC Exhibits --
MR. DUCOTE:
No.
MR. MANNING:
-- 1 through 19?
MR. DUCOTE:
Not at all. And to the extent that
there are particular issues of hearsay
that may come up in the testimony as a
result of that, I'll address it at that
time. But I don't want to waste time
here.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay. So we are going to admit into
the record ODC Exhibits 1 through 19. And
we understand that Mr. Ducote reserves any
objections he may have. But you did
stipulate to the authenticity of the
exhibits?
MR. DUCOTE:
Absolutely.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
(The documents were marked for
identification as ODC Exhibits "1" through
"19", respectively, and introduced into the
record.)
MR. DUCOTE:
At this time, I would offer, introduce
and file into evidence, and you have them
before you, Respondent's Exhibits 1, 2, 3,
4, 5 and 6 that have been stipulated by
the ODC. I think we're in agreement on
that.
MR. MANNING:
No objection to those.
identification as Respondent's Exhibits "1"
through "6", respectively, and introduced into
the record.)
MR. DUCOTE:
Okay. Now the contested Exhibits "R
7" will be the subject of the later
proffer that was already discussed. "R 8"
likewise will be the subject of the later
proffer. "R 9" is an exhibit that is
contested. Now if we want to address
this, first of all, the position of the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
57
ODC I understand is to relevance
concerning this. Now what is this? These
are federal pleadings directly from the
PACER case management record of the United
States District Court for the Eastern
District of Louisiana in the case of Kern
(spelled phonetically) versus Elshock
(spelled phonetically) which involved a --
MR. MANNING:
If it will help, I'll withdraw my
objections to "R 9" and "R 10".
MR. DUCOTE:
Okay. That's terrific. That helps.
MR. MANNING:
Yes.
MR. DUCOTE:
So I'd offer, introduce and file into
evidence "R 9" and "R 10".
identification as "R 9" and R 10",
respectively, and introduced into the record.)
MR. DUCOTE:
And then "R 11" again is going to be
the subject of a proffer.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
Thank you.
MR. MANNING:
I think all of the preliminary issues
have been addressed now and we're ready to
call ODC's first witness. The first
witness that the Disciplinary Counsel will
call in these proceedings is Judge Dawn
Amacker.
THE HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER, having been
duly sworn testified as follows:
EXAMINATION BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Good morning, Your Honor.
A. Good morning.
Q. You and I have met once or twice
before I guess including today. So as you
know I'm Damon Manning. I represent the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel in these
proceedings. They were initiated as a result
of a complaint filed against Ms. Joyce Nanine
McCool by Judge Deborah Gambrell of
Mississippi. And seated to your right is our
Hearing Committee. In the center is our
Chair, Ms. Goldsmith. We have our lawyer
member, Ms. Benoist, and our other member, Mr.
Nelson. Hopefully, I got those names all
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
59
right.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You did.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. So we're in kind of close quarters. I
don't think anyone's going to have any trouble
hearing, but to the extent your responses to
the questions are important, they're more
important to the Committee and to our Court
Reporter. So with that said, you've been
sworn, if you would, please, Your Honor, give
us your name and your professional address for
the record?
A. My name is Dawn Amacker. I'm a Judge
in the 22nd Judicial District Court. My
office address is 701 North Columbia Street,
Covington, Louisiana 70433. It is Room 3068.
Q. Briefly tell us about your educational
background?
A. Well I come from a small town. I come
from Bogalusa if you know where that is.
That's in the northern part of our District.
I went to Bogalusa High School. I graduated
from there and then I went to Southeastern
Louisiana University and graduated in three
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
years with a B.A. in Government and History.
I then went to LSU Law School. I was in the
Master's Program. Back then they had the
joint MPA, Master's of Public Administration
and Law that you could do for a year. I
thought I might want to do that. I did that
for a year waiting on getting in to LSU Law
School. I went to LSU Law School. I
graduated in 1982. And that's my education.
Q. You said you are presently a Judge in
the 22nd Judicial District. When were you
first elected to that?
A. I was elected in October of 2008.
Then I took office January 1st, 2009.
Q. What type of cases do you hear as a
judge there?
A. I was elected to the second created in
the State, Family Court. Other than East
Baton Rouge Parish there's only been one that
was created legislatively and that is ours in
the 22nd. So we have two parishes, Washington
Parish and St. Tammany Parish and two Judges,
Divisions K & L, were created. Two new
Judges. In 2008, that was passed in the
legislature. We hear exclusively Family Court
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
61
cases. And that's all I've done are Family
Court cases for the last five years now.
Q. And as Family Court Judge you were
previously, as I understand, the presiding
Judge in an intrafamily adoption proceeding
filed by Dustin Maurer, M-A-U-R-E-R; is that
right?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. And also, and these are some --
this is some background information. It's
actually even some stipulations on some of the
background facts of this so I tell you that in
advance because again, Judge, as I understand,
Dustin Maurer is Raven Boyd's current husband;
is that right?
A. Well I wouldn't know if he's current
husband. I know at the time one or both of
the matters were filed to have an adoption
proceeding and a custody proceeding that
concerned these parties that he was allegedly
the husband, yes.
Q. Okay. And Dustin Maurer was seeking
to adopt the minor children born to Raven and
Michael Boyd; is that correct?
A. That's correct.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
62
Q. All right. Who represents or who
represented Dustin Maurer in those
proceedings?
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. What is the status of the intrafamily
adoption proceeding?
A. Well I don't know how much came in by
way of stipulation and of course, this is a
sealed record, and you know deferring to the
Chairman here to instruct me on how much you
wish me to speak about the facts concerning
that.
Q. I guess maybe, Judge, this might be
helpful to you and I do apologize at any time
if I over speak you, but if this is helpful to
you then let me ask you the question -- first,
let's back up. You have since recused
yourself from those proceedings?
A. Yes. I handled some preliminary
matters basically. I know this has been made
an issue in the case so I can state that there
was a proceeding in Mississippi that I was
made aware of at our hearing when counsel
argued some exceptions to our jurisdiction in
the case. Ultimately, the matters were stayed
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
pending the proceedings in the State of
Mississippi. And now I've since recused and
those, Judge Deveraux is the other Family
Court Judge, has those cases in her division.
Q. At the time you recused yourself, the
intrafamily adoption matter was stayed?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. You've referenced, but let's
also talk about independently at some point
you were the presiding Judge in a proceeding
brought by Raven Boyd or Raven Boyd Maurer
where she was seeking emergency temporary
custody and asking that the intrafamily
adoption be put back on the Court's docket; is
that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And that matter was also allotted to
you?
A. It was.
Q. Was that matter -- as I understand,
you declined to exercise subject matter
jurisdiction?
A. I did because the proceedings were
still pending in the State of Mississippi. It
was a custody action. It was clear to me with
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
64
the UCCJA that Mississippi had jurisdiction,
continuing jurisdiction.
Q. Did you decline to exercise subject
matter jurisdiction and declined to lift the
stay in the intrafamily adoption?
A. That is correct.
Q. Who represented Raven in those
proceedings while you were the Judge?
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. That record also, the one brought by
Raven, is that matter also sealed?
A. Yes. That matter was sealed. The
custody case, by the Court as I remember, due
to the sexual abuse allegations that were made
and the graphic allegations concerning the
alleged abuse of the children.
Q. Minor children?
A. Yes.
Q. Two minor girls as I understand it?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. Your rulings on declining to
exercise subject matter jurisdiction and/or
staying those proceedings, did Ms. McCool on
behalf of her client or clients, did she
appeal or file writs on your ruling in that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65
matter?
A. She did. I think on both. And again,
without materials in front of me I'm giving
you to the best of my recollection. I know
that she filed on both writs; took appeals;
they were all denied by the First Circuit and
ultimately the Supreme Court.
Q. To your knowledge have any or were any
of your rulings in the intrafamily adoption or
the other matter brought by Raven, the
emergency temporary custody matter, were any
of your rulings overturned on appeal --
A. No.
Q. -- in either of those matters?
A. No.
Q. Judge, there is a couple of binders on
the small table in front of you. The binder
to the left has ODC exhibits and I would ask
if you would -- they have tabs to the right.
Turn to ODC Exhibit 11. When you get there,
Judge, you should have an October 11th, 2011
correspondence to me at the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel and is that your
signature on that letter?
A. Yes, it is.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
66
Q. This is correspondence that you
directed to my office regarding Joyce Nanine
McCool complaint. And let me -- let's just
get a couple of things out preliminarily. It
says, "As per our conversation this date in
connection with the complaint against attorney
Joyce Nanine McCool filed with State of
Louisiana Disciplinary Counsel by Chancellor
Gambrell" and it represents that matter. So
let me ask you, there has been some discussion
or they may be some discussion about whether
or not or why you personally did not file a
complaint against Ms. McCool in these
proceedings. And again, with that back drop,
explain this opening kind of paragraph here,
"As per our conversation this date," to the
extent you recall how that conversation was
initiated and why you opted not to formally
file a complaint against Ms. McCool?
A. Well, there's a lot to it and without
looking at specific documents it's hard to
tell you exact dates. But I received --
first of all my staff --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Hearsay.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
MR. MANNING:
We've addressed that the hearsay rules
of the Code of Evidence are more lax in
these proceedings. I don't know what the
Judge is getting ready to say, but she is
I believe going to testify about some
communication her staff received that was
brought directly to her attention.
MR. DUCOTE:
And the reason I'm objecting, this is
a --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Go ahead. We'll allow it.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. I received information from my staff,
my secretary and my staff attorney, that
communications were being made to our office
indicating that on the internet there was a
petition that concerned a ruling I had made in
connection with this sealed adoption
proceeding and/or the custody proceeding
concerning Ms. McCool's clients. Thereafter,
we actually received a petition that was faxed
purportedly by Ms. McCool's client because her
name --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
MR. DUCOTE:
Again, object. In fact, I'll make a
running objection because these are the
crucial things. Who did what? She says,
"purportedly". Well that's not even --
that's speculation because there's no
basis. And again, I think this is
important because they listed in their
disclosure to us the people who had
knowledge, Judge Amacker's staff. So I
think that we're connecting dots here
purportedly that --
MR. MANNING:
I'll ask some specific questions
rather than --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you.
MR. MANNING:
-- maybe the narrative form on this
topic.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, at some point you had a
conversation about the information you were
just discussing with Judge Gambrell; is that
right?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
69
A. I did.
Q. And you came to learn that Judge
Gambrell had or was filing a complaint?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Leading.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, did you come into possession of
any information that suggested to you that
someone else was filing a complaint against
Ms. McCool?
A. Yes. Going back, I think I can take
care of the objection by forgetting
"purportedly" and stating that the petition
that I got at my office which I saw had at the
top of the petition that it came from a fax
line from Raven Maurer who is Ms. McCool's
client. It was a petition directed to me, to
Judge Gambrell, to the Louisiana Supreme Court
and had many signatures and comments directed
to the Judges. And Ms. McCool's name was
listed as number one on the signatory line of
the petition.
Q. Judge, turn to ODC Exhibit 11(B) as in
boy. This is a copy of a petition to the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
70
Louisiana Supreme Court, Judge Dawn Amacker
and Judge Deborah Gambrell. Have you seen
this petition before?
A. Yes, I have. And rather than on the
top, it appears to be on the bottom, if you
see Raven Boyd. Actually I think Boyd is her
married name. That's the -- it kind of -- it
doesn't show her, but it did fully on the
original copy show this was coming from her
fax machine to us.
Q. Okay. And you said you received that
on your office fax at --
A. Yes.
Q. -- the courthouse?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Judge, what did you do in
response to receiving this petition via fax?
A. Well, I did two things. One thing is
that I sent our standard letter to Ms. McCool
and the other attorney in the case as we do
and we're required to do in Louisiana when we
receive an ex-parte inappropriate
communication from a client or an attorney.
We send them a letter that states that we've
received this communication. We attach the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
71
communication. And so that was the first
thing that I had done.
And then secondly, I called Judge
Gambrell. And I'd never met her or talked to
Judge Gambrell before, but I was very
concerned and I wasn't sure she knew about it.
And she's listed and I'm listed and there's
some very terrible things that are said and
what I perceived to be possible threats to our
safety. I thought it was absolutely
imperative that she know that there was this
petition out there. And of course, by then we
also knew that it was on the internet because
of the phone calls and the people that had
come by and told us about it.
Q. If you turn back one exhibit to ODC
11(A), is this -- does this document look
familiar to you?
A. Yes. That's the one I just talked
about.
Q. Who is Michelle Simon?
A. That's my administrative assistant.
My secretary.
Q. Okay. Is it your testimony that you
directed your assistant to issue this cover
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
72
letter?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And by that cover letter you returned
this petition to Ms. McCool?
A. Yes, I did. And let me state that
normally, I never even see the ex-parte
communication. That's how my office deals
with it. And then they just send the letter
with the communication back. The reason I saw
this one is because how concerning the
contents were and if they see something that
-- and they know through my directive, if it's
perceived as a threat or something that needs
action taken on it possibly by the Judge, it
is given to me and that's why this one was
given to me. But the letter goes out from my
secretary to the attorneys with the
attachment.
Q. Do you recall here today what maybe
some of the comments that you saw or became
aware of that you found maybe most concerning
or threatening when you first looked at this?
A. You mean --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection because first of all,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
73
they're not exhibits and that if she's
heard comments or saw comments from
somebody else, there's no way we can cross
that. That's nothing -- and again, it's
irrelevant. The fact that somebody else
may have said something that isn't the
subject of this petition is in here it's
irrelevant and there's no way we can
question that or ascertain the source.
MR. MANNING:
We're going to get to that a little
later because the charges accuse Ms.
McCool of soliciting others to make these
ex-parte communications. The Judge has
already testified that she contacted ODC
and Judge Gambrell because she saw these
things and something, pursuant to her
testimony, concerned her from a personal
safety standpoint. I think it's perfectly
relevant. It goes to the issue of harm
which is a Rule 19, Section 10(c) issue.
And so I think she can testify as to what
she personally saw that concerned her for
her personal safety.
MR. DUCOTE:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
74
If I could just explain briefly. The
allegations -- the documents that Ms.
McCool solicited people to say "protect
the children," "listen to the evidence,"
"apply the law". If somebody else
somewhere else calls and says something
else that isn't tied to her then that's
prejudicial. It has no value here and
it's a due process issue.
MR. MANNING:
When you inflame sensibilities of the
general public and then provide them a
phone number and ask them to call, you
can't then back up and say, but I didn't
tell them to say that. So the relevance I
think is clear.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
If it's communications that Ms.
Amacker heard or think she saw, we're
going to allow it and the fact that you
know, it may be hearsay will go to the
weight but we're going to allow it.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. Well, let me say that the first
communications that I saw were threatening are
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
in this petition. If you read the comments --
I mean there's a comment here about coming to
the Judge's homes. Let me see if I can find
that one. On Page 9, signature 172 purports
to be a person living in Covington. That's
where our courthouse is. "What will it take
to get the attention of the Judges? A protest
rally at their courthouse or home. Organize
one and count me in." There are many other
pejorative comments. Angry. The Judge's are
called "sick".
Many, many comments are made about the
case which was extremely disturbing to me
concerning these young children and all our
efforts to keep these matters private for the
family's sake and the children's sake. I was
just stunned that this would come across the
fax line at the office.
Q. (By Mr. Manning) Judge, when you
received the petition that we're looking at,
was or were the proceedings that we've already
identified, the intrafamily adoption and then
the other ex-parte emergency petition or
motion that was filed by Raven Boyd; were
either or both of those matters still pending
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
or stayed before you at that time?
A. Without looking at documents I can't
tell you. I know they were still in my
Division. I know they were still pending
cases in my Division. I believe everything
was stayed at this time and almost immediately
thereafter, within a few days is when we got
the petition. That's what I believe, but I
would have to look at the exact documents to
tell you when that happened.
Q. And I understand that. That first
paragraph says, "We the undersigned insist
that you ensure that the two little girls who
are the subject of case number 2011-14457
pending in the 22nd JDC, St. Tammany Parish,
Louisiana." That is one of the cases we're
referencing that was assigned to you?
A. I'm assuming it is. I don't know
about the numbers there. That number looks
familiar. We had two different case numbers,
but I'm assuming that is the -- probably the
adoption proceeding, but I couldn't tell you
for sure.
Q. Okay. Look at that middle paragraph.
It says, "To Judge Amacker, we the undersigned
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
77
insist that you withdraw the unlawful stay of
the adoption proceedings currently pending in
your court. And in accordance with Louisiana
Children's Code Article 1253, a hearing be set
with all due speed to allow the girl's
stepfather to show why it is in the girls best
interest that they be adopted by him, thereby
terminating all parental rights of the girl's
biological father." Judge are those the
issues that were pending in the cases before
you?
A. Yes. And if I recall, the timing of
this was the writ to the Supreme Court was
pending and that was very concerning to me
that because it's sent to the Supreme Court as
well, that this is pending with them and this
is a lobbying effort placed on the internet
and sent to me and the Supreme Court and
another Judge.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. There's no foundation for
her to say that she knows that this was
sent to the Supreme Court. It's addressed
-- it says Louisiana Supreme Court.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
78
That's fine.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, you touched on this just now, I
think before the objection. If you can,
explain to the Committee and for the record
your, as the presiding Judge, your personal
thoughts on the timing and the content of this
petition?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Speculation. Her personal
thoughts are not evidence of any --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. I had a lot of personal thoughts about
it. My main thoughts were about the safety
and security of the children that were at
issue. I don't know if it's this petition or
what had been placed on the internet at the
same time, but there were links to a recording
of the children which I to this day have not
personally seen. I didn't for a long time
because I was the Judge still involved in the
case and I wanted to make sure I distanced
from that. But I know that the children were
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
on the recording linked to this, maybe this
petition, but definitely the one that was on
the internet and for Ms. McCool's links that
she had created on her own personal pages, the
children testifying about apparently what
allegedly had happened and how they had been
sexually abused. And I checked last night.
Their picture is still --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
-- on the internet.
MR. DUCOTE:
Their picture is still on the internet
from what source? From where? Not
relevant.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I don't think she's testifying to the
source.
MR. DUCOTE:
So then it's not relevant. I mean the
pictures are on there --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Well she's just testifying that the
pictures are on the internet so --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
MR. DUCOTE:
If she's saying that that's -- if she
says that, what's the relevance to this
proceeding?
MR. MANNING:
It is relevant because again, as I
said, in Rule 19, Section 10(c), one of
the issues that this Committee has to look
at is the harm. And if you find
misconduct you look at harm or potential
harm that resulted from the misconduct and
if that is violative conduct to place
this material, these soliciting of others
to have ex-parte communication through
inflammatory, false statements, then it is
relevant because the harm is still out
there according to the Judge's testimony.
She testified she'd looked last night and
the information is still accessible on the
internet. We can look at that a little
later with Ms. McCool whenever she's
testifying so I don't mind moving on off
of that question.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
That's fine.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, turn to the second page of the
petition. You'll note that the petition
itself is page numbered, but you'll note also
at the bottom these are Bates stamped and for
the record, you'll be at Bates stamp page 43.
Tell me, Judge, whose name do you see as the
first signature on the petition?
A. Nanine McCool.
Q. And the tenth signature on the
petition?
A. Raven Maurer.
Q. Who is Raven Maurer?
A. She was the petitioner in one, I
believe in the custody action that was in
front of me and she was the wife I believe of
the petitioner in the adoption action in front
of me.
Q. All right. Judge, if you will, turn
all the way to the back of your exhibit book
to exhibit ODC 19. This is off of the
internet site, Change.org. It's in evidence.
It says, "Justice for (redacted) and
(redacted). Sign this petition." Is that
what you have before you right now?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
A. It is.
Q. Have you ever personally met the minor
children of Raven and Michael Boyd?
A. No.
Q. Would you know if that is an accurate
portrait?
A. No.
Q. A true portrait of the children?
A. No, I wouldn't.
Q. Let me ask you then as the Judge in
this case with the back drop that you've
already explained, and I'm going to ask you to
assume for purposes of this question that that
is a portrait of the minors involved in your
case and that their names are as listed there.
And I think I spoke their names and we're
trying to make an effort, Judge, not to
include their names --
A. I understand.
Q. We'll redact the names of the minor
children, but I'm going to ask you to assume
that that is their names and that that is
their picture and I want your response to that
as the Judge in the pending case when these
matters were posted on the internet?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
83
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. That's not a proper
question. "Your response to that." To
what? People, parents can post their kids
pictures on the internet. Her response to
that is not relevant to this.
MR. MANNING:
It's been stipulated to that Ms.
McCool posted this.
MR. DUCOTE:
That's all right.
MR. MANNING:
Or had some role in posting these.
MR. DUCOTE:
Sure.
MR. MANNING:
So it's relevant.
MR. DUCOTE:
But her response; I don't know what
that means "her response"?
MR. MANNING:
As the Judge, I do want to know and it
goes to potentially, to harm or potential
harm as Judge in this case that was
pending before her at the time these
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
84
matters were posted, I'm asking what are
her -- just as before with the petition we
looked at. What are her personal feelings
about this fact that this matter was
posted online?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We're going to allow it. Again, if
it's a relevant objection, it'll go the
weight and how much weight we give it when
we consider it.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. I had been a Judge a few years when
this happened. I had been a lawyer for in
excess of probably 27 years when this had
happened. I had handled at that point in time
literally thousands of cases. I had never,
ever seen an attorney send that kind of
petition or have their client send a petition
to any Judge. I had never seen anything like
this on the internet. I knew I had a sealed,
closed record in the adoption and the custody
proceeding.
I believe I knew at that point in time
that certainly the adoption proceedings
throughout the United States are sealed. But
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
85
that the custody proceeding as well in the
State of Mississippi was sealed. I knew this
was potentially devastating to the family, to
the children; to both sides of the case; to
the Judge's involved. It affected our
personal safety. It was lobbying the public
to get the Judges to change their mind and
influence and bully and intimidate us and this
was just the beginning. But I knew then what
was in front of me and Judge Gambrell and
everyone involved in this case. It was
chilling. Absolutely.
Q. (By Mr. Manning) Turn to the second
page of that exhibit. Judge, if you look down
you'll see that kind of beginning with that
third paragraph from the top, you'll see that
-- and you can review it, but it begins
talking about the case involving Raven Boyd's
minor children. And there's reference to those
minors there in that paragraph. You'll see
the next paragraph and you referenced this
earlier in your testimony, it says, "Listen to
their first disclosure to Raven." And then
there's a link. And then it says a day later,
their second and then there's a second link.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
86
Do you know what those links are to or
have a belief?
A. I have personally never clicked on or
know what those links are. But I know --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. She said she doesn't know.
So to go beyond that is not relevant.
MR. MANNING:
She didn't say she didn't know.
MR. DUCOTE:
She just said it.
MR. MANNING:
She said, "I know," and then you
objected and said she doesn't know.
Apparently --
MR. DUCOTE:
She said she never clicked on it.
Why?
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Why did you never personally click on
those links?
A. Because I still had the case in front
of me and sometimes part of -- part of the
strategy that attorney's have in cases is to
get the Judge recused from the case if they
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
87
think that you ruled against them or
potentially are going to. And they would want
you to have extraneous information or ex-parte
information that would later require you to be
recused. So as Judge's we have to do
everything that we can do to fight that and to
stay the Judge in the case and not let them
intimidate and bully us and get us into
situations that are going to require recusal.
So I couldn't look at all of those.
And for many, many months these type of
things had to be monitored by staff and other
parties. If there were any threats or
anything like that that were directed at me,
certainly that was transmitted to me, but any
-- me clicking on and seeing anything that
would have jeopardized my case in my opinion
would not have been something that would have
been appropriate or proper for me to do. And
I could do it now, but quite frankly, it turns
my stomach to think of somebody putting these
children on the internet.
If you click on my name right now, one of
the images you will see are these two children
and that's because of the links that Ms.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
88
McCool and the other people involved with her
have linked my name with these sites. And
I've never even seen these children. I
wouldn't know them if I had. But it makes me
sad for them that we're to this point.
Q. Judge, for purposes of the next
question or questions I'm going to ask you to
assume that those links were to audio
recordings of the children discussing with
their mother, allegations of sexual abuse,
okay? With that assumption, you will see the
next paragraph and it says --
MR. DUCOTE:
Are we still on, I'm sorry, 19?
MR. MANNING:
Yes. We're going to the second page.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. That very next paragraph following the
audio links, Judge, it says, "Now consider
that no Judge has ever heard those recordings.
Why? Because for four and a half years they
have simply refused to do so." And I'm going
to stop there for a minute. Actually, go down
then and you'll see it references your name.
"Judge Dawn Amacker in the 22nd Judicial
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
89
District Court for the Parish of St. Tammany
in Louisiana is also refusing to hear any
evidence or to protect the minor children" and
I'll omit their names, "even though the law
requires her to have a hearing and to take
evidence." Okay. Now I've got some questions
for you, Judge. Based on those statements let
me ask you, did Raven Boyd or anyone else in
those intrafamily adoption or the other
emergency ex-parte petition filed while you
were the presiding Judge, did Raven Boyd or
anyone else offer any audio recordings to you
as evidence of abuse?
A. No. We never even got to that point.
All I heard were preliminary exceptions. This
case was never tried in my division. It was
very simple, very short what I had, but, no.
Absolutely not.
Q. Let me ask you to say that "you have
refused to listen to these audio recordings" --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. That's not what it says.
It says, "Judge Dawn Amacker in the 22nd
JDC is also refusing to hear any evidence
or to protect the ..." -- it doesn't even
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
90
mention the audio recordings.
MR. MANNING:
It links the audio recordings and then
it says you refuse to hear any evidence.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, do you contend that that is a
misrepresentation of what has taken place in
your Court?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Calls for a conclusion.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. It's factual. It doesn't call for a
conclusion. It says, "Now consider that no
Judge has ever heard those recordings. Why?
Because for 4.5 years they have simply refused
to do so." In my Court, I can tell you I
never refused to do so. I was never offered
any recordings. That is not true.
Q. (By Mr. Manning) And again, to say
that you refused to hold a hearing even though
the law requires you to, do you believe that
to be a misrepresentation or a false
statement?
A. Absolutely both.
Q. And to the extent I believe I asked,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
but to the extent I didn't, were any of your
rulings in those matters ever overturned on
appeal?
A. No.
Q. You'll see, Judge, at the bottom of
the page, there's other information and you
can read it. Actually after the paragraph
that says, "Judge Dawn Amacker," I would ask
you really to scan it until you get to the
bottom. You'll see that the information and
allegations that are listed there. And then
once you get to the bottom of the page, Judge,
you'll see and I'm quoting, it says,
"Horrified. Call the Judges and let them
know." And then if you turn the page, it
lists your name. It lists Judge Deborah
Gambrell and then below that it lists Dawn
Amacker, Judge 22nd JDC, St. Tammany Parish,
Louisiana. Who is Amber Mitchell?
A. That's my staff attorney.
Q. And you've already told us that
Michelle Simon was your administrative
assistant?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recognize those phone numbers
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
92
and fax line numbers? Are those accurate
numbers for you or your staff's office?
A. Yes, they are.
Q. And then it also has contact
information for the Louisiana Supreme Court;
see that?
A. Yes.
Q. Did -- first question, did you
personally ever receive a telephone call that
got through to you from some woman who was
trying to have an ex-parte communication with
you about this case?
A. Let me see if I can break that down
just to be accurate. I -- no. We have things
put in place at our offices that noone ever
gets to me as the Judge without it first being
vetted through usually my secretary and my
staff attorney. So if there's ex-parte
communications that come in, and we get a lot
in Family Court. You get a lot of angry
people and people calling in and it happens.
Those never get to the Judge.
So I can't tell you who called, what they
said, these type of things of who called in.
I can say that hundreds of members of the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
93
public and attorneys have stopped by or called
to let us know this was on the internet out of
concern; out of concern for us. They just
wanted to let my staff know or me know. Stop
me on the street, in the hallway, whatever,
out of concern and horror -- the horrified was
the public and the attorneys that saw this.
And still are.
Q. Judge, turn back in the exhibit book
to ODC Exhibit 13(d). And then if you'll look
at the second page; is that your signature?
A. It is.
Q. And that's correspondence that you
directed to me at the Office of Disciplinary
Counsel on January 22nd of 2013?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. If you would, Judge, on the
second page, that first paragraph it says,
"The petitions online are purportedly closed,
but the defamatory content remains online.
These petition sites can and should be removed
from the internet as they continue to direct
people to contact Judge Gambrell and myself to
express how horrified they are with our
decisions and attempt to intimidate the Courts
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
involved and influence our decisions."
Now I've asked you this already and maybe
you've answered this, but to the extent there
is additional information you can provide,
tell the Hearing Committee and for the record,
why you felt this was an effort to intimidate
and influence your decision?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Why she felt it was an
effort to intimidate and influence. I
mean that's not probative evidence, how
she felt about it.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, you made this statement. Can
you explain the statement that you made that's
in a document that's already admitted into
evidence in the proceedings?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes. I think it is relevant.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. I wrote this January 2013. At that
point we were almost two years into this. The
things that I'm referencing there remain
online. They continue to tell people to
lobby, basically I'll just paraphrase, the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
95
Judge's. Ms. McCool still has on her Facebook
site what she had in the beginning. That
hasn't changed. She has a blog called
Sheepless in America or Sheep Free Zone. The
petition is still on there. If you Google my
name, they have linked, she or people on her
behalf, everything they possibly could
concerning these children, those blogs, those
websites. Facebook sites that are called
Prosecute Judge Dawn Amacker.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. There's nothing in this
charge that mentions any other websites
and there's no evidence saying that Ms.
McCool has any responsibility for any
websites created by other people who have
a disagreement with Judge Amacker.
MR. MANNING:
It goes to harm and I think the Judge
said these are linked to sites and blogs
that Ms. McCool --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
If she has knowledge of this --
MR. DUCOTE:
But she doesn't have knowledge --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
96
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I'm going to allow it.
MR. DUCOTE:
-- of where these came from. The fact
that somebody else adds a link to their
Facebook page doesn't make Ms. McCool
responsible for the page upon which that
link is linked.
MR. MANNING:
It's not just someone. It's a lawyer
who is the counsel of record in the case
that's being discussed.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We're going to allow her to tell us
what she knows.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. There's so much. Let me see if I can
be brief. There's a site called Prosecute
Judge Dawn Amacker. Ms. McCool has had and
although I didn't check it last night, it has
not been removed to my knowledge, a link in
which she likes the site, promotes the site on
her Facebook page. She has responded on the
site and appeared on the site. Whether she
created it or not I don't know.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
97
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. That has nothing to do
with this. The fact that this goes to the
whole Fifth Amendment thing and makes my
point. Judge Amacker is trolling the
internet to find something on some site
that Ms. Amacker -- Ms. McCool likes and
that's relevant? I don't think so.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We're going to allow it.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. Without going into great detail it's
still on the internet. You can bring it up.
This site encourages people to take action
against me including criminal prosecution. At
times it's mentioned Federal indictments.
People respond that I and other Judges are
satanic, evil, criminal, corrupt. There is an
ongoing dialog and has been for years in which
Ms. McCool has participated and she openly
likes and links this site to her Facebook
account. That's one. There was a site
recently --
MR. DUCOTE:
Again, objection. This has nothing to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
98
do -- somebody else creates a site,
something and then Ms. McCool, if she
comments on something, that's nothing
about these charges.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I disagree. We're going to allow it.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. There's another site that recently
that I became aware of in which my photo was
placed and the name Shawn Amacker was a site
created on Facebook with my name, some of my
identifying information. Ms. McCool again, on
the first page of her Facebook site liked and
promoted this by it being on the first page of
her Facebook site.
When you went to it, it was clearly an
impersonation of me, my photo that's been used
on Prosecute Judge Dawn Amacker. I think it
was the same one that was used on this site.
At that time she was only one of two people
who had liked the site. Whether she created
it or not, I don't know. It was linked to and
showed that I liked other sites that were
obviously intended to be derogatory to me. I
had to report this to Facebook. They took it
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
down and said it was impersonation and the
site was removed. And removed them from also
her like page on her Facebook page.
There are other sites. It would take the
majority of the day for me to go into all the
sites and the blogs and the various things
that Ms. McCool is a part of that she has
linked to my name in which misrepresentations,
falsehoods, discussion of cases that are
pending before the Court.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. This goes far beyond the
allegations of this complaint. This
complaint is about a specific case.
Specific sites. Specific petitions. She
has no records of anything else. It's
just layers upon layers that would take
all day for this and that about various
cases. It's not probative. It's not
pled. It's a due process violation and
it's irrelevant.
MR. MANNING:
Again, I think it goes to harm. But I
would, with the permission of the
Committee, like to direct the witness to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
100
another document and some other questions.
I think I'm good here.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you.
MR. MANNING:
It's well explained.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, turn to ODC Exhibit 12(A) and
as a commentary why I'm working backwards
through these exhibits I don't know. 12(A)
you'll see is I guess some type of online
article or blog that says, "Make Louisiana and
Mississippi courts protect (redacted) and
(redacted)." Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. And it says, "Target Louisiana Supreme
Court, Judge Dawn Amacker, Judge Deborah
Gambrell" and it says, "Sponsored by Bridge to
Justice" and something about LC3. I will
represent to you, Judge, that it is stipulated
to that Bridge to Justice is a non-profit
organization created by Ms. McCool.
MR. DUCOTE:
We didn't stipulate to it. It wasn't
even mentioned.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
101
MR. MANNING:
It is stipulated to and we'll cover
that with her testimony.
MR. DUCOTE:
Well, let's be clear. He's
representing they're stipulated to. That
wasn't even addressed to be stipulated.
He may take the position that she admitted
it at some point, but that's not a
stipulation.
MR. MANNING:
Okay. Then let's say we'll address an
admission later on and I'll withdraw it.
I'll deal with that with another witness
at a later time.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. I just wanted to get you to look at
this particular article. And Judge, if you
would, turn to the second page, please, Your
Honor. And the first paragraph and it says,
"Insist that Judge Amacker and Judge Gambrell
do their jobs. If you want more info, go to
BridgeToJustice.com and read the writ
application to the Louisiana Supreme Court.
Number one, we previously discussed that Ms.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
McCool on behalf of Raven had writted your
rulings to the Louisiana First Circuit and
then to the Louisiana Supreme Court, correct?
A. That's right.
Q. So while the writ is pending at the
Supreme Court then, which this article
suggests or states as fact, would then that
case still have been pending before you in
your Court?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Okay. So this is a communication
posted on the internet at a time when this
case was still pending before you?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. The second paragraph,
Judge, it says:
"Please sign the petition; circulate to
all of your friend's and families and call
Judge Amacker and Judge Gambrell during
the hours of 8:30 to 5:00 starting Monday,
August 15th to ask why they won't follow
the law and protect these children. Let
them know you're watching and expect them
to do their job and most of all, make sure
these precious little girls are safe."
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
103
I've asked you before and I'm going to ask
you again for your reaction. You were the
presiding Judge in this case when these
comments were made. Call you. It gives a
specific date, day, and time to call and it
says, "let them know." Let you know that
you're being watched and that you're expected
to do certain things while the case is
pending. Can I please get your response?
A. Well, my response was not to let them
accomplish what is their purpose.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Speculation. Their
purpose? The only purpose they state is
make sure the precious little girls are
safe by knowing and expecting them to do
their job. I don't know what she says
their purpose is. It's speculation.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, do you feel -- you provided a
copy of this article to my office, right?
A. Uh-huh (affirmative).
THE COURT REPORTER:
Yes? No?
THE WITNESS:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
Yes.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. And having read this and having
provided it to my office, that information in
there, did you personally, Judge, since it's
talking about you and a case, did you feel it
was an attempt to influence you in your future
decisions in that case?
A. Yes. If you read the last paragraph
on the first page, "Judge Dawn Amacker and the
22nd JDC, Division L, for the Parish of St.
Tammany, Louisiana also refused to protect the
girls even though she has the power and
authority to protect them. RM now has an
application to the Louisiana Supreme Court
asking that it order Judge Amacker to protect
the children." It's trial by internet.
That's what we have now when we have this on
the internet.
Okay. Trial by internet. Let me put this
out there to the media or to the people on the
global internet and get them to influence and
intimidate this Judge to change her mind in a
sealed, closed proceeding. I was shocked. I
was stunned. I could not believe -- I still
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
105
can't believe that a stay order could not
issue to prevent an attorney. You might
expect this from litigants. They do this all
the time on the internet to every Family Court
Judge probably in the world. But you do not
expect a professional who is held to higher
standards and ethical standards, you do not
expect this. It took my breath away.
Q. Judge, turn to ODC Exhibit 12(C). You
made reference earlier to this Sheep Free Zone
and we know have an online article or blog
from the Sheep Free Zone. You see it's dated
Thursday, August 25th, 2011?
A. Yes.
Q. And it says, "Justice for" and then it
lists the first names of the two minor
children. Your Honor, if you'll turn to the
second page at the bottom -- what is it posted
by Nanine McCool, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was at that time the presiding --
I'm sorry, the counsel of record for Raven
Boyd in proceedings pending before you,
correct?
A. That's correct.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
Q. If you move in -- on the first page
you'll see again beginning like with the third
paragraph, it starts discussing underlying
details of the case involving Raven and her
minor children. Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. And allegations of sexual abuse. You
see references to that in there, correct?
A. Exactly.
Q. You see again in the next paragraph it
says, "Listen to their first disclosures to
Raven," and it has a link and it says, "and a
day later, their second," and it has another
link; do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. By "listen" do you as the person
reading this today take that to mean if you
link to that there will be audio you can
listen to and hear?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. The last paragraph, Judge, on
that first page it says:
District Court for the Parish of St.
Tammany in Louisiana is also refusing to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
hear any evidence or to protect the minor
children even though the law requires her
to have a hearing and to take evidence."
Judge, is that a false statement or a
misrepresentation of what transpired in your
Court?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. It's multi-part question.
It's a combination question.
MR. MANNING:
Well Rule 8.4(c) says it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to
engage in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
MR. DUCOTE:
I'm going to object because when I
took Judge Amacker's deposition just a
couple weeks ago both Mr. Manning and
Judge Amacker's counsel and Judge Amacker
refused to answer any questions and this
was January 22, 2004 (sic) whether
anything Ms. McCool did was unethical or
breached the Rules of Professional
Conduct. So --
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
And I did not ask the Judge if she
believes that Ms. McCool violated a rule
or engaged in misconduct. It is a factual
question. Does she believe -- is it her
position that that statement that we just
read is it false and/or is it a
misrepresentation of what occurred in her
Court?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
THE WITNESS:
Can you show me the statement again?
MR. MANNING:
Yes.
THE WITNESS:
There's so many of these and I --
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Yes. Bottom of the first page, Judge.
It says:
"Jude Dawn Amacker in the 22nd Judicial
hear any evidence or to protect," lists
the minor children's first names, and
says, "even though the law requires her to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
have a hearing and to take evidence."
Let me stop there. And I asked you is
that either false and/or is that a
misrepresentation of what transpired in your
Court?
A. It is false and this same exact Sheep
Free Zone is the one I mentioned earlier that
to this day is still up in exactly this form
on her blog site.
Q. And again, I think I've asked you this
before, but those issues about whether the
stay that you entered was appropriate or not,
those issues were brought up in a writ to the
Louisiana First Circuit and to the Louisiana
Supreme Court, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And writs were denied by both Courts?
A. That is correct.
Q. Judge, turn if you will to ODC exhibit
13(A). We're going to now look at some of the
motions that were filed to recuse you in other
proceedings. This is expedited consideration
requested. Motion to Recuse and it is in the
matter of Keister versus Keister. That's
K-E-I-S-T-E-R. 22nd Judicial District Court,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
110
Parish of St. Tammany. Is that what you're
looking at, Judge?
A. Yes.
Q. Who filed this motion?
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. You'll see, Judge, on the first page
kind of in that second paragraph it has some
statements about the reasons for seeking your
recusal. You'll see that one of those is, she
states, "And has actively participated in a
complaint against undersigned to the Louisiana
Disciplinary Counsel." Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Judge, did you in fact recuse
yourself from the Keister case?
A. There were so many of these. I know
eventually I did voluntarily recuse myself
from the Keister case.
Q. I have the order and we're going to
look at it.
A. All right.
Q. But before we move on, what was the
date that this Motion to Recuse was filed?
A. It looks like May 31st, 2012.
Q. Okay. Turn to ODC 13(B). What is
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
111
this?
A. This is the order I was referring to
where I voluntarily recused myself.
Q. What's the date of your order, Judge?
A. June 5, 2012.
Q. Okay. I'm going to ask, Judge, if you
will, please -- first off, is that your
handwriting on the --
A. Yes.
Q. Would you please read out loud the
reasons that you expressly stated as the
reasons for your recusal?
A. Yes. "The Court hereby voluntarily
recuses itself due to the possibility that the
Judge may be called as a witness in the
proceedings referenced by counsel and out of
an abundance of caution and to avoid the
appearance of impropriety, the matter shall be
referred to another Judge at the District
Court for trial through the random process of
assignment in accordance with provisions of
Code of Civil Procedure Article 253.1."
Q. All right. Judge, there -- and I have
it here somewhere. Here it is. This is part
of -- part of respondent -- I know these have
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
been relabeled. It was originally
Respondent's Exhibit I which was an in globo
submission of motions and rulings in other
matters.
MR. DUCOTE:
Right. That's all a part of R 5.
MR. MANNING:
Okay.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, what is part of Respondent's
Exhibit R 5, in globo --
MR. DUCOTE:
And that's in front of her. R 5 is in
front of her.
MR. MANNING:
It's in that book. Thank you, Your
Honor.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. If you would turn to R 5 and tell me
then is that a Motion to Recuse in the matter
of In Re: Dustin Corey Maurer Applying for
Intrafamily Adoption?
A. I must be looking at the wrong one.
I'm finding Keister.
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
113
May I help her?
MR. DUCOTE:
They're all together.
MR. MANNING:
Yes. It's probably a little further
back. Okay.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
What page is that?
MR. MANNING:
It is -- it looks like Bates page 41.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you.
THE WITNESS:
44.
MR. MANNING:
Oh, I'm sorry. It's a "4". 44.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, is this the intrafamily
adoption matter we've been discussing already
today that was originally allotted to you?
A. Yes.
Q. And this is a motion seeking to recuse
you from that case?
A. That's correct.
Q. Who filed this motion?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
114
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. And what was the date that it was
filed?
A. May 31, 2012.
Q. Same date as the motion filed Keister
that we just looked at?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. Again, Judge, you'll see that
at least part of the reason why Ms. McCool was
seeking to recuse you from these proceedings
was because of your "participation" with the
ODC's investigation; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Judge, there should also
be maybe the very next document there in
responding to the exhibit, your order.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And what Bates stamp page is
that? 46?
A. 46.
Q. Okay. Judge, did you recuse yourself
from that matter?
A. I did voluntarily recuse myself. Yes.
Q. Okay. And what is the date of your
order of recusal?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
115
A. June 5, 2012.
Q. Again I'll ask and I know it's
repetitive, but you wrote out again your
specific reasons for recusing in this matter.
Would you read those out loud, please?
A. Yes. "The Court hereby voluntarily
recuses itself in the matter and shall be
referred" -- I'm sorry. "The Court hereby
voluntarily recuses itself due to the
possibility that the Judge may be called as a
witness in the referenced proceeding." It's
hard to read this copy.
Q. Involving counsel?
A. Yes, I think so. Sometimes I can't
read my own handwriting. "Proceeding
involving counsel and out of an abundance of
caution and to avoid the appearance of
impropriety, the matter shall be referred to
another Judge of the District Court for trial
through the random process of assignment in
accordance with the provisions of the Code of
Civil Procedure Article 253.1."
Q. Okay. Before we move on, again the
date of that order that you just read?
A. June 5, 2012.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
Q. Judge, look at ODC Exhibit 13(C).
That is a Motion to Recuse in Cullen versus
Cullen. Do you have that?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the date this was filed?
A. June 28, 2012.
Q. Which is after both of the orders of
voluntary recusal that we just looked at in
Keister and Maurer, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Yes?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Who filed this motion in Cullen
versus Cullen?
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. All right. And this motion was
seeking to recuse you from this case, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Judge, the second paragraph in this
motion filed by Ms. McCool, it states, "The
Court has voluntarily and expressly admitted
its extreme bias and conflict in recusing
itself in two other cases which grounds are
equally applicable in the case at bar." My
question, Judge, and just using the language
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
contained in this motion, did you ever
"expressly admit extreme bias and conflict" in
recusing yourself from any case involving Ms.
McCool?
A. No.
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. Several grounds. First
off, it calls for a conclusion of law.
And second of all, she's already, through
her counsel, objected to any testimony or
discussions regarding her mental
deliberative process in connection with
any litigation. So I don't think they can
have it both ways. The documents say what
they say. So for her to go beyond that is
not relevant.
MR. MANNING:
The motions that we looked at says
that "she expressly" made certain
admissions. We've looked at two orders
and she's read those into the record.
What I asked her was in anything outside
of any of these orders has she ever made
an "express", which is what was accused in
the motion. An "express admission" of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
118
"extreme bias and prejudice" against Ms.
McCool in any proceeding. And it's
charged as a false statement. It's in the
formal charges and I'm asking the Judge to
clarify.
We have read the orders and my
question to the Judge is, in addition to
what we read is there anything anywhere
else where you expressly admitted extreme
bias and prejudice against Ms. McCool?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. No.
Q. (By Mr. Manning) Is that then a false
statement in your --
MR. DUCOTE:
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. Yes.
Q. (By Mr. Manning) And that was the
Cullen case. If you would turn to ODC Exhibit
13(d), Your Honor. Again, that is your order
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
119
voluntarily recusing in the Cullen case?
A. Yes. Well, no. I've got that's
Keister. Is there another one you need me to
look at?
Q. 13(d).
A. (D) Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not hearing
very well either. My ears are stopped up.
Yes. It is Cullen.
Q. Okay. And 13(d), Your Honor, is that
your order voluntarily recusing yourself in
the Cullen case?
A. Yes.
Q. And what is the date of that order?
A. June 28, 2012.
Q. And this will be the last time I ask
you too, but it is your handwriting, Judge.
Read us, again, out loud what your reasons for
recusal were in this order?
A. "The Court hereby voluntarily recuses
itself due to the possibility that the Judge
may be called as a witness in proceedings in
which counsel for mover is a party and out of
an abundance of caution and to avoid the
appearance of impropriety the matter should be
referred to the Judge of Division K of the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
120
District Court."
Q. Judge, do you find your reasons for
recusal in the Cullen matter consistent with
the reasons for recusal in the other matter we
just looked at?
A. Yes.
Q. Did at any time in the Cullen case,
did you ever expressly admit extreme bias or
prejudice against Ms. McCool or her client?
A. No.
Q. Turn to ODC Exhibit 13(e). We're
almost done, Judge. I sure do appreciate your
patience. Your Honor, ODC 13(e) is a Motion
to Recuse in Russell versus Russell. Do you
see that?
A. Yes.
Q. That is a motion seeking to recuse you
from that case?
A. Yes.
Q. And who filed that motion?
A. Ms. McCool.
Q. When was it filed? What date?
A. January 3, 2013.
Q. Okay. The Motion to Recuse in this
matter was filed chronologically after your
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
121
voluntary recusal in Keister, Maurer, and
Cullen that we just looked at? Is that right
or would you like to go back and check those?
A. Well, I would probably have to because
I'm not so sure of the dates.
Q. Just look back at 13(B) which is the
last one in line that we just looked at. What
was the date of your order of recusal in that
matter?
A. June 5, 2012. 13? You're talking
about in Keister?
Q. In Cullen at 13(d).
A. Oh, (d). I'm still not hearing. I'm
sorry. June 28, 2012.
Q. And then at 13(e), this is filed after
your voluntary recusal in those other matters --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is that correct? Okay. The second
paragraph, again Your Honor, of the Motion to
Recuse filed by Ms. McCool states, "The Court
has voluntarily and expressly admitted its
extreme bias and conflict in recusing itself
in several other cases which grounds are
equally applicable in the case at bar."
Judge, do you consider that to be a false
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
122
statement?
A. Yes.
MR. DUCOTE:
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. In the Russell case, is there any
other instance where you, outside of the order
that we looked at, where you have in any other
case -- I should say not just Russell.
Cullen, Maurer, Russell, any other case that
you've had involving Ms. McCool, have you ever
expressly or otherwise admitted extreme bias
and prejudice against Ms. McCool or her
client?
A. No.
MR. MANNING:
Judge, you have been very patient with
my questions and the back and forth and I
will tender the witness.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. Good morning, Judge Amacker. In the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
123
Maurer versus Boyd case in your court, did you
ever conduct an evidentiary hearing to
determine if the kids had been sexually
abused?
A. Not that I recall, Mr. Ducote.
Q. Did you ever issue an order protecting
the children?
A. I don't recall that, Mr. Ducote.
Q. You don't recall one way or another?
A. I recall that the court in Mississippi --
Q. I'm not asking you about the court in
Mississippi. Did you ever issue an order
protecting the children from sexual abuse by
their father?
A. No. I had no subject matter
jurisdiction to do that.
Q. Okay. Isn't it correct that in that
case that you ruled that you did have subject
matter jurisdiction, but had been issued a
stay?
MR. MANNING:
Which case are we talking about?
There are many.
MR. DUCOTE:
We're talking about Maurer versus
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
124
Boyd.
MR. MANNING:
The intrafamily adoption?
BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. The intrafamily adoption in your
court?
A. In the intrafamily adoption in my
court, what is your question, Mr. Ducote?
Q. Did you not rule that you had subject
matter jurisdiction, but issued a stay, a
discretionary stay?
A. I believe you're correct. Yes.
Q. Okay. So you did have subject matter
jurisdiction had you chosen to exercise it and
not issue a discretionary stay to conduct an
evidentiary hearing and if the evidence so
warranted, to issue an order protecting the
children from abuse?
A. In the adoption case? I'm not at all
sure that was an issue in the adoption case,
Mr. Ducote and I can't go into the details of
the pleading. But I don't know that was an
issue at all in the intrafamily adoption case.
Q. Did you issue an indefinite stay?
A. I'm sorry?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
125
Q. Did you issue an indefinite stay or a
time limited stay?
A. Again, I don't have the proceeding in
front of me. The order would speak for
itself. But I believe it was a stay pending
resolution of the proceedings in Mississippi
that had gone on for several years at that
point in time.
Q. That was four and a half years at that
time, correct?
A. Possibly more.
Q. Okay. Now, did you ever file a
disciplinary complaint against Ms. McCool with
the Office of Disciplinary Counsel?
A. No.
Q. Now, are you familiar with the
provisions of Article 863 of the Code of Civil
Procedure?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And those provisions allow you
as the Judge, if you believe that an attorney
has signed a pleading that contains improper
arguments or false facts or filed for a
purpose other than propriety or for proper
purpose or misstates the law, you have the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
126
authority, do you not, to issue a rule to show
cause against that attorney as to why they
should not be sanctioned, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever issue such a rule to show
cause against Ms. McCool?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Did any attorney in any of the cases
in which Ms. McCool sought your recusal ever
issue, file an Article 863 motion seeking
sanctions against Ms. McCool?
A. I don't know. I've been recused from
many cases involving Ms. McCool right now.
I'm not so sure what's been filed or is going
to be filed against Ms. McCool.
Q. Okay. So you don't know? Okay. Now
are you also aware that Article 864 of the
Code of Civil Procedure says that if an
attorney knowingly files a pleading that
contains false statements of facts or contains
knowingly misstatements of law that that can
be referred to the Office of Disciplinary
Counsel for discipline?
A. I don't know that it says that in 864.
But if you say so I assume it does.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
127
Q. But nonetheless, you did nothing of
the sort in connection with any of the
pleadings that Ms. McCool filed, correct?
A. It was my information there had
already been a complaint that had been or was
in the process of being filed. I contacted
Disciplinary Counsel to see if I needed to
file a separate complaint. I was told to send
my information in. That's what I've done the
past three years is send the information in.
Q. Okay. You're aware, are you not, of
Canon 2(B) of the Code of Judicial Conduct
that says, "A Judge should not initiate the
communication of information in any court or
disciplinary proceeding, but may provide such
information for the record in response to a
formal request by a court or disciplinary
agency. Do you agree?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. The first communication that
you had with the Office of Disciplinary
Counsel regarding Ms. McCool was not, was it,
in response to a request from the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel?
A. That's not true.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128
Q. It was in response to a request from
the Office of Disciplinary Counsel?
A. They requested that I send information
to them in connection with Judge Gambrell's
complaint that was also the same petition that
I had received in which I had additional
information.
Q. Judge Amacker, I took your deposition
on January the 22nd, 2014 at 1 p.m.; did I
not?
A. I don't know the date, Mr. Ducote.
You did take my deposition.
Q. Okay. I refer you to page 23 of your
deposition, line 10. "Well Judge Amacker, do
you have any knowledge of -- let me back up.
Have you had any communications with the
Office of Disciplinary Counsel about Ms.
McCool?"
Line 14, answer, "Yes".
Line 15, "Did you contact the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel first or did they contact
you first?"
Answer, line 17, "I contacted them first."
Line 18, "Did you contact them to file a
complaint against Ms. McCool?"
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
129
Line 20, "No, I did not".
Is that --
A. That's correct.
Q. Do you still stand by that?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now let's go to your
communication with Judge Gambrell, okay?
Judge Gambrell at the time that you telephoned
her was presiding over proceedings, the
custody case in Mississippi involving Raven
Boyd and the children who were also the
subject of the adoption proceeding in your
court, correct?
A. As far as I know, yes.
Q. And you initiated a telephone call to
Judge Gambrell for the purpose of essentially
bad-mouthing Ms. McCool and Ms. Boyd to Judge
Gambrell, correct?
A. That is incorrect, Mr. Ducote.
Q. Well, did you tell them positive
things about Ms. Boyd and Ms. McCool?
A. Mr. Ducote, it was a very short
conversation as I told you earlier. It
concerned safety issues that I had for Judge
Gambrell and myself quite frankly.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
130
Q. Okay. And that was based on the
petition?
A. Yes. And what was on the internet at
that point in time.
Q. Okay. Now what did you tell Judge
Gambrell -- well let me back up. Did you tell
Judge Gambrell when you called her, "Judge
Gambrell, I'm concerned about your safety?"
A. I'll tell you as I told you before --
Q. I'm asking you a specific question,
Judge Amacker.
A. I'll tell you as I told you before, --
Q. I'm asking you a specific --
A. -- I don't remember the --
Q. I want you to answer the question as
I'm asking it.
A. I am answering the question, Mr.
Ducote. I don't remember. This has been
years ago, the exact conversation. It was
short. It was to the point. It was to ask
her did she have knowledge -- I had no idea
whether she knew this petition that named her
and me and our Supreme Court was there and on
the internet and being disseminated. I was
concerned and I called her. That was the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
131
purpose and that's what we discussed.
Q. Did you tell her you thought her
safety was in jeopardy?
A. I don't remember anything specifically
that I told her, Mr. Ducote.
Q. Well, have you spoken to Judge
Gambrell since I took your deposition?
A. Out there briefly. We had
conversation about children and other issues.
Just life in general.
Q. Anything about the case?
A. Nothing about the case.
Q. Have you read anything since I took
your deposition about this case? Have you
read any other depositions?
A. No.
Q. In your conversation with Judge
Gambrell, did you talk to her or suggest to
her in any way that she file a complaint with
the Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel
against Ms. McCool?
A. Did I?
Q. Yeah.
A. No.
Q. Did you in any way advise her of how
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
132
she should file a complaint --
A. No.
Q. -- against Ms. McCool? I'm sorry.
Wait till I'm finished asking the question.
Okay. Did you have any question at all or
conversation at all with Judge Gambrell about
the proper procedures for filing a complaint
against Ms. McCool?
A. Not that I recall. It is as I told
earlier, I've had two short conversations with
Judge Gambrell. That date when I called her
and she told me she knew about the petition
and was very concerned. And then I had a very
short conversation with her at the National
Judicial College in Reno when we were both
attending courses at the College in different
courses and she found me. I guess she had
seen my name somewhere that I was there. She
just wanted to put, I'm assuming, a face to a
name. We maybe spoke two minutes because
literally, you have about five minutes between
the bells. She introduced herself.
I don't remember which conversation it
was, the first or the second one, but she told
me that she had filed or begun the proceedings
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
133
to file a complaint in Louisiana. It was
done. It had nothing to do with my
conversations with her.
Q. Okay. So it is your testimony that in
your first conversation with Judge Gambrell,
she advised you that she was already in the
process of filing a complaint against Ms.
McCool?
A. It may have been.
Q. Hang on.
A. I don't know. As I stated, this has
been years.
Q. Let me, if I could, just let me finish
my question. In your first conversation with
Judge Gambrell, is it your testimony that she
advised you that she was already in the
process of initiating a complaint against Ms.
McCool?
A. Same answer. I don't know, Mr.
Ducote.
Q. Okay. But you're clear that your
conversation with Judge Gambrell had nothing
to do with any effort on your part or any
facilitation on your part of her filing a
complaint against Ms. McCool?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
134
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. And let me explain, Mr. Ducote, where
I was at this point in time. This was
literally the day or a few days after I
received it. I was literally in shock that an
attorney would be part of this. I frankly
thought that I would receive some
communication back from Ms. McCool when we
send her the letter saying your client has
sent this. Your name, obviously her name is
the first one on the petition. This is
inappropriate ex-parte communication. One
would think that the attorney would call
immediately. Either they didn't realize that
this is a violation or Judge, this wasn't me.
I'm not affiliated with these people. To this
day, I've never heard anything from Ms.
McCool.
So at that point in time, I certainly
wasn't in any position -- I guess I still
assumed I'd hear from her quite frankly.
Something. So I was certainly not in a mode
of let's go run file a complaint against an
attorney. That's a very serious thing. And
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
at that point in time, I guess it was just a
shock and worry about safety and a lot of
issues and I had just never seen anything like
that in all the years of my practicing, being
a Judge and I never had that situation happen
before and I guess, you know, in speaking to
the other Judge who had been dealing with it
apparently for a while at the time I talked to
her, she was well aware of it. I just wanted
to make sure that she knew.
I assume the Supreme Court knew if it came
across their fax. But I had a concern for her
and a concern for myself. Yes, I did.
Q. Okay. And so to be clear, Judge
Gambrell never contacted you or requested any
information from you?
A. She never contacted me?
Q. Right.
A. No. She never called me or contacted
me.
Q. Okay. So at the time Ms. McCool filed
on May 31, 2012 her expedited motion to recuse
you in the Keister case, you had already had
the telephone call with Judge Gambrell,
correct?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
136
A. What's the date in Keister?
Q. May 31, 2012.
A. Yes.
Q. You had already been communicating
with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel
providing them unsolicited information about
Ms. McCool, correct?
A. I would not say the information was
unsolicited, first of all, Mr. Ducote. I was
asked to provide what information I had to
them in written form which I did.
Q. Okay. Let's go back. The first
contact you had with the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel was one you initiated,
correct?
A. When I placed a call. Yes.
Q. Okay. So Exhibit ODC 11 is a letter
you wrote to Mr. Manning, October 11, 2011
where you said, "As per our conversation in
connection with the complaint against attorney
Joyce Nanine McCool, I enclose a copy of the
communication," and then you go on to discuss
the petition, etcetera, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now did you cc Ms. McCool or give her
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
137
a copy or in any way advise her of the letter
that you wrote on October 11, 2011?
A. No. But I had been told in the past
by Disciplinary Counsel that it is not
confidential and that anything that I send in
to them could be provided to the respondent
and I assumed that, quite frankly.
Q. But you didn't cc Ms. McCool when you
sent it on October 11, 2011, right?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Then your second letter to the
ODC on March 28, 2012, again contains a bunch
of negative statements about Ms. McCool. You
say the statement on her blog is untrue,
etcetera, etcetera. And it's certainly
communicating information to the Office of the
Disciplinary Counsel of a negative nature
about Ms. McCool, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now at that point you had not
recused yourself in any cases involving Ms.
McCool even though you had already talked to
Judge Gambrell; you were already writing these
letters to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel
providing them information and all that;
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
138
hadn't you?
A. No. There's nothing from the
conversation with Judge Gambrell that
concerned the substance of our cases at all.
That would not give me any grounds for recusal
at all. The second part of your question, if
responding to requests to send information
into ODC or sending in information to ODC when
an attorney has engaged in certain conduct
that is so serious that it might require
notice to them that there could be possibly
some things that are being done that would be
violations of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, I know of nothing that
requires me to let the attorney know that I am
responding and sending in information to ODC.
Q. Well, between August 22, 2011 when you
sent ODC 11(A) to -- I'm sorry, ODC 11 where
you send the letter to Mr. Manning and March
28, 2012, you were generating and sort of
gathering information about Ms. McCool's
activities; were you not?
A. Mr. Ducote, I didn't generate
anything. Ms. McCool generated all of it.
Q. Okay. So you were getting stuff about
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
139
Ms. McCool --
A. Yes.
Q. -- that you were sending to the Board,
right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now in fact, ODC 11(A) is dated --
strike that. Okay. So during October 11,
2011 and March 28, 2012 you did not self-
recuse based on "the appearance of
impropriety" in any of Ms. McCool's cases,
correct?
A. No. And Ms. McCool --
Q. Wait, no, correct?
A. If I --
Q. Am I correct?
A. I said, "no." You're not correct. I
mean, no, I did not.
Q. Okay.
A. You're correct.
Q. And that's my question. You did not.
A. But if you'll let me explain. The
very first letter, the complaint that Judge
Gambrell sent to ODC has me I believe cc'd on
the complaint. That was back in 2011 and she
would have gotten a copy of that so she would
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
140
have known that I obviously was somehow
involved in providing information to ODC, one
would think.
Q. So -- but you never recused yourself?
A. There was no reason for me to recuse
myself, Mr. Ducote. I have to send in
information to ODC about attorneys at times
and there is no reason for me to recuse myself
because I have to do this in response to
conduct of the attorney's.
Q. Okay. So how about March 31st when
she filed the motion to recuse in Keister,
which is May 31, 2012 which is Exhibit 13(A)
in the ODC's exhibits. At that point you
suddenly had the appearance of impropriety?
A. I don't even see the order on this
one. Where is it?
Q. The order is June 5, 2012. So I guess
let me ask it this way. What happened between
the letter that you sent Mr. Manning on March
28, 2012 which is ODC 12 and May 31, 2012 that
would state that Ms. McCool filed the
complaint in Keister that suddenly generated
the appearance of impropriety?
A. All right. What's the first exhibit
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
141
you're talking about; ODC 12?
Q. The letter dated March 28, 2012.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. We know that you didn't recuse
yourself before the Motion to Recuse was
filed. And we know that you called Judge
Gambrell and you presented stuff to the Board.
You're reading these things online and all
these things. And then Ms. McCool files her
Motion to Recuse you that says that your
biased and prejudiced against her and
references "The Court has made statements to
third parties which would tend to call into
question the honesty and integrity of mover's
attorney and has actively participated in a
complaint against the undersigned in Louisiana
Disciplinary Counsel" and I'm reading from ODC
13(A), "without disclosing its participation
in the complaint or its personal opinions
about the honesty and integrity of the
undersigned and the parties."
Okay. At that point you did not recuse
yourself. And what I'm asking you is what
happened between March 28, 2012 and May 31,
2012 that suddenly generated the appearance of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
142
impropriety if it didn't exist before then?
A. I believe Keister was the first one
that she put the false statement in.
Q. That's not my question. What my
question is --
A. That is your question.
Q. No, ma'am.
A. You're asking me what else --
Q. I know what my question is, Judge.
A. -- had happened.
Q. My question is what happened? You
signed an order on June 5th saying that not
because you were biased and prejudiced
despite what you had been doing in the
interim, it was to avoid the appearance of
impropriety. And I'm asking you what created
the appearance of impropriety between the two
-- as of May 31st if it didn't exist before?
A. Let me answer this way, Mr. Ducote.
There is so much that has gone on in this
case. These bench books don't touch -- and
even the complaint that's been filed don't
begin to touch everything that has happened in
this case that Ms. McCool has visited upon me
and the other Judge's involved here. At some
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
143
point with any Judge we are required to stay
in the case to fight this. To fight people
trying to bully, intimidate, and get you out
of the case. I did that for as long as I
could.
But at some point, the confluence, if you
will, of events is such whether it's what she
places on the internet or what she puts in a
pleading that is false, whether there are
other actions that are being taken or going
on, at some point, it gets to a point where
every Judge knows at that point it's time to
recuse yourself from this case. At some point
I reached that point with Ms. McCool that I
could no longer say that I felt like I should
remain in the case as a Judge and that anyone
looking at it, looking at everything that was
happening at that point in time, I didn't feel
I had any mandatory grounds. I never have
felt that way but I felt that voluntarily at
that point in time I had been in these just
about as long as I could be at that point in
time and still stay in them without it at
least appearing that it was time for me to get
out of the case.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
144
Q. Now you would agree with me, if you
did have actual bias and prejudice against Ms.
McCool you would be required to recuse
yourself, correct?
A. Such that it would affect my judgment
in so far as her client is concerned, you are
correct.
Q. Judge, is it your position that all
the stuff you were doing starting from the
time that you had the phone call with Judge
Gambrell and the letters you wrote to Mr.
Manning, the information you're sending, the
stuff you say you're reading online, people
stopping you in the halls and all that; you're
saying that you weren't -- none of that
evidenced that you were biased and prejudiced
against Ms. McCool?
A. No. I have to put up with a lot of
things from a lot of attorneys, Mr. Ducote. I
don't have the ability just to get out of
cases rather than deal with some of the
conduct and issues or they'd be able to recuse
every Judge on that bench.
Q. Now Ms. McCool is running against you,
right? She's your only opponent in the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
145
November election, correct?
A. As far as I know she's running against
me, yes.
Q. Have you ever made the statement to
any litigants in your court room or in
chambers that they need to be careful who
their wife -- what their wife likes on
Facebook?
A. I don't know what you're referring to,
Mr. Ducote. Do you want to be more specific
about it?
Q. I'm asking you a question. Did you
ever?
A. You better be careful what your wife
likes on Facebook?
Q. Yes.
A. I don't recall making that statement
or comment, but I will say this. This is now
something we have to address with attorneys,
with their clients, and with children in
Family Court and this is why; we have to make
it very clear to them now that it could be
considered contempt of a court order against
harassment or from speaking derogatorily about
the other parent, from undermining the Court's
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
146
orders in the case involving children. If you
place on a social media site information that
you know your child or the other spouse or
friends can access, this is how they do it
now. Rather then go talk on the street, they
put it on the internet. So we do have these
conversations and it may be that there has
been a conversation with counsel, in general,
in cases or their client's or children, that
if you do this on social media, this could be
an issue which might place you in violation of
Court orders. We are now having to tell
people that. Yes, we are.
Q. Now how often do you check Ms.
McCool's Facebook page?
MR. MANNING:
Objection as to the relevance of that.
MR. DUCOTE:
Well let me rephrase the question.
Well she testified that she just checked
it yesterday and what's on there and all
that.
MR. MANNING:
So did I, but -- I don't think it's
relevant at all.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
147
MR. DUCOTE:
Well --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
She can answer.
BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. How often do you go looking to see
what's on Ms. McCool's Facebook?
A. Right before this hearing I have
checked probably twice in the last week to see
if these matters remained, because I knew I
would be questioned about them, online. I
have people in my campaign who volunteer and
check Facebook, the internet regularly. I
also now have a Google feed that lets me know
if my name is mentioned on the internet.
Q. Don't you have an obligation not to
sort of investigate to see what's out there?
To see if somebody's saying something about
you. To avoid doing this?
A. I don't have any cases as you know
with Ms. McCool anymore, Mr. Ducote. I have
no obligation to and particularly in
connection with the campaign, it's absolutely
vital that we keep track of what happens on
the internet. But I have no cases and haven't
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
148
had for a while with Ms. McCool.
Q. Do you know the Russell case?
A. Yes.
Q. Now the Russell case came long after
you had recused yourself from "appearance of
impropriety" and Ms. McCool filed a Motion to
Recuse you and you did not recuse yourself.
You referred it to another Judge for
consideration; is that correct?
A. I believe it is correct.
Q. So did the appearance of impropriety
simply vanish momentarily at that point or
what happened there?
A. These are the set of circumstances
that happened with Russell. Ms. Russell had
other counsel involved in the case. She
sought to have or Ms. McCool did enter as
attorney of record and have me simultaneously
recused because she was entering as attorney
of record as I recall in the Russell case.
This is a case that had gone on for years in
the Division. I believe it's the Russell
case, but I can't be sure that it -- it's at
that point in time I discovered that Ms.
McCool was remaining in certain cases in my
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
149
Division. That she had sent in orders and
judgments for me to sign. That she was
effectively cherry-picking the cases she would
decide it was fine for me to stay in or her
client wanted me to stay in. She would then
on some occasions appear in court and on the
day of or the day prior to, after settings
have been set for months, come in and then
some of them decide that she wanted me to be
recused.
It was also at this point in time that
this had been going on maybe two or two and a
half years with ODC. I had no idea what was
going on with the complaint. I had no idea if
it was continuing or coming eventually or
formal charges were going to be filed. No
idea. But at that point in time I knew there
had to be, and the attorney's on the opposing
sides very much opposing what was happening.
We knew at that point in time, I did, looking
at what was happening in the Division, that
this had to come to a head. There had to be a
decision reached on whether or not I was going
to do standard recusals on everything from
that point in time on with Ms. McCool or,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
150
because she was continuing to represent
clients in the Division, there was no need to
and there's no need for me to recuse any
longer.
So at that point in time I referred it to
another Judge and said let them put on
whatever they needed to put on and whatever
they decide, you know, I'll stand by that. So
I believe that's at the point in time when
that happened. A lot has happened. It's hard
to say.
Q. The -- do you remember the "Save
Victoria" website?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you monitoring that website?
A. Can I ask is that relevant to this
proceeding?
Q. It's in evidence. It's R 10. I'm
sorry. The "Save Victoria" website is Exhibit
R 3. Do you want to take a look at that? Are
you familiar with this website?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Now is it your contention Ms. McCool
has anything to do with this website?
A. Well, if you look on page two of this,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
151
it says supporters are signing, number one,
Nanine McCool. I don't know if she has
anything to do with it or not, but she
obviously supports it.
Q. Now did you submit this website to the
ODC?
A. I don't know if I did or not. I can't
tell you.
Q. And this case, you threw this child's
mother in jail because there was stuff posted
about you on the internet that you somehow
attributed to her, right?
MR. MANNING:
Objection as to relevance and again, I
guess asking about an unrelated matter
involving minors and issues that have no
relevance to these proceedings.
MR. DUCOTE:
Well, let's just jump ahead. Exhibit
R 10 is in evidence. That's the First
Circuit's opinion in the case of TD versus
FXA. This came down January 9, 2014 where
you were reversed and a lot of discussion
in here about your putting that child in
some school in New Mexico or somewhere and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
152
throwing her mom in jail because of stuff
on the internet, right?
MR. MANNING:
Again, I object to the relevance of
the question. The exhibit is in.
MR. DUCOTE:
Wasn't it --
MR. MANNING:
It speaks for itself. The relevance
of the Judge's actions in some other case
doesn't have anything to do with her
actions or reactions in the case that
we're here for today.
MR. DUCOTE:
Well we'll just argue. Now Judge
Amacker --
THE WITNESS:
No. I would like to respond.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. My response is first of all that you
know I can't respond. I would like to
respond. I cannot respond and your client can
also not discuss this case. This is a case
that is still pending in my Division. She is
a candidate for judicial office. She can't,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
153
nor through she can you -- through you, can
she discuss that case. So you know that I am
prevented from discussing it.
Q. (By Mr. Ducote) So it's your position
that Ms. McCool can't say look at what the
First Circuit said about Judge Amacker's
ruling in that case?
A. In a pending case it is my position
that a Judge or a candidate for that office
cannot discuss what has happened in that case,
the details of that case. Yes, that is my
position.
Q. Okay. Well you have a website you put
up called "Judge Dawn Amacker in the 22nd
Judicial District Court." Is this something
in connection with your campaign?
A. I don't know which one you're
referring to, Mr. Ducote.
Q. This one.
A. You can show it to me if you want to.
Q. Sure.
A. Yes.
Q. Is that in connection with your
campaign?
A. Well it's just in connection with my
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
154
name. It's a website that lists my
accomplishments. You can call it in
connection with the campaign or not, Mr.
Ducote.
Q. But it doesn't say it's -- it says
Judge Amacker, 22nd JDC, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And it lists your accomplishments and
it has how to contact you. It has your phone
number, etcetera, right?
A. I don't know if it has that or not.
Yes. It appears it does.
Q. And that's the same phone number
that's on the petition and the websites that
are in evidence, correct?
A. And the 22nd JDC website. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now in this exhibit you say
contact Judge Dawn Amacker. What do you want
people to contact you for? For what purpose?
A. I don't know that I say contact Judge
Dawn Amacker.
Q. It says contact Judge Dawn Amacker
right there on the website.
A. I don't know if it says contact Judge
Dawn Amacker, but if it doesn't say for any
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
155
purpose such to influence me in connection
with any litigation. It says contact
information for the Judges on the 22nd JDC
website and on a lot of other websites, Mr.
Ducote. But it's not in an effort to
influence or intimidate or get me to change my
decision in any case.
Q. Well if somebody contacted this and
said Judge Amacker, we want you to listen to
evidence, apply the law, protect children,
you'd be offended by that?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Can we see the exhibit, Mr. Ducote?
MR. NELSON:
Is it evidence?
MR. DUCOTE:
It's not in evidence yet. I haven't
offered it.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay.
BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. If somebody read this and goes wow,
look at Judge Amacker's thing here. I want to
call her. I'm interested in evidence, law and
the protection of children and said Judge
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
156
Amacker, I want you to do these things, would
you find that offensive?
A. It would never get to me. It would be
considered ex-parte communication about cases
that are pending in front of me and that
communication would not get to me. On the
other hand, people contact me all the time,
Judge, will you come speak at this school, to
these children about certain issues. If they
contact me then that will get to me. That
communication would get to me. That's
perfectly appropriate.
Q. So if somebody contacts you and says,
Judge, we want you to do your job, apply the
law, listen to evidence and don't reference a
specific case, you'd say that's improper?
A. First of all, they never do those and
not reference a specific case. That's never
happened.
Q. Okay. On this you say these are your
accomplishments. Number two, "implemented a
therapeutic as opposed to adversarial family
court process which includes the employment
and use of staff social workers with expertise
in parenting and custody issues and includes
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
157
the use of court hearing officers who are
specially trained in mediation and
collaboration." Adversarial implies hearings
and evidence; does it not?
A. In what context? If you want to give
it to me and show it to me.
Q. Well, what you say in here,
implemented a "therapeutic" as opposed to an
adversarial family court process. What's the
legal authority for you to run your court room
in a therapeutic way as opposed to an
adversarial way?
A. Is this relevant? Can I ask is this
relevant to this proceeding?
Q. Well this all goes to the whole issue
of your -- the reasonableness of people being
concerned about your willingness or your
unwillingness to hear evidence. And I'm
saying --
MR. MANNING:
I'll object and I'll base my objection
on relevance also, but at some point you
just get so far afoot from what we're here
to discuss and what a therapeutic setting
as opposed to adversarial means or doesn't
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
158
mean, I don't know. What we know and what
we've heard is that the Judge made rulings
in these cases that were writted and not
overturned. That's what we know. So what
this has to do with anything we're here to
talk about today other than prolong, I
don't understand.
THE WITNESS:
Look, Madam Chairman, I don't have any
problem at all talking about my record, my
experience, my qualifications, and my
court. My only question is this could go
on quite a length of time and my concern
is that we're getting into topics that
aren't relevant. But if you say I need to
answer this, I will be glad to answer it.
MR. DUCOTE:
I'll withdraw that question. I just
have one more question.
BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. If Ms. McCool is disciplined in some
way that would help the election for you;
would it not?
MR. MANNING:
Objection. That's not relevant
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
159
whether she thinks that it's going to help
her or not. She didn't file these
charges. She didn't even become a formal
complainant. ODC filed the charges. What
the affects of that on the others outside
of the system is not relevant.
MR. DUCOTE:
It does so. It goes to potential for
bias in her testimony.
MR. MANNING:
And at the time the complaint was
filed, Ms. McCool was not a candidate
against Judge Amacker.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I don't think she has to answer that
and I'm not going to ask her to.
MR. DUCOTE:
I don't have any further questions.
Q. Judge, if I could just follow up on
one thing very briefly. You were asked and we
don't have to flip back, but Mr. Ducote asked
you to look at your initial letter to ODC and
the date of that and then he got you to move
forward to your first order of recusal in
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
160
Keister.
Q. And the date of that. And then he
asked the question, well what transpired in
the interim? Why early on you didn't feel the
need to voluntarily recuse and now all of a
sudden you do? ODC 13(A), the motion that Ms.
McCool filed and the allegation in the motion,
isn't that something that happened in the
meantime that got you to consider this as
well?
A. I think that's what I was saying or
trying to say earlier. Yes. I mean she puts
things in that motion that at that point in
time were obviously -- well they are false.
But this was the first time that these things
are placed in there. And there's a lot more
in there that you don't even mention that's
completely false as well.
Q. For example?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. If it's not mentioned then
it's beyond the scope of the pleadings.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. And again, I think you answered my
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
161
question, but isn't it true that the motion
filed at ODC 13(A), that was something that
happened in the interim that caused you to
think about the appearance of impropriety?
A. Yes. And I thought I had gotten that
across earlier and perhaps I was interrupted
or got on another train of thought. But, yes.
That was one of the changes, absolutely, where
she, as you can see, all of her motions to
recuse are different as are the latest ones
that's she's filed. The allegations are
different. You have to look at all of them.
And the Judge's order, just because you
recuse, certainly doesn't mean you're doing it
for the same reasons that they have presented
in their motion. That's why you see me write
in in my handwriting --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
-- my reasons for --
MR. DUCOTE:
They objected. They said she couldn't
testify about her mental processes.
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
162
She's talking about her handwritten
orders. That's not a mental process. In
any event --
MR. DUCOTE:
Well, I understand why she --
MR. MANNING:
-- I have no other questions. Thank
you, Judge.
MR. DUCOTE:
Can I just ask one more question?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes.
Q. Is your office fax number
985-809-5309?
A. I couldn't tell you, Mr. Ducote. I've
never faxed anything to my office.
Q. Well, is that what's on your contact
Judge Dawn Amacker, fax 985-809-5309.
A. If it says that I would presume that,
but I don't fax things to my office.
MS. BENOIST:
Could we see that even though you
haven't admitted it into evidence?
MR. DUCOTE:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
163
I'll mark it as Respondent No. 12 and
offer, introduce, and file it into
evidence.
MR. MANNING:
No objection.
(The document was marked for
identification as "R 12" and introduced into
the record.)
MR. DUCOTE:
And I apologize. I only have the one
copy.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Are we finished?
MR. DUCOTE:
Yes.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you so much.
THE WITNESS:
Am I free to go?
MR. NELSON:
Can I ask her a question?
MR. MANNING:
Yes.
MR. NELSON:
May I, Judge?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
164
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes.
EXAMINATION BY MR. NELSON:
Q. Judge, thanks for your testimony this
morning. Why are court records sealed in your
court? What's the purpose?
A. Good question. Some are by State law.
For example, I was the juvenile Judge for
three years. My first three years, probably
during part of something -- I was during part
of this time I was the Juvenile Judge in
addition to doing a civil docket. Those are
sealed by law. All the juvenile records.
Sometimes adoptions are filed in juvenile
records. This one was actually filed in a
civil proceeding and in our jurisdiction, the
adoptions are handled by the civil Judge's so
I still do the adoptions.
By State law those are sealed in Louisiana
and the reasons being obvious. There is an
interest in children, sometimes particularly
in connection with a private adoptions. The
parties want to remain private or it would
preclude people from offering children for
adoption. I also want to let you know that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
165
one reason records are sealed today is because
of the internet. Our Clerk's Office, for
example, in St. Tammany and now in Washington
Parish, everything's on the internet. I'm
sure it probably is in your jurisdictions as
well.
Children are increasingly going on the
internet and reading everything in connection
with their parent's divorce proceedings. Any
type of proceeding. So whereas in the past
there might not have been a great of reason
because the children maybe couldn't just come
check out a record over at the court house,
they are very easily -- they just type in
something and the Clerk's entire records come
up. Sometimes medical records. Drug test
results from parents. Other things.
A Judge seals, has the discretion under
Louisiana law to seal a record in certain
instances. I have sealed very few records out
of the thousands of records that I've handled.
This was one of them in connection with this
case. And it's because of the graphic sexual
allegations. You certainly don't want anyone
reading that on the internet. Not only that,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
166
you're wanting to preserve the record that
already the Judge in Mississippi had clearly
sealed. We had sealed the adoption
proceeding. Sometimes attorneys will use
tactics to come in and file it in a different
form. Say a custody proceeding or say
something with the Court of Appeal and then
they will argue well it's not sealed in that
proceeding and they get it out to the public
or the children or other people that way. We
have a lot of that happen. So I don't if that
answers your question.
MR. NELSON:
It does. Appreciate that. Thank you,
Judge.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Is Judge Amacker free to go?
MR. MANNING:
She is released.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you so much.
THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Do we want to take a recess? Do we
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
167
want to take a lunch break? What's the --
MS. BENOIST:
What time is it?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
A quarter to twelve.
MR. MANNING:
I'm just going to state my preference
which has no bearing on anyone else. I
don't each lunch during hearings and I
always like to work through and I'm
usually standing in a party of one with
that position but you asked. So my
position is --
MR. DUCOTE:
I never eat lunch anyway.
MR. MANNING:
-- is to take a short break or --
MR. DUCOTE:
Can we take like a bathroom break or
something?
THE RESPONDENT:
I'm so sorry. I have to testify this
afternoon I'm assuming. If I don't eat
something I'm going to be stupid. I am so
sorry. Even if I just have to go find a
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
168
sandwich. Can we have 30 minutes? I have
to have something to eat.
MR. DUCOTE:
Thirty minutes?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Would that give enough time?
MR. DUCOTE:
Yes.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Let's say 12:30. That'll give
sufficient time.
(A lunch recess was taken.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I think we're about ready to get
started. Yes. Susan's reminded me if you
could check your phones to make sure after
the break that they are silenced.
THE HONORABLE DEBORAH GAMBRELL, having
been duly sworn testified as follows:
Q. Good afternoon, Judge. You and I have
had -- it's been my pleasure to meet you a
couple of times prior to today. Once at your
discovery deposition so you know I represent
the Office of Disciplinary Counsel in these
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
169
proceedings which initiated our investigation
at least off a complaint that you filed. So
we're going to talk about some of the issues
from that underlying case that resulted in the
complaint here in just a minute. The people
to your right are our Hearing Committee. It
is, as I told Judge Amacker, more important
that they hear your responses than it is I
hear and for the Court Reporter as well. So
we're kind of in close quarters here so it
shouldn't be an issue. But in any event, if
there are any objections, the Chair will rule
on those. So you are very familiar with these
proceedings. And while it's more informal, it
will be much like a proceeding probably that
you conduct in your own court.
Before we get started, give us please,
your name and your professional address for
the record.
A. Deborah J. Gambrell, 641 Main Street,
Hattiesburg, P.O. Box 807, Hattiesburg 39401.
Q. That address is to where?
A. The Forrest County Chancery
Courthouse.
Q. You are a Judge in Mississippi?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
170
A. Yes, sir. I'm a Chancery Court Judge
for the 10th District.
Q. How long have you served as Judge in
any capacity there?
A. I served as Judge since 1980. I was
elected as a Justice Court Judge which is a
part-time judgeship in Mississippi in 1980 and
was re-elected thereafter until Judge Thomas
died and Governor Barbour appointed me to the
Chancery Bench, January 2011. I was unopposed
for that first term and have served and am up
for re-election to that term now -- to that
position.
Q. And before we move on, just briefly
tell us about your educational background?
A. I graduated from high school, Locker
High School in Wiggins; small town thirty
miles south. Went to the University of
Southern Mississippi. Graduated there in
1972. Went to the Mississippi College School
of Law after marrying and two children.
Graduated from there in 1978.
Q. Judge, on the Chancery Court, what
type of cases do you hear?
A. Well, we can hear 117 different kinds
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
171
of cases so the Mississippi constitution tells
us, but about 80 percent of our cases involve
domestic relations. We do estates, probate
cases. We do land line disputes. Injunctive
relief disputes but mostly family practice.
Adoption, divorces, things of that nature.
Q. One of the -- we're here actually
talking about a family law case that was the
matter of Michael Boyd versus Raven Boyd.
Were you at one time the presiding Judge in
that case?
A. Yes. That was a case that I inherited
when I took the bench January 2011. I don't
know where I'm supposed to look. You got to
tell me. I think I'll look at the -- I'm not
accustomed to talking to people and not
looking at them.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We can hear you fine so wherever
you're comfortable is okay.
MR. MANNING:
You're good.
BY THE WITNESS:
A. I inherited the Boyd case in January
2011 when I took the bench.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
172
Q. (By Mr. Manning) And that was as a
result of the prior Judge --
A. Passing away. Judge Thomas had a
stroke May of 2010. Literally everything shut
down until the Supreme Court appointed Billy
Bridges to come in about -- no everything
literally shut down until he passed away
October of 2010. Then the Supreme Court
appointed Billy Bridges somewhere in that
period of time, a retired Chancellor to serve
until someone was appointed and I was
appointed.
Q. And you said I think that that Boyd
case was one of the cases already pending that
you inherited?
A. Oh, yes. That case started I think in
2007 or so.
Q. If you recall, what was the status of
that case when you inherited it?
A. I may have to get my notes and I
already gave you all that at the deposition.
When I inherited it an agreed temporary order
had been executed in December of 2010 and I
would assume it was signed by Judge Bridges.
When I took the bench, a motion was filed
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
173
in January to enforce the temporary order for
contempt. So there had been all kinds of
temporary orders; orders sealing file;
contempt matters; changing of guardian ad
litem. There were several guardian ad litems.
Several counselors appointed and re-appointed.
And when I got there, there was a motion
pending to enforce the temporary order.
Q. Okay. And the matter -- we'll look at
some of those orders. Not a lot of them.
There's a couple of orders that I have that
are in evidence here like the order sealing
the file and the agreed judgment that you
referred to, but those matters came about
before you inherited it?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Once that case was assigned to you and
in the course of serving as the Judge over
that case, you had the opportunity to review
the record in that matter?
A. I'm trying to think if I actually got
to review the record before the first
conference. Somewhere between January 2011
and the first conference I did get to review
the file along with my law clerk and make
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
174
notes. You have to understand, when I was put
on the bench, I mean there was a backlog of
cases like you wouldn't believe that had been
pending for a full year. So I did get to
review files, but most of my reviews were in
close proximity to the hearings.
Q. Okay. I understand. And I guess
maybe my point is you are generally aware and
familiar with the record, the pleadings, and
judgments and orders in that case --
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. -- from that review?
A. Yes.
Q. And in that matter, Judge, you recall
or do you recall that Raven Boyd accused her
ex-husband, Michael Boyd, of sexually abusing
their minor children?
A. Yes, sir. I saw that early on. And
there were even some criminal charges filed I
think which also caused a delay because it
looks as if the attorneys were waiting to see
if the State would go ahead and indict the
gentleman. So I was concerned that there was
lag time between things. For instance, an
order December '08. Nothing else happens
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
175
until March of '09, but then there were
criminal charges pending and I think
everything was kind of held in abeyance.
Q. So you recall that those allegations
and maybe especially the criminal allegations
served to delay the domestic proceedings?
A. It appeared that way to me.
Q. Okay. And before we move on and since
you brought it up, to your knowledge, has
there ever been an adjudication finding
Michael Boyd guilty of those allegations of
sexual abuse?
A. To the contrary. Those criminal
charges were nol-prossed, which means the
State opted not to -- did not see probable
cause to proceed.
Q. Judge, the record in those
proceedings, the domestic proceedings, not the
criminal matter, was that matter sealed?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was done before your
involvement?
A. Yes. That was done by Judge Thomas in
2008 I believe.
Q. We had a question earlier about why
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
176
certain matters might be sealed as opposed to
other matters. Can you explain your position
on that issue?
A. In our courts if allegations of abuse
are raised or criminal charges are filed and
minor children are involved the file is
normally sealed to keep parties from
disseminating information that may not be true
or correct or there might not be a basis in
fact for it. So it's just a practice to seal
matters. Those that have been referred to the
Department of Human Services for
investigation, normally those files are
sealed.
Q. And this was one of those cases?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Judge, you refer to the Agreed
Judgment and there is a book of exhibits --
there's a couple of books, but let me make
sure you're looking at the right one. This
particular book has Office of Disciplinary
Counsel's exhibits and I'm going to ask you to
turn to ODC Exhibit 7.
A. Okay.
Q. ODC Exhibit 7, Your Honor, is that the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
177
Agreed Judgment that you were referring to in
the Boyd case?
A. Yes. It appears to be. That's Judge
Thomas's signature.
Q. Okay. And Judge, turn to that
signature page and I want to ask you if you
would to look at a couple of things. Look at
Sections 12 and 13 of the Agreed Judgment.
Okay. I think we've established, you said
this was entered by Judge Thomas before you
were appointed --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- to the bench there? To the
Chancery Court? Okay. It has -- we will be
addressing stipulations or admissions later
with another witness, Judge, but I would ask
you to assume that it has been stipulated to
that Raven Boyd filed a Motion for Contempt
and to terminate Michael Boyd's parental
rights; and that the hearing on that motion
took place before you on August the 16th of
2011.
A. That is correct.
Q. Okay. You recall there being a
hearing on August 16th, 2011?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
178
A. I do.
Q. Okay. We're going to talk about that.
But again pointing you back to Sections 12 and
13 of this Agreed Judgment -- and I'll just
briefly read it and read it out loud into the
record. In Section 12 it says:
"Any video tapes or other recordings made
by the parties or at their behest or by
anyone related to the minor children shall
not be disclosed to anyone except counsel
of record and the Court and shall not be
made available to anyone except the
appropriate investigatory agencies at
their request."
Then Section 13 says:
"Neither the parties nor anyone working in
concert with them shall make any audio or
video recordings of the children in an
attempt to investigate or document alleged
abuse. This does not include recordings
made by a counselor for therapeutic
purposes or any recordings made by law
enforcement agencies."
Did this issue come up again while you
were involved in the case? Issues of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
179
recordings and videos of the children and
whether or not dissemination of those
recordings were in violation of this Agreed
Judgment?
A. It came up with me when I learned that
audio tapes were being disseminated over the
internet. I don't recall it coming up at any
hearings.
Q. Okay. And we'll talk about the
internet postings later, but specifically with
regards to hearings and this August 16th, 2011
hearing, you don't recall that being an issue?
A. I don't recall that. I don't recall
any attempts to introduce any audio recordings
or anything.
Q. Turn to ODC Exhibit 10(B) as in "boy".
And when you get there you should be looking
at an email.
A. I am.
Q. Okay. This says that it is an email
from Heather Lyons and it lists her email
address. It is dated Sunday, August 14th of
2011 at 9:10 p.m. and it is addressed to
bparham@co.forrest.ms.us and the subject says,
"Expecting Judge Gambrell to Protect
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
180
Children." Do you see all that?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is 'bparham', if you know?
A. She was my Court Administrator at that
time.
Q. And Judge, did you provide a copy of
this email to me? To the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Okay. You recognize also the bparham
email address?
A. Yes.
Q. And that is for Ms. Parham at your
office at the time?
A. Yes. It pops up. Both of our email
addresses show up on both of our computers.
Q. Okay. The date of this email again
was August 14th of 2011. So that would have
been two days before your hearing in this
matter, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And tell us again of the hearing on
August 16th, what was it to address?
A. The issues of contempt, expanded
visitation. I can pull my notes, but --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
181
Q. Was it -- did it -- let me ask you if
you recall also, was it -- was there an issue
on a Motion for Contempt in that matter?
A. Yes.
Q. And to terminate Michael Boyd's
parental rights?
A. That is correct.
Q. Okay. Judge, the email that we're
looking at at 10(B) it states:
"I live and vote in Forrest County. I
will be paying attention to the case filed
in LA Supreme Court on Friday due to the
fact that Judge Gambrell refused to hear
evidence of abuse in the case of little
girls who are likely being molested by
their father. She has an obligation to
protect our most vulnerable children.
Please do not let them down Judge." All
right.
First, was August 16th the first hearing
you held in this case?
A. Yes. We had a conference in June.
The first year that I took the bench there was
so -- we had such a backlog that when there
were complex cases I would request, not order,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
182
but request that counsel have a conference
with me. A pre-trial conference or something
so we could all get up to speed. We had that
in June and the hearing was set for August.
Q. But the conference, that's not a place
where the parties are offering evidence into
the record?
A. Oh, no. No. No. No.
Q. Okay.
A. It's just a conference to be sure that
everybody's on the same page; to learn if
there are outstanding motions or if there are
reports that are due because some jail reports
have been ordered and we could not find copies
of them. You know just to try to do some
housekeeping before there's a hearing.
Q. As of the date of this email, August
14th of 2011, had you refused to hear any
evidence of abuse?
A. No, sir. I had not.
Q. There had been no hearing?
A. There had been no hearing.
Q. Where did you come across this email
that we're looking at?
A. I saw it on the computer and I went
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
183
and looked for others because I got a call --
my office started getting calls from a lady
whose name was Wanda Phillips saying that we
were not doing things. So we started checking
to see what was going on.
Q. Do you know who Wanda Phillips is?
A. Well I learned that she is the mother
of Raven Boyd and I learned that I married she
and her husband 20 something years ago. She
told me that and that was preamble to one of
the calls. But of course, I married lots of
people. I don't remember.
Q. You didn't have any specific
recollection of her?
A. No, sir.
Q. Those calls that you received from
Wanda Phillips, were they in any way an
attempt to discuss the --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- Raven Boyd case with you?
A. Main point of it. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. And did you or your staff
receive calls from others who were calling to
discuss the Raven Boyd case?
A. After the hearing and my family had to
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
184
remind me of this, after the hearing in August
a call came into my house from this same lady.
Q. Which lady are you referring to?
A. This Lyons lady.
Q. Okay.
A. Accusing me of being a person who
supports child predators or whatever. And
I'll have to explain to you how I know about
the call. I wasn't there and didn't take the
call. I was taking a kid to a college in
upstate New York. My father who is 94 --
MR. DUCOTE:
I'm going to object to this. I mean
this is --
THE WITNESS:
Well a call came to my house and I
told my sister who was sitting my dad to
not answer the home phone. I have a
public phone. When I was Justice Court
Judge it was required to have a public
phone. I have not had the time to get the
phone turned off and I should not have a
public phone, but I do. And I'm sorry,
but this same Heather person that I don't
know.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
185
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, as the presiding Judge in this
case at that time, would you tell the
Committee your thoughts on the content and
timing of the email and of the phone calls to
your office and residence?
A. Well, I personally took it to be
intimidation. I'm new. I've not had anything
to do with this case. I'm going to do what is
fair, what's right when I get to hear it and I
did not care to be accused of any
improprieties or anything before I even saw
the parties or heard the case. I only knew
about all this on the internet because the
Department of Human Services attorney from
Jackson called my office and said Judge
Gambrell needs to go to whatever, Twitter,
whatever. They're saying these things about
her and she wasn't even in the case. So
that's how I learned about all this. And I
did not -- I thought well it violates all of
the Canons of Ethics that we have in the State
for someone to attempt to influence me or
intimidate me prior to me even having a
hearing.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
186
Q. Judge, turn in that exhibit book to
ODC Exhibit 10(A). Do you recognize this
document?
A. Yes. Yes. Yes, I do.
Q. This is what I refer to as a petition
and I would ask you was a copy of this
petition -- was this sent to your office? To
your court?
A. It was sent to the Chancery Clerk's
office in Marion County and it was sent to me.
Q. Okay. I'm going to ask you -- and
you'll see that it was actually filed into the
record --
A. That's correct.
Q. -- of the Chancery -- by the Chancery
Clerk's Office on August 23, 2011. Judge, I'm
going to ask you for your reaction to some of
the comments made in this petition, okay?
Q. It says on the first page of the
petition, that last paragraph, large paragraph
at the bottom it says:
"To Judge Deborah Gambrell: We the
undersigned ask that you renounce
jurisdiction in this matter to the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
187
Louisiana Court because the children have
lived exclusively in Louisiana for the
past three years." It goes on to state
some other things and then you'll see
several lines down it picks up quoting,
"If you refuse to relinquish jurisdiction
to Louisiana, we insist that you remove
the guardian ad litem currently assigned
to the case and replace him with one that
has the proper training and experience in
investigating allegations of child sexual
abuse in custody proceedings." And it
says, "We further insist" and then you can
see it goes on to make other demands.
And I would ask, Judge, the timing of this
petition being filed with the Chancery Clerk's
Office and sent to your court, was the Boyd
case still pending at that time?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you still the Judge presiding --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in the case --
A. Yes.
Q. -- at that time?
A. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
188
Q. As with the email, I'm going to ask
you what are your -- as the presiding Judge,
what are your thoughts about the timing and
the content of this petition that was sent to
your court?
A. I took it as an attempt to either
threaten me or attempt to intimidate or harass
me into handling the case in the manner that
whoever the persons were that did this wanted
it done. I considered it to be ex-parte
communication by sending it to the Clerk
because it was a sealed file and then sending
it to me. And I think at one point I told
Barbie to just collect all of this; put it in
an envelope; and if I could ever figure out
who it went to, get it to them. I looked
through the petition to see if there were any
Hattiesburg attorney's on here because if
there were I was going to send it back to them
because they know better.
Q. Did you find any Hattiesburg
attorney's involved?
A. No. I saw people from Hattiesburg in
some of these petitions, but I don't know
these people.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
189
Q. Judge, since you are looking at those
purported signatures to the petition, they
begin on the second page of that. Tell us who
you see as the first name on the petition?
A. Nanine McCool.
Q. And who do you know her to be?
A. The attorney that was involved with
this Twitter campaign.
Q. And the 10th signature on that page,
who is that?
A. Raven Maurer who is Raven Boyd known
to me.
Q. She was the defendant in your case?
A. That is correct.
Q. And the 13th signature?
A. That's the mother.
Q. Wanda Phillips is Raven's mother?
Q. Okay. Judge, turn the page and look
at the 43rd signature. Who is that?
A. That's the Heather Lyons person that
sent the emails and made the call. Allegedly
made the call. I wasn't there.
Q. Got you. All right. Judge, turn all
the way to the back of that binder to the last
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
190
ODC exhibit which is ODC 19.
A. Okay.
Q. When you get there you should see a
document that came off of, at the bottom
you'll see the Change.org website address and
at the top you'll see it says, "Justice For"
and it lists the two first names of the minor
children. And Judge, I will tell you that we
are making a concerted effort to omit any
mention of that might identify who these
minors are in the proceedings today. So we
will also take some steps to redact and
protect their names from these exhibits.
But let me ask you, the first names
referenced in this "Justice For" and then it
lists these two names, do you recall those to
be the first names of the minor children
involved?
A. I do.
Q. You do?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And you'll see it says "Sign
this petition," right?
A. Yes.
Q. And then underneath -- also, while you
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
191
were the presiding Judge, did you ever
personally meet or see the minor children
involved in this case?
A. I saw the minor children for the first
time last year I think right before I recused
myself.
Q. I guess my question and it's not a
very good quality copy that you're looking at,
but do you recognize the two girls pictured --
A. Yes.
Q. -- there to be --
A. Yes.
Q. -- the children in your case?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Okay. All right. Judge, on the
second page of this document you're looking
at, you'll see if you count down to the third
paragraph, you'll see where it starts
referencing and talking about the Raven Boyd
case and the minor children.
A. Yes.
Q. And then the next paragraph it says,
"Listen to their first disclosure to Raven"
and then there's a link. And then it says,
"And a day later their second" and then
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
192
there's another link. Do you have any first
hand knowledge of what those links brought the
reader to?
A. I had my law clerk go to these
Twitters or website things and --
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection. She doesn't have any
personal knowledge. That was the
question.
MR. MANNING:
She --
THE WITNESS:
I know what they were. They were the
audio statements.
MR. DUCOTE:
Again, she doesn't have personal
knowledge. She said she had her law clerk
to do it.
MR. MANNING:
We've addressed this. The Judge said
she had. Se instructed her law clerk to
do this. And again, we've already
discussed the case law on hearsay and the
rulings up until this point will go to the
weight of the matter and I'll ask that she
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
193
be allowed to testify about it.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
She can answer.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Okay. Judge, do you know what these
links were to?
A. The audio recordings of the children
that were prohibited by Judge Thomas's order.
Q. Okay. And the audio recordings were
discussing the allegations of sexual abuse?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. Or at least they purported to
discuss allegations?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Judge, is it your belief that
disclosing these audio recordings was a
violation of either the order to seal the file
or the Agreed Judgment?
A. Yes.
MR. DUCOTE:
MS. GOLDSMITH:
You can answer.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
194
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. All right. Judge, the next paragraph
right after linking to the audio recordings,
it says:
"Now consider that no Judge has ever heard
those recordings. Why? Because for four
and a half years they have simply refused
to do so. On August 16, 2011 Judge
Deborah Gambrell in the Chancery Court of
Marion County, Mississippi once again
refused to admit all of Raven's evidence
including these recordings and ordered
that" the minor children "have visits with
their father in the house where they both
report having been molested by their
father in the past."
Judge, did Raven Boyd or anyone else for
that matter, offer those audio recordings into
evidence at the August 16th hearing?
A. No.
Q. Has Raven Boyd or anyone ever offered
the audio recordings into evidence in a
hearing before you?
A. No.
Q. So do you consider that to be a false
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
195
statement then?
A. Yes.
Q. Judge, I'm going to ask if you'll go
down several paragraphs to where it states --
it lists the first name of one of the minor
children and it says:
"Still loves her daddy. She just wants
him to stop doing what he's doing to her.
She does not feel safe with him alone.
She said as much in her journal, but Judge
Gambrell refused to allow it as evidence."
Judge is that an accurate statement about
what transpired --
A. No.
Q. -- from an evidentiary standpoint?
Can you recall for us what transpired with
regards to any journals that may have been
offered into evidence?
A. I can. I went back and reviewed the
transcript to be sure that I recalled
properly. It appears that when the mother of
Raven, Ms. Phillips, was on the stand, an
exhibit had been pre-marked something called a
"Bad Book." It was marked for identification
purposes only I think at that point.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
196
Somewhere along in her testimony either Mr.
Ignatiev or someone else raised the issue of a
"Good Book". So I stopped the proceedings and
questioned the mother as to whether or not
there was another book or not. She indicated
there was a "Good Book", not a "Bad Book".
And I said well do you have the "Good
Book" too and she said, "No, I didn't bring
the "Good Book". I said well then we're not
going to admit the "Bad Book" or something to
that effect. We don't have anything in here
for me to compare. If I recall it was offered
for identification purposes. Could have been
admitted and then I disallowed it. I can't
recall, but there was some conversation
regarding a "good" and a "bad" and we only had
one so I didn't let any of it in.
Q. Subsequent to that hearing did Raven
or any of the attorney's or any of the other
parties involved in the case ever re-offer the
so called "Good Book" and "Bad Book" together
into evidence?
A. No.
Q. Do you then, Judge, as the one who
made these rulings, do you consider it to be a
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
197
false statement or a misrepresentation to
suggest that you refused to allow it as
evidence? It says -- it talks about how the
minor child admits or says in the journal
about sexual abuse and it says, "But Judge
Gambrell refused to allow it as evidence." Is
there anything other than what you've already
told us that would enlighten us?
A. That's a misrepresentation. I
literally just told you what happened as best
I recall.
Q. Judge, after saying these things that
we just read and linking to the audio
recordings, if you look at the bottom of that
same page that we were at --
A. Do I need to just flip all this and
stay back in this portion of the book?
Q. For now, yes. I'm sorry.
A. That's okay.
Q. On the second page of ODC 19, all the
way at the bottom --
A. All right.
Q. It then says, "Horrified?" Do you see
that?
A. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
198
Q. Okay. It says, "Horrified? Call the
Judge's and let them know." Do you see where
we're at now when you turn the page?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And if you turn the page it
then lists contact information for Judge
Deborah Gambrell. Is that your phone number?
A. Yes.
Q. And fax number?
A. Yes.
Q. And it says email Court Administrator
and it has the bparham email address, correct?
A. That's the Court Administrator. Yes.
Q. And that's the email address we just
looked at in the email --
A. Yes.
Q. -- sent by Heather Lyons? Reportedly
sent by Heather Lyons, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now Judge, you were talking
earlier about having received or a call having
come into your home while you were away. And
so in addition to that I'm asking specifically
about your office there at the court or your
staff. Did you or your staff, to your
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
199
knowledge, receive other calls from people
other than what we've already discussed that
were calling to inquire or to voice their
opinion about this Raven Boyd case?
A. Yes. To the point that I told Barbie
and Courtney Wilson, who was the law clerk, to
just either hang up or tell the persons that
we cannot discuss the case.
Q. Were these calls coming in while the
case was still pending before you?
A. Yes, sir. And I think at the hearing
in August I mentioned it on the record that
numerous people were calling and that they
should not do that.
Q. Judge, did you receive any calls or
view anything in the petition or these
comments that we've looked at already that
ever gave you any cause for concern for your
personal safety?
A. Yes, sir. The kind of work that we do
in this court places you in a situation where
somebody is going to win most of time and
somebody's going to lose. It concerned me
because I learned from Ms. Phillips that not
only had I -- and I didn't take it -- I didn't
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
200
know how to take it that I had married her,
but that she lived near me on the road that I
have to travel to get from my house to court
in Lamar County. So that concerned me that
all these people are being told to call me.
You could easily Google map me; find out where
I am and it really -- I was really concerned
because I had just gotten into the case and
before I could even do what I needed to do, I
was being harassed by phone calls and then
this Twitter and all this other stuff. It did
not make sense to me, but I was concerned
about my safety, especially learning where the
Phillips lady lived and you know Raven had
grown up or whatever. I have to travel that
way to get to the Courthouse.
Q. Judge, at the risk of drawing your
ire, I'm going to ask you in that book to turn
all the way back to the first exhibit now. I
think you were there earlier.
A. I can't do you like I would do the
lawyers that appear before me in court.
Q. Thank you for that.
A. Okay. Now what?
Q. Okay. ODC Exhibit 1.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
201
A. All right.
Q. Okay. Judge, do you recognize this as
the letter of complaint that you filed with
the Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. If you would, Judge, the second page,
in the last sentence of your first paragraph.
Okay. I want to focus on that. And it says,
"Also, she", and you're referring to Ms.
McCool, it says, "Also, she may not be aware
that the signatories to the petition she is
circulating are participating in a conspiracy
to intimidate a judicial officer which is a
felony in this State" and you cite Mississippi
Code Annotated, 97-9-55. Explain the --
MR. DUCOTE:
I have to object. Can I confer with
counsel for one second?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes.
MR. DUCOTE:
Thank you.
MR. MANNING:
Madam Chair and Judge Gambrell, for
your benefit as well, let me reiterate
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
202
something we discussed this morning many
hours ago. I am not, either by my
questions or by allegations, trying to
litigate the truth or lack of truth of the
allegations of sexual abuse. I'm not
suggesting or trying to prove that
happened or didn't happen in this case.
So to the extent I ask questions about
your comments or about sexual abuse or
criminal conduct, I'm not asking for
conclusory statements about whether those
things did or didn't happen, okay? I'm
only asking questions about what the Judge
did in response and to explain comments
that she made in her complaint.
MR. DUCOTE:
I think we need to make this clear
that when we just discussed this earlier,
ODC clearly in response to that paragraph
in the complaint indicated to me that it
was not their position that Ms. McCool did
in fact commit the offense that's sort of
referenced in the complaint letter.
That's what I was trying to --
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
203
And I think I just said I'm not
accusing her of that and I'm not trying to
prove that she committed a felony. That's
not the purpose for the question. Thank
you.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Okay.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Judge, and I'm sorry but it's short,
so I'm going to re-read it. Your complaint
referring to Ms. McCool you say, "Also, she
may not be aware that the signatories to the
petition she is circulating are participating
in a conspiracy to intimidate a judicial
officer which is a felony in this State." And
then you cite the proper Mississippi code.
Explain that statement, please?
A. Our State law indicates that you
cannot intimidate a judicial officer. In my
personal opinion after I learned that Ms.
McCool was the person who was instigating
these attacks and ex-parte communications and
statements that I took to be intimidating, I
wanted her to be aware that she was conspiring
to have people do things that might place them
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
204
in a position of being guilty of an offense.
I practiced law 30 something years myself.
I try to be above board with people and just
say don't do this.
Q. Judge, at some --
A. Don't do things that are going to get
you -- just don't do it.
Q. At some point did you make the
determination to refer this to any law
enforcement agency?
A. I contacted the -- and I'll tell you
exactly when I did it when I got that last
petition -- I contacted the Mississippi
Attorney General's Office. Their cyber crimes
division, etcetera. Talked to someone there.
Told them that because I had a companion case
I had spoken with the Judge. When we had to
decide about the relinquishing jurisdiction
issue and we were trying to get it resolved
and he said that I could go ahead and proceed.
I told him where I'd gotten all my information
from. The lawyer's calling me from Jackson.
I said but I'm trying to just tell people to
stop. I'm going to go ahead and file a
complaint and he said do that and if you see
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
205
fit to come back we'll prosecute and do
whatever we need to do.
Q. Okay. And did you follow up with that
and request any prosecution on that?
A. I don't want to prosecute anybody, but
-- the way I handle things is to try to take
the approach that will get your attention to
follow the law and do what's right. But I
didn't want these people innocently getting
caught up into something that might get them
in trouble. Whoever they are.
Q. I understand. And in keeping with
your actions that you took in response to
these online petitions and whatnot, turn ahead
to ODC Exhibit 8. This is a Show Cause order
and it's addressed to Honorable Joyce Nanine
McCool. Judge on the second page is that your
signature at the end?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And you issued this Show Cause order
why?
A. Because the calls were coming. The --
I don't know how you refer -- I don't know
enough about the internet to know how to shut
down these kinds of sites, but they were not
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
206
shut down. I wanted everybody to appear
before me so that I could go back and explain
to them verbally what that 2008 order meant.
Ms. Boyd, Shirley Baldwin was noticed who's
the lawyer for one of the parties. Jim
Johnson, the GAL was noticed. Ms. McCool was
noticed because my law clerk had to go online
or whatever and find out where her office was
and all that stuff. And I wanted them all --
and all of them got notices to show up so I
could tell them what a sealed file meant.
Q. Was Wanda Phillips one of the ones
noticed also?
A. Yes. I think she was noticed too.
Q. Okay.
A. Anybody that had shown up or was
calling or doing anything in this case, even
the GAL because the GAL was on a tizzy about
getting his fee and how Judge Thomas had said
he could -- and I said you know what,
everybody needs to show up before me and I can
explain where we are. Everything for once and
for all and we'll stop all this chatter about
this case.
Q. And how did you notice Ms. McCool with
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
207
the Show Cause?
A. We should have noticed her under Rule
4. I did the order. Got certified copies.
Brought them back to Hattiesburg. Asked my
law clerk to send them pursuant to Rule 4
which should have been certified mail or
personal service. All the rest of them got
theirs by regular mail and showed up.
Q. So everyone showed up. Did Ms. McCool
show up?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Judge, turn to the next
exhibit, ODC 9 and that's an Order of
Contempt. Is this an order that you in fact
issued against Ms. McCool?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's your signature on the
order?
A. Yes.
Q. Dated October 6th of 2011?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Judge, at some point did you
rescind the Order of Contempt?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you bring us through the process
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
208
by which you rescinded that order or the
grounds on which it was rescinded?
A. I got a call from John Tony (spelled
phonetically) who questioned me as to whether
or not service of process had been had on Ms.
McCool. I contacted -- I had Courtney go
back. Get in the car. Go over to Marion
County. Pull the court file because I am --
my primary office is in Hattiesburg, but this
sealed filed stays in Columbia, Marion County.
And I had Courtney go over and bring the file
back and process had not been perfected on her
properly and I rescinded it.
Q. Okay.
A. Called and said I had not complied
with doing what we should have and I should
not have delegated that to Courtney to do. I
should have done it myself.
Q. Judge, turn to ODC Exhibit 12(A).
This is a copy of an online blog or article,
if you will, and it's entitled, "Make
Louisiana and Mississippi Courts Protect
(redacted) and (redacted)." Is that what you
have?
A. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
209
Q. Okay. Judge, the -- first off you'll
see it says target Louisiana Supreme Court,
Judge Dawn Amacker, Judge Deborah Gambrell.
Do you see that at the top?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. If you will go down to the
second paragraph you'll see it says quoting:
"In spite of overwhelming evidence that
the girls have been abused by their
father, the Judge in Mississippi, Judge
Deborah Gambrell of Chancery Court of
Marion County, Mississippi, refuses to
even look at the evidence and has now
ordered the girls be sent to unsupervised
visitation with their father." And I'll
end quote there.
Judge, is that an accurate representation
of what --
A. Mr. Manning, that is an error. No
court -- Judge Thomas nor myself, and as far
as I know the Chancellor that now has the
case, has made the determination that these
children have been abused. This is an error.
Q. Do you believe that is a
misrepresentation?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
210
A. That is a misrepresentation.
Q. Judge, to your knowledge, because I
don't know if I've asked you or we've gotten
this out so far, but you have since recused
yourself from this hearing?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. To your knowledge as you sit
here today, have any of your evidentiary
rulings been overturned on appeal by any
court?
A. No.
Q. All right. Judge, turn to the second
page of that same exhibit. And again we're at
ODC 12(A) and you'll see just so that we're
keeping the record clear, at the bottom
there's Bates stamp numbers and we're on page
55.
A. All right.
Q. The second paragraph states quoting:
"Please sign the petition. Circulate to
all of your friends and families and call
Judge Amacker and Judge Gambrell during
the hours of 8:30 to 5:00 starting Monday,
August 15 to ask why they won't follow the
law and protect these children. Let them
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
211
know you're watching and expect them to do
their job and most of all make sure these
precious little girls are safe." And let
me end quote there.
Judge, we just read it tells the people to
start calling you on August 15th and you had a
hearing scheduled for the very next day in
this case, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your concerns? What is your
response, your reaction to the timing and the
content of what we just read?
A. I think it was an attempt to
intimidate the Court. An attempt to
communicate with the court and force the court
into doing whatever it was they wanted and to
the contrary, not be fair and impartial in the
hearing. That's what I think. I think it's
intimidation.
Q. Was that part of the reason you filed
a complaint against Ms. McCool?
A. Yes, sir. It would not stop.
Q. Judge, turn to the next exhibit ODC
12(B) as in "boy". This is another online
blog or article and it's dated August 17th,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
212
2011. That's the date right after your
hearing, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And its entitled, "Justice for" and
then it lists the first names of the two minor
children. You'll see next to the picture of
the minor children it says, "By Nanine McCool,
Attorney". Do you see that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. In the first paragraph, Judge,
if you scan through you'll see where Ms.
McCool talks about allegations that the minor
children were being sexually molested by their
father; do you see that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. In the third paragraph, Judge,
you'll that Ms. McCool again reveals that
there are audio recordings and "extremely
disturbing video" in support of these alleged
abuses. Do you see that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. Judge, turn to the second page
of that article. Towards the top of the page
Ms. McCool you will see refers to the August
16, 2011 hearing. It says, "It's been a
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
213
series of grueling battles; some won; some
not. Yesterday she lost a major one." And we
looked at the date of this. This is the date
after your August 16th hearing, okay. So if
you pick up where we are there that next
paragraph and I'll quote, it says:
"In a hearing before Judge Deborah
Gambrell of the Chancery Court for Marion
County in Mississippi yesterday, all of
Raven's evidence of abuse was excluded
from consideration on one legal
technicality or another."
And then if you -- Judge, in that next
paragraph, if you go down a ways I'm going to
pick up where it says, quoting:
"Judge Gambrell's solution to this
irrefutable evidence that" (and it names
the minor child), "and her sister are
suffering as a direct result of an order
she issued prematurely and without due
process on July 20, sending the girls for
visitation with their father in the house
where he repeatedly abused them, was too
excluded as evidence." End quote there.
Judge, we've already I think discussed and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
214
you've testified that there were no audio
recordings offered into evidence at the August
16th hearing, correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Was there any video evidence offered
into evidence at the August 16th hearing?
A. No.
Q. Was there any video evidence ever
offered into evidence in a hearing before you?
A. No. I can't -- I won't say I'm not
supposed to. I'm not a good witness, but I
would assume that Judge Thomas dealt with
that, something relating to videos back in '08
based on his order.
Q. But here if we're specifically talking
about the hearing of August 16th, which it is,
if you look at the dates and it says the
hearing yesterday; is that a false statement?
A. That's a false statement.
Q. All right. Judge, turn ahead to ODC
Exhibit --
A. Well, and you need to talk about this
July 20th thing that she -- well, I don't know
what she's referring to. July 20th I did
something without due process.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
215
Q. Do you recall issuing an order on July
20th?
A. I got my handwritten notes from the
20th. We had a conference. All the lawyers
were present and the lawyers entered into an
agreed order. It may be hard for Ms. McCool
to understand, but when everybody is
represented by counsel and they tell me what
they want to agree to in conference, we reduce
it to an order.
Q. Judge, turn to --
A. And I'll just tell you what my notes
say. There was a recommendation by the
guardian ad litem and all the parties that
were represented by counsel that visitation
should commence on a limited basis and my
notes set out what they agreed to do. The
paternal grandmother will supervise. Friday
at 3:00 to Sunday at 3:00. Visitation will
start the first of August. It will be
supervised; and that this is what they agreed
to and I signed it.
Q. Judge turn to ODC Exhibit 12(C). That
is something on what is called The Sheep Free
Zone; do you see that?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
216
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it's dated Thursday, August 25th
of 2011.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. And it's Justice For and again
it lists the first names of the two minor
children involved the case. And Judge, if you
turn to the second page and look all the way
at the bottom you will see where it says
posted by Nanine McCool. Do you see that just
above where the --
A. Yes. I see it.
Q. All right. So Judge, back on the
first page you will see beginning in the third
paragraph, as we've seen with some of these
other online blogs and articles, you'll see
where Ms. McCool starts discussing the minor
children involved in the Raven Boyd case and
the allegations of sexual abuse.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you see the references to that?
Okay. You'll see below that again where is
provides links to what is identified as audio
recordings. "Listen to their first
disclosures to Raven." And then it says, "And
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
217
a day later their second." Do you see --
A. Yes.
Q. -- the places where those links are?
A. Yes.
Q. Again, and we've seen this in other
online blogs and articles, in that next
paragraph she says paraphrasing that, that you
refuse. It says:
these recordings. Why? Because for four
and a half years the Judge's have simply
refused to do so. On August 16, 2011
Judge Deborah Gambrell of the Chancery
Court of Marion County, Mississippi once
again refused to admit all of Raven's
evidence, including these recordings."
Judge, this is now a subsequent posting
dated August 25, 2011. This is repeated.
We've seen this repeated in others. But on
this day, again I'm going to ask you the same
question. First off, is that a false
statement?
A. It is.
Q. Were these audio recordings ever
offered into evidence before you on August
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
218
16th or any other date?
A. No, sir.
Q. Okay. Judge, can I ask you if you
would explain to the Committee your feelings,
your beliefs, on how this conduct did or
threatened to influence or affect the
integrity and independence of your court?
A. A Judge is a human being also and it
is very difficult for me to feel that I am
exercising my integrity and being independent
when I'm being constantly barraged by
allegations that are just completely false.
It is very difficult for a Judge to make
decisions without knowing that all of this
intimidation and harassment is out there.
It is insulting to me as an -- well, I
practiced law for 30 years. I'm the mother of
six daughters. It would have been better for
Ms. McCool just to drive across the state line
and come sit in the court and actually see
what was being done. As an advocate for the
children or whatever as opposed to making
these malicious attacks to the point -- I
think it was designed to run me from the case.
Intimidate me to the point that I felt that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
219
there was no way to be fair or impartial.
That's basically what it did. I tried --
I've never been one to run away from doing
what I've been called to do, but this was just
more than I could bear. I have a family like
everybody else and it just would not stop. My
-- I wanted to stop it at the Show Cause
hearing so that I could just look at everybody
and say look, this is not how we do this.
Give me a chance to look at this and let
everybody have access to the court system.
But everybody just went on their own tears and
it took away my ability to really do anything
with the case.
MR. MANNING:
Thank you, Judge. I have no further
questions for you at this time. I'll
tender the witness.
MR. DUCOTE:
Can we take a five minute restroom
break real quick?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Sure.
MR. DUCOTE:
Thanks.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
220
(A brief recess was taken.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We're back.
Q. Good afternoon, Your Honor. Thanks
for being so patient. Okay. So when you
inherited the case, you inherited the whole
court file, correct? I mean the whole --
A. I inherited everything that Judge
Thomas had. Cases are assigned to Judge's and
I inherited everything that Judge Thomas had.
Q. Okay. So including this Boyd v. Boyd
case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you inherited the whole court
record from that case, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Could we go to your notes from May the
8th, 2008?
A. My notes?
Q. The notes that you gave us at your
deposition; the handwritten notes?
A. The synopsis?
Q. Is that what -- whatever it was you
called that. The synopsis.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
221
A. This (indicating) on the case?
Q. Yes, ma'am. May the 8th, 2008.
A. And this is as I told you at the
deposition, my law clerk's writing.
Q. I understand. Okay. May 8th, 2008.
Who was the Judge at that point?
A. Judge Thomas.
Q. Okay. Now if you could read what it
is that's written for May 8th, 2008?
A. Petition for emergency custody.
Courtney used shorthand but I can read it.
Raven filed. Directed by Sheriff and South
Mississippi Advocacy Center. After forensic
interview not to let children see their
father, so she did not. What that means is
Raven filed a petition saying she didn't want
the children to see the father.
Q. Okay.
A. Takes the child's conversation to
Sheriff. D.A. advised to continue his
visitation because kids did not self-report to
Child Advocacy Center so she did. Dad picked
kids up and didn't return. Allegations of
sexual abuse re girl said. Exhibit A, audio
recording. Exhibit B, video. Exhibit C,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
222
tape. Exhibit D, video.
Q. Okay. Now, so on May the 8th, 2008
there's a reference to four exhibits; two
audio recordings and two video recordings,
correct?
A. That were exhibits to her petition.
Q. Okay.
A. These are not court exhibits. When
people file petitions and they attach thereto
their exhibits, that's what this is referring
to.
Q. Okay. Were these ever into evidence,
these exhibits?
A. I wasn't there. I don't know, but I
can tell you how Judge Thomas practiced and
probably what happened.
Q. Okay. But you don't know for sure,
correct?
A. Well I can tell you for certain that
the records don't show that they were
admitted. There was no hearing. That was an
agreed order.
Q. Okay. So have you ever listened to
any audio tapes or video tapes of the kids
describing sexual abuse?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
223
A. No, sir.
Q. Well, are there audio tapes and video
tapes in the sealed record?
A. No, sir. From what I learned from
looking at the sealed documents that are made
up of about six thick manila files, she filed
a petition and attached thereto these
recordings. From conferring with the lawyers
at the June conference, Judge Thomas sat down
with all of the lawyers in a conference and
they came up with an agreed order that he
signed.
Q. Okay. So --
A. So I assumed he heard them.
Q. Well you don't know? You don't know
if anybody heard them, correct?
A. Well, one of the lawyers indicated
that he had and the GAL. But now personally,
I don't know.
Q. Okay.
A. I didn't get to confer with him.
Q. Do you know -- well let's go back. So
are there audio recordings and video
recordings of the girls discussing sexual
abuse in the sealed record?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
224
A. I did not see any and did not open all
of the files. At the June conference I did
discuss with the lawyers what had transpired
and in looking at the agreed order I was told
that there was an attempt -- even some
advocacy people -- and I gather they had the
Department of Human Services there because
those are the people who called me and were
appalled that I was being implicated in all
this.
Q. Well, I understand.
A. So I gather they heard.
Q. Let me go back to the question. Let
me ask another question. So do you agree that
at some point Raven or somebody on her behalf
attempted to offer into evidence audio and/or
video tapes?
A. No, sir. I can't agree to that. I'm
telling you what the process is. Judge Thomas
could very well at that motion hearing set
everybody down in a room and each side said
what they had to offer and he could very well --
Q. Okay. I understand it very well.
A. There is no record showing that he
accepted any audio tapes into evidence.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
225
Q. Okay.
A. His order specifically said he did not
want to have anything said about it.
Q. Because he said it was too ugly. What
was on the tapes was too offensive, right?
A. Oh, I don't know. That was 2008. I
was not a Judge. If Ms. McCool was there and
knows, I really don't. I wasn't there.
Q. Okay. Did you ever make the statement
that what was on the tapes was too offensive
or too ugly, something to that effect?
A. Did anybody ever offer me the tapes to
make that statement? I don't recall anybody
ever offering that.
Q. Okay. Do you remember on the record
speculating and saying well I guess Judge
Thomas didn't put them in the record because
they were too ugly or offensive?
A. I don't recall saying that.
Q. Okay.
A. But I can't speculate as to why Judge
Thomas -- fortunately, by the time I got the
case --
Q. Okay. And --
A. -- lawyers had changed so much, but if
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
226
I'm correct, the GAL or one of the lawyers
might have been privy to Judge Thomas's
conference, but not me.
Q. Okay. Now you consider the GAL an arm
of the court; would that be fair to say?
A. No. Our statute says we can appoint
them to be an arm of the court or we can
appoint them just to protect the interest of
the child.
Q. Okay. And in this case?
A. And Jim Thomas was appointed by I
think Billy Bridges or Judge Thomas.
Q. As an arm of the court?
A. He was appointed as the GAL. They did
not use the specific orders that I now use.
Q. Okay. And you appointed Mr. Johnson
to be the guardian ad litem at some point?
A. I don't think I did. I don't normally
appoint Mr. Johnson.
Q. Okay.
A. I'll see though. I appointed Chase
Morgan I know that I use a lot.
Q. Did you ever designate the guardian ad
litem once you got the case as either being an
arm of the court or an advocate for the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
227
children?
A. When I appointed Chase Morgan I did.
Q. Okay. And when was that?
A. Either in 2012 or 2013.
Q. And what did you appoint Chase Morgan
as?
A. It looks like Jim Johnson was
appointed 12/21/2010. That had to be by Judge
Bridges because Judge Thomas has died.
Q. But the Judge -- the guardian ad litem
you appointed was appointed as what?
A. As a guardian for the children and
pursuant to our statutes as an investigatory
arm of the court.
Q. All right.
A. To have access to anything that she
needed; investigative agencies reports;
etcetera.
Q. So that gave the guardian ad litem a
lot of power and authority --
A. Yes.
Q. -- as to what happened, correct?
A. Not to what happens, but it gives her
a lot of investigatory powers.
Q. Okay. Now the audios that are linked
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
228
on these various petitions and websites, you
have never listened to them either, have you?
A. I was in another room in my chambers
and heard one that Courtney pulled up.
Q. Okay. But do you know whether or not
those are the same that are reflected in
anything that was attempted to be offered in
court?
A. I don't know, but his order was
explicit: no audio recordings of these
children at all relating to abuse. I didn't
make the order.
Q. Okay. No audio. What about no audio
recordings of the kids?
A. I'll have to go back to the 2008 --
Q. You can't make them? You can't --
A. You can't discuss them. Whatever the
order says, Mr. Ducote.
Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the case,
and this is attachment one to my supplemental
memo, the case In the Interest of RJMV, a
minor, rendered by the Supreme Court of
Mississippi on May 23, 2013 and 2013
Mississippi Lexus 305; are you familiar with
that case?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
229
A. I'm not that bright. I mean I can't
just from the top of my head say I am or not
unless I look at it.
Q. Is it -- do you know whether or not
the position of the Mississippi Court is that
when a court record is sealed whether or not
that prevents people from discussing the case
and discussing the facts of the case and the
material on the case? Do you know what the
Supreme Court's position is about a sealed
order vis-a-vis the rights of people to
discuss the case itself?
A. The Supreme Court made a -- clarified
what their position is about sealed files in
2013. This file was sealed in 2008 and I can
tell you what the Supreme Court's position was
in 2008.
Q. Okay.
A. If it's sealed you don't discuss it.
If it's sealed and it has specific areas that
are sealed like recordings, physician
statements, criminal complaints; then you
cannot discuss it or disseminate it.
Q. So you are familiar with what the
Court said in 2013?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
230
A. To a limited degree, yes. But I can't
cite the case verbatim.
Q. What was the authority --
A. And --
Q. What was the -- in 2011 --
A. And, sir. You're going to have to
give me the case to read it to refresh my
memory. I read case summaries every Monday.
Q. Okay. But you said there was some
authority in 2011 that ruled differently. I'm
asking you if you know what that was?
A. I don't think I said 2011. If I said
it I meant 2013 at the time of that ruling
that you just talked about.
Q. Okay. Well in 2008, what was the
authority -- or do you know of any authority
before this 2013 case that said that if a case
is sealed it means something other than --
A. Our local Chancellor rules.
Q. Oh, the local Chancellory rules?
A. In addition to the Supreme Court's
interpretation.
Q. Now you're aware, are you not, that up
until after we took your deposition, that the
whole docket of the case in Boyd v. Boyd was
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
231
available, including the kids name, even on
your own Chancery Court website as reflected
in, let's see, Exhibit R 4 which is before
you?
A. Yes, sir. I'm aware. And then I made
the person who is responsible for the website
aware of it and I think it has since been
resolved. We, from what I understand before I
got there, they went from one system to DELTA
System which would allow you to look at a
docket, but wouldn't allow you to access the
actual pleadings.
Q. Okay. And are you aware that --
A. And I have no control over that. But
after you brought it to my attention, I took
it to the IT person and our Senior Chancellor.
Q. And that was just a couple weeks ago,
correct?
A. Yes, sir. And from henceforth, there
are specific rules regarding sealed files.
But they explained to me that that happened
that you could access the docket because of
the DELTA System.
Q. Okay.
A. They changed it. I don't know.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
232
Q. Are you aware that the Mississippi
College of Law has the Mississippi College
Judicial Data Project that compiles and allows
public access to Appellate Court --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- hang on one second, Judge, -- to
Appellate Court records. Are you aware of
that?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And R 1 that's in evidence is
the Mississippi College of Law Judicial Data
Project that contained Raven Boyd's entire
appellate brief that has all the facts of the
case; the children's names; recitation of all
the evidence; the Court's ruling; and the
subsequent appeal from the Mississippi Court
of Appeals wherein they ruled that your
judgment was not a final judgment, hence it
was not properly before them. Are you aware
of that?
A. Yes, sir. They publish all appellate
cases.
Q. But even the brief. Are you aware
that the brief that goes through the whole
history of the case; talks about the sexual
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
233
abuse allegations; talks about the kids; their
names; what they said; the orders that you
made; the issues about whether evidence was
admitted; whether or not -- that all that was
online and completely accessible to this day
by anybody who wants to go online to the
Mississippi College of Law Judicial Law
Project and access it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. Now, on the judicial complaint
that you filed you cc'd Judge Amacker; did you
not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Why did you cc Judge Amacker?
A. When I got on the bench and the
conflict arose and they filed for an adoption
down here, under the Uniform Child Custody
Jurisdiction Enforcement Act she called me to
see if there was something pending and I did
in fact go and explain to her that the matter
was pending here and the State has
jurisdiction. Then on a Friday she called me
to tell me about the petition that was
circulating, whatever date that hit right
before my hearing, and I got sorely upset and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
234
asked her how do you handle lawyers in
Louisiana? Do you know this lawyer? Can you
call her since you've got a pending matter
that's going up on appeal, etcetera. And I
think she gave me the address for filing the
complaint.
Q. So Judge Amacker is the one who
suggested to you that you file the complaint
against --
A. Oh, no. I asked her. Where is your
Bar Office located? She didn't suggest
anything.
Q. Okay.
A. I was about to have the Attorney
General go ahead and proceed.
Q. Okay, Judge. Remember I took your
deposition on February 3rd, 2014?
A. And you asked me the same question --
Q. Okay. Well let's --
A. -- and I told you I asked her how do
you -- where is your -- how do you get that
done; that I'm going to do it.
Q. Okay.
A. And I did it.
Q. Is it your testimony today that the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
235
first conversation you had with Judge Amacker
was pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody
Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act to discuss
the --
A. It would have had to be. I don't know
her. But that would have been the only way
that I would have had a conversation with her.
You asked me about that and I told you that it
either had to be regarding the jurisdictional
issues because now that I have cases in Pearl
River County, which is immediately adjacent to
Louisiana.
You asked me did I have any further
conversations with her and I told you I very
well could have at the Judicial College in
Reno where all first term Judges went in
October. But I knew for a fact that I had
talked to her on a Friday to get the
information to file the Bar complaint after
she made me aware of that online whatever you
call it, petition.
Q. Okay. Have you -- since I took your
deposition on February 3, 2014, have you
spoken to Judge Amacker?
A. Out there this morning.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
236
Q. Okay. What did you speak about?
A. The Bolshoi Ballet Company being in
Russia, our children.
Q. Did --
A. Nothing about this case.
Q. Did you ever read her deposition?
A. No, sir. I'm not privy to her
deposition. Never seen it.
Q. Okay. So on your deposition on Page
9, I ask you -- do you have a copy of your
deposition? Okay. Ms. Gambrell, I'm going to
hand you a --
A. No. I'll find it. Let me just --
Q. You've got it?
A. Let me find it. This should be it.
Yes, sir. I have it. This is it.
Q. Okay.
A. But mine is missing pages 74 to 77.
So those are not in here.
Q. Okay. I got another copy if we get to
74 or 77. Let me pass this up to you now.
A. Okay.
Q. Okay. Now Page 21, let's go to that.
I ask you in Line 6: "So when Judge Amacker
called you about this case did she represent
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
237
that this had anything to do with the
communication between the court's provisions
of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
Enforcement Act?" And what was your answer?
A. I couldn't recall. You also asked me --
Q. I --
A. But let me go ahead and explain. When
I sat down you asked me had I pulled any files
or done anything to prepare for any of this
and I said no, sir. I've been very busy. I
brought in those big stacks. I couldn't
recall.
Q. So did you have records of that call?
A. No, sir. Barbie Parham is not my
Court Administrator. She is now the Parenting
Class Coordinator and I sat Barbie down and
said do you remember what transpired back
then? You sit down and try to remember
because she answered the phone and would put
me through.
Q. And did Judge Amacker tell you that
she was calling to alert you about some stuff
online because she was concerned about your
safety?
A. The second call about the petition.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
238
The first call was literally about the Boyd
matter and the fact that a companion case on
adoption or something had been filed down
here. And I think I told you specifically and
I'll tell you again, I remembered it was a
Friday. That's when I do pre-trial
conferences.
Q. Right.
A. They came and got me off the bench
when these online petitions hit.
Q. Now -- okay. Do you remember me
asking you on Page 23, Line 17, I said:
"After you talked to Judge Amacker that
one time on the phone when she called you
and told you there was this petition
online, did you take any action?"
And what did you say?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Than I said, "What were the first
things you did after talking to Judge
Amacker?"
A. I pulled up the online petition thing.
I think I called the Judge back and asked her
what was the -- was this permissible by a
Louisiana lawyer to do this type of thing
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
239
because here it would not be.
Q. And what did she say? And that's Page
24 --
A. I think she indicated to me that she
didn't think it was permissible, but the only
way I would know whether it was permissible or
not would be to file a complaint with the
Louisiana Lawyers Disciplinary Board.
Q. Okay. So it was Judge Amacker who
told you that you should file a complaint with
the Judiciary Board?
A. No. She didn't tell me to file a
complaint. I asked how you would handle this
down here and she told me.
Q. And so she said -- and you said in
your deposition referring to Judge Amacker, "I
think she indicated to me that she didn't
think it was permissible, but the only way I
would know whether it was permissible or not
would be to file a complaint with the
Louisiana Lawyers Disciplinary Board;" is that
correct?
A. Yeah.
Q. Okay. And in fact, Judge Amacker gave
you the name of the agency where you should
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
240
file the complaint, right?
A. I don't -- I don't know that she did.
I know I asked because our Bar Complaint
Committee is lodged in our building and
Courtney ended up ultimately finding how to do
it.
Q. That's not my question.
A. What is your question?
Q. Did Judge Amacker tell you the name of
the agency where you could file the complaint
against Ms. McCool?
A. I don't think so.
Q. Well, let's go to what I had asked you
in your deposition just on February 3, 2014,
Page 24, Line 23. I ask you, "So you
eventually filed a complaint?" And what was
your answer on Line 24?
A. Yeah, but prior to that --
Q. No, ma'am. I'm asking -- this is what
I'm asking.
A. Well then I won't answer because I'm
reading what I said. I said, "Can someone
give me the number," and Courtney ultimately
figured out what to do.
Q. Ma'am --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
241
A. So I eventually did file a complaint.
Q. Let's go through the questions when I
asked you in your deposition.
A. I just answered already.
Q. Page 24, Line 23.
A. All right.
Q. "So then you eventually filed a
complaint?"
A. When I got around to it, I did. Yes,
sir.
Q. Okay. Then I said on Line 25, Page
24, "So when Judge Amacker told you that you
could file a complaint against Ms. McCool for
this you asked her for the number and who to
contact and she gave you that information?"
This is Page 25, Line 3.
A. Uh-huh (affirmative). I'm there.
Q. What's your answer?
A. "No. She gave me the name of the
agency. My law clerk went and looked up
everything. My law clerk found in her writing
Ms. McCool's name, Bar number and everything
and I did the complaint."
Q. Okay. So Judge Amacker is the one who
gave you the name of the agency and then your
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
242
law clerk went and looked up the address?
A. Yes, sir. Because your agency is
different from ours.
Q. Okay.
A. If we wanted to file a complaint we
would call the Mississippi Bar. I didn't
need to ask Judge Amacker what to do as it
related to the criminal charges. I knew to
call the Mississippi Attorney General's
Office.
Q. Okay.
A. But we don't have a mechanism -- our
mechanism for filing a complaint is very
simple. The Mississippi Bar handles
everything.
Q. Okay.
A. And we could not find -- we found
Louisiana Bar Admissions stuff, things of that
nature and I wanted to know how to do that.
Q. Okay. And now on Page 25, Line 9, I
ask you, "So when Judge Amacker told you that
was something you could do, what was your
response? When I say 'something' I mean
initiating the complaint against Ms. McCool."
What was your answer?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
243
A. I probably said, "Thank you very much"
and went back to work.
Q. Okay. Now, up until your conversation
with Judge Amacker, you did not initiate a Bar
complaint against Ms. McCool, did you?
A. No. But I initiated a request to
proceed criminally until I recall practicing
law myself and said I'll try the other
approach before letting the A.G. do a criminal
charge.
Q. Okay. Now when you were asked about
what prompted your vacating the contempt order --
A. Yes.
Q. -- against Ms. McCool, you say you had
gotten a phone call from somebody?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And who was that that you got the
phone call from?
A. John Tony with the Committee on
Judicial Performance.
Q. Okay. And it was after that you got
that letter -- I mean you got the phone call
from the Mississippi Council on Judicial
Performance. You vacated the order, correct?
A. That was the first time I was aware
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
244
that there was a problem with the order and
that's what he asked me. Deborah, there's an
order to rescind and I said I don't have the
court file. His office faxed it to me and he
asked about process. Did we have personal
service to process at which time I contacted
the Clerk.
I didn't have the sealed file in my office
and it took me about 24 to 48 hours to get it
in my hands. Talked to Courtney and we didn't
have process pursuant to Rule 4, personal nor
through certified mail on Ms. McCool. And I
rescinded it. That's what you do when you
issue an order in error.
Q. Now is it your position that you
actually had some sort of jurisdiction,
subject matter jurisdiction to hold Ms. McCool
in contempt?
A. Yes. Because all of the information
that I received as it related over the
internet indicated that Ms. McCool was
literally trying to practice law from
Louisiana through Raven Boyd across state
lines without committing herself to the
jurisdiction.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
245
Q. And you -- that's --
A. And I'd never run across a case yet
and I wanted some clarity as to how you can
actually influence a case via the internet.
Q. So you --
A. I'm old school, but obviously she had
the capacity to interfere with Mississippi
proceedings without setting foot here.
Q. So you --
A. And our rules say -- our Rule 4 says
we can secure process on her by sending her
notice certified mail or having her served and
I just happened to leave that up to my law
clerk like I do in a lot of cases.
Q. So did you file -- did you ever
reference or write anywhere or communicate in
anywhere to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel
that you thought Ms. McCool was practicing law
in Mississippi without a license or without
complying with the pro hac vice rules?
A. I think she is, but I'm not the person --
Q. That wasn't my question, Judge. Did
you ever communicate that to the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel in Mississippi or
Louisiana?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
246
A. No. I filed the appropriate complaint
and sent the documents and it's for your State
to determine what that is.
Q. Okay.
A. I don't -- you know it's hazy to me
that you can intimidate or influence a case in
one state via the internet. Now I don't know,
but the Bars need to deal with that, not me.
Q. Okay. Now you --
A. I've never had any other lawyer do
this so I don't know.
Q. You cc'd Judge Amacker on the
complaint that you filed --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- with the Bar, correct? Why did you
do that?
A. Because I told her I was going to send
her a copy because she had a companion case
and I wanted her to be aware of what was
happening on my end since she was also getting
the same complaints.
Q. But that's not what you said in your
deposition though.
A. Well, what did I say?
Q. Well, let's go to your deposition.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
247
Page --
A. Because that's why I sent it.
Q. Page 44 of your deposition on February
3rd, 2014, Line 13, I ask, I say, "And I note
on there that you cc'd Judge Amacker on that.
Why did you do that?" And your answer was
what?
A. Because I asked her about what the
procedure was. She's the one who told me. I
cc'd her so I'd know if I had done the proper
procedure and she had a companion case and was
involved in the same thing. Her name was in
the petitions with mine. And I wanted her to
be aware of what I was doing.
Q. Right. But you specifically say,
"Because I had asked her about what the
procedure was and I cc'd her so I'd know if I
had done the proper procedure," right?
A. Yes.
Q. She's the one who told you how to file
the Bar complaint?
A. No. She told me where to get it done.
I had to call down here and find out. You all
didn't have the forms like we normally do.
And I had to learn from your office here and I
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
248
say what I said then, she had a companion
case; was involved in these petitions; her
name was in it with mine; and I wanted her to
be aware of what I was doing.
Q. Well, now what about the confidential
nature of the complaint that you were filing
against Ms. McCool? Why would you cc that?
You knew it was supposed to be confidential?
A. I had no clue. I figured your agency
would tell me. And to be honest, I was hoping
that my complaint would be a complaint for her
because she was being named just like me.
Q. Okay. Now Judge Amacker never
conveyed to you that she felt you were in some
kind of danger as a result of these filings,
right?
A. I don't know Judge Amacker personally,
sir.
Q. That's not my question, Judge. Did
Judge Amacker --
A. I've never had a Judge ever in my life
convey that I should be afraid of something.
I make those feelings myself.
Q. Okay. And that would also apply to
Judge Amacker, correct?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
249
A. I have no idea.
Q. Now you were reading earlier through
some notes that you said were from July 20,
2011?
A. The synopsis of the case that was made
when I got it?
Q. Yes, ma'am.
A. By my law clerk. My yellow copy?
Q. Yes, ma'am. And is that -- because
what you had given us at the end of your
deposition doesn't have any reference to
anything on July 20th. It goes from --
A. July 20th of what year?
Q. It goes from July 5th of '11 to July
21 of '11. But there's nothing of July 20th
of '11. Do you have something from July 20th?
A. Show me what you're talking about?
Q. All right.
A. That July 20th I referred to something
I saw in this big book.
Q. Okay. So do you have any notes from
July 20th in your notes?
A. I think you all looked at this. I
handed you this which is the law clerk
prepares a docket sheet. I handed you all
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
250
that at the deposition and you all went in my
office. I left. I don't know if you copied
it.
Q. Okay. Well my question is --
A. But that's -- that's what's in the
file.
Q. Okay. Can I see this for a second?
A. Yes. Yes. I thought you all went in
and made copies of everything. I left.
Q. Okay. Now, let's go --
A. Do you have that so I can look at it?
Q. I didn't have that, but I'm glad you
gave this to me. It says for July 20th, 2011,
case number 46-2006-0136 G, 9:00 a.m., Raven
Skye Boyd versus Michael Thomas Boyd. Then
you have Shirley Marie Fager-Baldwin, that's
an attorney?
A. Yes.
Q. Alexander Ignatiev?
A. Ignatiev.
Q. He's an attorney?
Q. Then you have modification; child
support; child custody visitation; comments
Jim Johnson, GAL, right?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
251
A. Let me explain what all that is. I
had to ask my law clerk. On the DELTA System
it pre-prints everything that started the
process. The last thing under comments are
what you're doing on that day. And on that
day it had -- this matter is only for a
conference instead of a trial.
Q. But there are indications on there
that a trial is set that day, correct?
A. No.
Q. It says trial twice, does it not?
A. No. I have to explain the system.
This is what -- what's in caps for comments is
what you're doing on a case if it's not set
for trial. We call the docket; then I
handwrite the announcement from the lawyers.
This one is conference. It's set only as a
conference. The next one is a trial. The
next one is a Rule 81 return hearing. The
next one is a minor settlement. The trial
date was August. This is the conference that
you have before a trial. And I gave you this
at the deposition. And I think one of the two
of you have my original because my original
would be on yellow paper and all I have left
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
252
is white.
Q. So when you were reading earlier from
something about -- and I understood that to be
from some notes you had about July 20, 2011 --
A. Unh-unh (negative). It was something
in this book Mr. Manning gave me. I saw July
20th and opened my mouth and started talking
about what I saw in his book that related to
July 20th. There was something about Ms.
McCool saying what I did on July 20th in one
of these, somewhere in one of these books.
When I stopped and reached over and got this.
MR. MANNING:
ODC 12(B), second page.
THE WITNESS:
12(B).
MS. GOLDSMITH:
12(B)?
MR. MANNING:
12(B) page two refers to the -- like
the third paragraph it refers to July
20th.
THE WITNESS:
Yes. That was a conference.
MR. DUCOTE:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
253
I'm sorry. Which exhibit?
MR. MANNING:
ODC 12(B), second page.
THE WITNESS:
Yes. My concern was I issued
something prematurely without due process.
At a conference these parties agreed to do
something that the court just confirmed.
And I have my notes from that day.
BY MR. DUCOTE:
Q. Okay. That's what I'm asking you for.
What do your notes from July 20th -- because
we didn't have those.
A. Well you had them at the deposition.
I showed you --
Q. Well we didn't get a copy. Whatever
you gave us is copied.
A. Well, I got the docket sheet that I
take into court. I've got my handwritten
notes that are on yellow paper, but it's white
which means this is a copy, showing what
happened. I have the notes from the law clerk
who was sitting there. No trial today. And
that means somebody probably got chewed out
for not bringing the file down to wherever we
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
254
were. JJ, GAL, allegations of sexual abuse.
Shirley represents father, Michael. Mother
just gave birth. Couldn't proceed today. GAL
says can't find any basis for the restrictions
on visitation. D.A. nol-prossed the charges
and it's spelled incorrectly. She spelled
nol- prossed wrong.
GAL wants court to consider expanding the
dad's visitation. Now visits at paternal
grandparent's home. Wants grandma to come to
dad's house. Let kids do overnight. GAL says
termination of parental rights issue still
pending. Mom filed. Wants Raven mom to post
a bond to pay his fees in advance. Judge says
yes. Needs to pay first within 30 days or
prior to trial because fees have been
outstanding since Judge -- before he died.
Judge says visitation expanded every other
weekend. First few with grandmother
supervising at Mike's house. Thereafter,
unsupervised in September. Birthday party on
Saturday. Dad gets her Saturday from 6:00.
Monday at 6:00 or Friday at 6:00 to Sunday.
Mom can choose. Need to set this ASAP. Going
to talk to Barbie. That's my Court
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
255
Administrator. Ordered drafted by Shirley.
Amended temporary order.
Q. Okay. Now was Raven Boyd represented
by counsel on that day?
A. Yes.
Q. And who was her counsel?
A. Alex I think was her counsel. He was
her counsel on the 16th.
Q. Is that represented in there?
A. Yes.
Q. That he says anything in that -- on
July 20th?
A. No. This is Courtney's notes about
her interpretation of what's happening.
Q. Okay. That's why I'm asking.
A. Here's my order showing who was there
and who they are. I have to draw a road map
when I do cases. Alex represents the mother
who's Raven. Two girls. New baby. Slidell.
The GAL is Jim Johnson. He's been the GAL six
months. Michael is represented by Shirley.
D.A. Nol-prossed the indictment. And here's
the temporary order. When they say what they
agree to or I order, I write it down. They go
back and do an order and I'm sure you don't do
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
256
this in Louisiana, but lawyer's will come to a
conference, say they agree to something and
get back 10 days later and nobody can remember
what they agreed to or one will say this. So
I make my own notes so that when the order
does get to my desk I can look at it.
Q. Okay. So on July 20th, 2011 was there
any evidence taken?
A. No, sir.
Q. Okay. And what language at all is
there in your notes from July 20, 2011 that
represent anything that Raven Boyd's lawyer
did or said?
A. He signed an order after this hearing.
The lawyers get in there and they hash it out --
Q. Okay. I understand. But I'm asking
you specifically about your notes.
A. I don't keep notes about them --
Q. Okay.
A. -- with each of them talking.
Q. Okay. Is there any reference in your
notes of July 20, 2011 to Raven Boyd's lawyer
whatsoever?
A. Yes.
Q. What is it?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
257
A. My drawing showing that he was there
and who he represented and what he said.
Q. Okay. What did he say?
A. That Raven is the mother. That's
she's the mother of two kids. She's now got a
new baby. She's in Slidell.
Q. And that was it?
A. I'm sure that's not everything that
was said, sir. It just doesn't operate that
way.
Q. Are there any official minutes or
anything or that's the best work that we have?
A. No, sir. That's the best we can do.
Q. Okay.
A. But you're teaching me. Now there
will be a Court Reporter in every conference
even if they're asking me can someone go to
the bathroom. But if they sign an agreed
order, they are confirming to me that they
were there, they were present and this is what
they agree to.
Q. Do you have the signed and agreed,
confirmed, conformed order that came out of
the July 20, 2011?
A. Let's see. I don't have that file
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
258
with me so I'd have to look at this. It looks
as if an order was signed July 20th and that
refers to them going to the parenting class
that we discussed, but I don't have the actual
file with me.
Q. Okay.
A. I don't have the actual file.
Q. Did you ever conduct an evidentiary
hearing specifically on the question of
whether or not these two girls were sexually
abused by their father?
A. If there was a motion set or a hearing
for me to do that I would have, but I don't
think there was.
Q. Okay. So the answer would be "no"?
A. I didn't.
Q. Do you know who -- you said you got an
email or some kind of call that said we're
watching you and we want you to do -- protect
the kids and listen to the evidence?
A. Are you referring to an exhibit that
was shown to me?
Q. Yes, ma'am.
A. Which one was it and I'll go back?
Q. Judge Gambrell, you're elected; are
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
259
you not?
A. Yes.
Q. You run a campaign?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You run on your record I assume when
you're up for re-election?
A. Since 1980.
Q. And so do you object to the voters
watching you to see what kind of job you do as
a Judge?
A. To the contrary. Schools bring
classes in to watch me to see what I do.
Q. Okay.
A. Classes. Church groups.
Q. And do you object to being advised by
the electorate because they want you to listen
to evidence and apply the law and protect
children; do you find that offensive?
A. I've never been told by the electorate
to do that. My reputation of 30 something
years has let the electorate know that that's
who I am and that's what I do.
Q. So if people come to you and say
'protect children', 'do the right thing'
specifically -- well do you think you have an
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
260
obligation to protect our most vulnerable
children?
A. I have six female daughters myself.
I've done a pretty good job of protecting
them. I'm the oldest of six siblings. I've
done advocacy work for the Presbyterian
Church; Department of Human Services. My
whole life has been protecting the
down-trodden probably because of my ethnic
background. I just have a propensity to try
to be fair and impartial in everything that I
do and protect the rights of all people.
That's just who I am.
Q. So you would agree with the
proposition that it's important for the
electorate to know what kind of a job their
Judge's are doing?
A. Oh, yes. And there's a proper way to
do that; by showing up in court; watching me;
asking me to come and speak; reprimanding or
telling me if I'm doing something that falls
outside of the Canons of Judicial Conduct. I
don't have a problem with that.
I don't have a problem with Ms. McCool
coming into court and saying, Your Honor, I'm
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
261
an advocate for those children; may I talk to
you? I don't have a problem with anybody
doing that. But I have a problem when
somebody conspires to malign me or attempts to
take away my ability to do my job by
intimidating me and attempting to coerce me
into taking a position without utilizing the
court that's been put there for us. I have a
problem with that, Mr. Ducote.
Q. Now you said you saw the children one
time?
A. Maybe twice. The last time that I saw
them was when I introduced them to the new GAL
and I think that was in 2012 or 2013.
Q. Have you ever interviewed them about
the sexual abuse allegations?
A. I interviewed them -- I didn't
interview them. When I brought them into my
chambers with permission of counsel and
counsel present to introduce them to the new
GAL, I personally felt that we needed a female
who was a mother, who had those instincts to
talk with them and because I had lots of
children and grandchildren, I wanted to talk
to them. It was during the holidays. I made
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
262
them at ease by talking about what are you
doing to get ready for Christmas. The kids
were obviously -- I don't know how to say it --
Q. Well my question is did you ask them
anything about the sexual abuse allegations?
A. No. I asked questions that would lead
up to whether or not they feared either of
their parents or whatever because we were
talking about modifying visitation. There was
a motion filed to limit visitation. So I did
it in front of the GAL and then I had the GAL
take them and talk to them to get their
concerns about being afraid of visiting. And
I saw nothing to exhibit that they were afraid
of loving or being around either of their
parents.
Q. But did you ask them anything
specifically about the sexual abuse?
A. No, sir. I wouldn't dare do that
without being on the record or having
something before me to prompt me to ask that.
Q. Okay. So --
A. And I had nothing before me.
Q. Okay. And whatever conversations you
had with the kids were not on the record; is
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
263
that correct?
A. No, sir. It was to determine -- I
think Ms. Boyd -- Mr. Boyd's lawyer filed a
motion to expand visitation during the
holidays and I was trying to see if we could
figure out a way for the children to be able
to see both parents. But I think Ms. Boyd
said they were fearful of coming to
Mississippi for Christmas --
Q. But my question was, was this on the
record or not on the record?
A. No. It was with Ms. Boyd's lawyer,
Mr. Boyd's lawyer, the guardian ad litem, me,
the children and the law clerk.
Q. But no recording made of it?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
MR. DUCOTE:
I don't have any other questions.
Thank you very much.
MR. MANNING:
Just one follow up, Judge. I'm going
to turn to the exhibit for you. It's ODC
Exhibit 7 and I just have a couple of
quick questions for you about that.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
264
Q. Judge, very quickly. We looked at
this already. Agreed judgment, Michael Boyd
versus Raven Boyd. It has "This day this
cause having come before this court on the
motion of the defendant to set aside the
temporary order and the parties having
announced to the Court that they have reached
an agreement." Okay. I guess that's how we
get to the agreed judgment in the first place,
right?
A. Yes.
Q. The parties announcing to the court
they've reached an agreement. And on the
signature page it says who prepared the agreed
judgment. Who is that?
A. Mr. Ignatiev.
Q. And who did he represent in this
proceeding?
A. Raven Boyd.
Q. So Raven Boyd's attorney prepared the
agreed judgment and in Sections 12 and 13 it
talks about that the parties have agreed that
no video or audio tapes will be made or
disseminated about these sexual abuse
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
265
allegations, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MANNING:
That's all I have. Thank you, Judge.
MR. DUCOTE:
I don't have any else. Thank you.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Thank you so much.
THE WITNESS:
May I be fully and formally excused?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yes. You are free to go. Thank you
so much. We can take five minutes.
(A brief recess was taken.)
MS. GOLDSMITH:
We're ready.
MR. MANNING:
Disciplinary Counsel's last witness is
the Respondent, Ms. Joyce Nanine McCool.
JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL, having been duly
sworn testified as follows:
Q. Ms. McCool, good afternoon.
A. Good afternoon.
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
266
Madam Chair, Mr. Ducote and the
Committee, I told our -- I mentioned this
to Mr. Ducote yesterday. What I intend to
do and hopefully it may help us to get
through Ms. McCool's testimony in a
quicker manner -- it's my intent -- one
of the things that Ms. McCool and her
counsel filed into the record was
Respondent's pre-hearing memorandum. They
attached stipulations. And so what I am
going to do is, and I made copies for
everyone, I'm actually going to walk Ms.
McCool through the stipulations and I will
have questions in between some of the
stipulations to fill in what I believe
were those facts or issues that we weren't
able to agree to. That way we get the
stipulations in the record and again, I
think my hope and intent here is that it
speeds us up, not slows us down.
MR. DUCOTE:
And I think as a matter of record, the
fact that I represented those to be
stipulations in my pre-hearing memorandum
do constitute the establishment of these
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
267
stipulations. So hopefully we don't need
to belabor them.
MR. MANNING:
No. I agree. But there were certain
-- we had proposed stipulations and there
were several that didn't make it to the
final cut. So it will be necessary for me
to I think ask some questions in addition
to what we stipulated to.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. So Ms. McCool, please, and I know you
won't, but don't allow me to talk through
these things if there is something that you
don't agree with or you need to explain. It's
not my intent to rush for the sake or hurrying
or rushing you, okay? What I will try to do
to be clear because we all have -- I've
provided everyone with a copy of the
stipulations. Anyway, so that we're clear,
what I will try to do is I'll actually say the
word stipulation before I read into the record
what was a stipulation and if it is a question
that's not a stipulated fact I will try to
make clear to you when I'm asking you a
separate question. And I've gone through and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
268
numbered them as well.
So Ms. McCool, before we get started I
think it would be important for the Committee
and for the record to reflect some background
information on you. Let's get your name and
your professional address and then tell us
about your educational and professional
background?
A. My name's actually Joyce Nanine
McCool. Nine (spelled phonetically) is my
maiden name. My office address is 1772
Orleans Street in Mandeville 70448. My
background -- I grew up in New Orleans. I
attended Ben Franklin High School, but dropped
out when I was 15. Got my GED. Joined the
military, the Coast Guard. Served four and a
half years on active duty. Got out of the
Coast Guard. Had a little bit of a break
there where I sort of traveled around. Went
to college at UNO. And it took me a little
longer than three years to finish.
I got interrupted in my senior year. I
got called back to duty for Desert Storm. I
served for 90 days and then another 45 days.
I was training to go overseas and then the war
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
269
was over so thankfully we weren't deployed.
And then I served over the summer on a summer
stock program and then I went back to school
and when the term started again. I graduated
I want to say in '93. I don't remember. Took
some social work training and then applied to
law school in '97. I graduated in 2000.
And I went to law school because I wanted
to be a family law attorney. I wanted to
advocate for victims of domestic violence. I
wanted to be able to protect children. That's
why I went to law school.
Q. Good. And as I said, we'll walk
through some. So you'll see that Stipulation
No. 1 simply says Respondent, Joyce Nanine
McCool was admitted to practice law in the
State of Louisiana on October 6th, 2000,
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. What areas of law do you primarily
practice today?
A. Family.
Q. What percentage of your practice is
family law? Estimate.
A. About 95 percent.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
270
Q. Okay. How long has that been true?
A. It's always been primarily family law.
It does tend to fluctuate, but it's always
been at least 75 percent.
Q. Okay.
A. Except for when I was on active duty
between 2003 and 2006 in which case I just did
family law assistance while I was on active
duty. So it wasn't too terribly long.
Q. Stipulation No. 2 says Respondent is
currently eligible to practice law. Is that
still true today?
A. That is still true today.
Q. Stipulation No. 3 says in September of
2011 the Office of Disciplinary Counsel
received a complaint filed against Respondent
by a Judge Deborah Gambrell of the Chancery
Court of Marion County Mississippi, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was what we have referenced
here today as ODC Exhibit 1. Stipulation No.
4 says underlying this complaint is the
custody/visitation matter of Michael T. Boyd
versus Raven S. Boyd Maurer, cause number
2006-0136G-TH, Chancery Court of Marion County
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
271
Mississippi.
A. Yes.
Q. How did you first come to meet Raven
Boyd? And this is a question, not a
stipulation.
A. She -- it's been awhile. She came to
me -- I believe I met her husband first
because her husband worked for my husband.
And she came to me I want to say in 2007
because of the case in Mississippi, asking for
my help. She knew the kind of law that I
practiced and at that time I just tried to
help her find an attorney in Mississippi
because I told her I didn't practice in
Mississippi.
Q. Did you help her find an attorney?
A. I gave her questions to ask and you
know things about experience and training.
And I think I told her that she should
probably look for somebody who was a trial
attorney, who had trial experience and that
they also -- like a criminal background might
be helpful. I don't know. I tried to help
her with what appropriate questions to ask
because a lot of people really don't know how
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
272
to hire an attorney.
Q. So to be clear, you do not nor have
you ever represented Raven in the Mississippi
proceedings?
A. That's correct.
Q. You're not licensed in Mississippi?
A. Correct.
Q. And in the Boyd case you have never
made an application or appearance pro hac vice
in those proceedings?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. But you do represent Raven in
proceedings that were filed in Louisiana,
correct?
A. I did.
Q. And that was for a petition or a
motion for Ex-Parte Emergency --
A. Correct.
Q. -- Custody or I may not be titling it
correctly.
A. Yes.
Q. That was allotted to Judge Dawn
Amacker?
A. Yes.
Q. You also represent or represented
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
273
Raven's husband, Dustin Maurer?
A. Yes. Maurer (pronouncing).
Q. In the intrafamily adoption
proceedings filed in Louisiana?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. Ms. McCool, do you
consider Raven to be a personal friend of
yours in addition to a client?
A. I did.
Q. You did? You no longer do?
A. I haven't spoken to Raven -- she's
still somebody that I care about, but I
haven't spoken to Raven in over a year.
Q. Do you no longer represent her in any
proceedings?
A. Incorrect. I'm sorry. I actually saw
her at a parade a few weeks ago and had a
brief conversation with her.
Q. Do you not represent her anymore?
A. No. I do not.
Q. When did you either withdraw or when
were your services terminated?
A. The adoption proceeding was completed
a year ago? And then the ex-parte matter you
know was completed. We took writs and we
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
274
lost. We didn't get writs so that pretty much
ended that.
Q. So that's how both of those were
concluded? Your writ's denied?
A. Yes. Well, no. The adoption -- yeah.
It was either writ and appeal on the adoption.
I don't remember. I'm sorry.
Q. Okay. We've had some discussions here
today, but as I understand, Raven and Michael
Boyd have two minor daughters together?
A. They actually have four children
together, but -- oh, I'm sorry. Michael Boyd.
Yes, you're correct. Two little girls.
Q. Okay. Now we're back to a
stipulation. This is Stipulation No. 5. It
says the litigation has been very contentious
and included allegations by Raven Boyd that
Michael Boyd sexually abused their minor
children?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. Stipulation No. 6. John
Smallwood was initially appointed guardian ad
litem to investigate the allegations?
A. Correct. I don't have firsthand
knowledge of that, but if you say so.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
275
Q. Ms. McCool, would you -- I don't want
to say if I say so. These are stipulations.
A. I apologize. I know that he was a
guardian ad litem. I don't know if he was the
first one.
Q. Okay.
A. But I know that he was a guardian ad
litem on the case.
Q. And you also know that part of, at
least part of what he was appointed to do at
some point was to investigate allegations of
sexual abuse, right?
A. Correct. That would be my guess.
Q. Do you agree with the statement that,
at least as far as what Guardian ad Litem
Smallwood found, that he found either no merit
or insufficient merit to the allegations of
sexual abuse?
MR. DUCOTE:
Objection to the relevance because
that gets into this whole thing. It's not
relevant unless he's accurate or
inaccurate. I mean the fact that he did
that in the matter.
MR. MANNING:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
276
It's relevant because it then follows
into the next stipulation and because it
is what is the foundation for ODC Exhibit
5, which is an order granting motion for
temporary emergency relief that was filed
by Guardian ad Litem Smallwood. So this
is --
MR. DUCOTE:
To that extent.
MR. MANNING:
-- already in evidence.
MR. DUCOTE:
To that extent if that's the only
purported relevance I'll withdraw my
objection.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. And I'll just ask again, would you
agree that at least based on the record,
Guardian ad Litem Smallwood found no, either
no or insufficient support for the allegations
of sexual abuse of Raven Boyd's children?
A. Just to clarify, you're not asking me
if I agree with him, but you're asking me
whether or not those were his findings?
Q. Exactly.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
277
A. I agree those were his findings
pursuant to that order.
Q. Okay. And you do see or you are aware
of if you need to turn to or not at ODC 5, was
that order granting motion for temporary
emergency relief that was based on the motion
filed by Guardian ad Litem Smallwood, correct?
A. It was filed by him?
Q. Yes.
A. Oh. It says presented by -- yes -- on
the bottom. I agree that's what it says.
Q. Okay. And you're familiar with this
particular order?
A. Not terribly, but I don't disagree
with its authenticity. Authenticity.
Q. Looking at ODC 5, the order granting
motion for temporary emergency relief, you see
it says:
"This day this cause came on for hearing
on motion for temporary emergency relief
filed by the petitioner, John D.
Smallwood, Guardian ad Litem, and all
parties having been noticed and after
having been informed that the defendant
does not oppose the petition."
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
278
Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. So do you see the reference --
A. Yes. Uh-huh (affirmative).
Q. -- that Raven Boyd did not oppose the
Guardian ad Litem's petition?
A. I see that there. Yes.
Q. And it says:
"It is hereby ordered and adjudged that
Raven Boyd, Wanda Phillips, and any
persons acting on their behalf or at their
direction are hereby enjoined from making
the same or similar allegations of sexual
abuse as to the minor children of the
parties herein."
Did I read that accurately?
A. Yes, you did.
Q. And lastly it says, it says "It if,"
but I think it's supposed to say:
"It is further ordered and adjudged that
Raven Boyd, Wanda Phillips, and any
persons acting on their behalf or at their
direction are enjoined from subjecting the
minor children to any more medical
examinations for the same or similar
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
279
allegations of sexual abuse."
Did I read that accurately?
A. Yes.
Q. Point being, at least based on the
order, Raven Boyd did not oppose this
petition?
A. I don't know.
Q. You have no reason to or no
information that would differ with what is
stated in this order, do you?
A. I certainly have my doubts based on
things that Raven told me, but I couldn't say
specifically to this order.
Q. Okay. Continuation of Stipulation No.
6 it says:
"Following his investigation, Mr.
Smallwood filed a motion for temporary
emergency relief seeking to prevent Raven
Boyd from further subjecting the children
to the same or similar allegations of
sexual abuse" which is what we just looked
at.
So on the record here today, do you agree
with that stipulation? It's No. 6 or a
continuation of No. 6.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
280
A. I'll agree that the documents are in
the file and that they represent the record in
Mississippi, but I really don't have much
firsthand knowledge about those orders or how
they came to be there. And that's my only
discomfort here is that I'm not questioning
the authenticity of these documents or that
they accurately reflect the Mississippi
record. I just -- they are what they are.
Q. I understand. And again, I guess the
question --
A. I agree to what they say as well.
Q. Okay. That really was the question or
the stipulation was, "Following his
investigation, Mr. Smallwood filed a motion
for temporary emergency relief seeking to
prevent Raven Boyd from further subjecting the
children to the same or similar allegations of
sexual abuse." The question is do you still
agree with that stipulation today?
A. That's referring to the order to seal
for ODC No. 6?
Q. No. ODC 5.
A. Oh, I'm sorry. ODC 5.
Q. That's the one we just looked at.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
281
A. Okay. All right. I stipulate that's
in the record.
Q. Okay. We looked at the order and
we've had some -- heard some testimony earlier
today and so I wanted to ask you since you
were maybe more familiar with Raven Boyd and
her family. Wanda Phillips, we've heard that
name today. Is that Raven's mother?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Stipulation No. 8. We skipped
over 7, but 7 is what we covered the orders
contained in ODC 5 so we'll move to
Stipulation No. 8. On June 2, 2008, Judge
Thomas issued an order to seal file. And Ms.
McCool, that's the one that's at ODC 6.
A. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said ODC
8.
Q. No. It's Stipulation No 8. It's in
the next --
A. Sorry. ODC 6. Got it.
Q. Okay. Referring to ODC 6, we're on
Stipulation No. 8.
A. Got it.
Q. On June 2, 2008, Judge Thomas issued
an order to seal file which stated in part:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
282
"Based upon the nature of allegations made
in pleadings filed in this matter and to
protect the minor children in this matter,
the entire file shall be sealed by the law
clerk and not made available to any person
until further order of this court with
notice of any such request for disclosure
being given to both parties and the court
appointed Guardian ad Litem herein."
Do you still agree with that stipulation
today?
A. I agree that's what it says.
Q. Yes. Stipulation No. 9 says, "On
September 2," this refers to ODC Exhibit 7,
"On September 2, 2008, an agreed judgment was
signed stating in part that" and then it
refers to orders or Sections 12 and 13 which
are on the signature page, Bates page 22,
where at 12 it states that:
"Any video tapes or other recordings made
by the parties or at their behest or by
anyone related to the minor children shall
not be disclosed to anyone, except counsel
of record and the court and shall not be
made available to anyone except the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
283
appropriate investigatory agencies at
their request." Order number 13 states,
"Neither the parties nor anyone working in
concert with them shall make any audio or
video recordings of the children in an
attempt to investigate or document alleged
abuse. This does not include recordings
made by a counselor for therapeutic
purposes or any recordings made by law
enforcement agencies."
Again, we looked at it. It's called an
agreed judgment. It states that the parties
came into court and announced that they've
reached these agreements. Do you stipulate or
admit for the record today that Raven Boyd
agreed to the judgment containing these
orders?
A. I can't. I wasn't there.
Q. Are you aware that Alexander Ignatiev,
I-G-N-A-T-I-E-V, represented Raven Boyd in the
Mississippi proceedings?
A. I am.
Q. And you see on Bates page 22 of that
exhibit that this Agreed Judgment was prepared
by Alexander Ignatiev who was Raven Boyd's
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
284
attorney?
A. Yes. It says that.
Q. Ms. McCool, you have a complete copy
of the Mississippi proceedings; isn't that
true?
A. I have -- I have a copy of Raven's
appellate record I believe. But I don't know
if it's a complete copy.
Q. Is it your testimony today that the
only thing you have is a copy of her appellate
record?
A. I think that's the only thing I still
have and it's almost accidental that I still
have it.
Q. And if it's a copy of her appellate
record, is it your understanding that they
provided her the record in the underlying
matter to assist her on appeal?
A. They did. She got it on CD.
Q. Okay. And so she, Raven, is the one
who provided you with a copy of the record or
the appellate record in the Mississippi case?
A. What she did was she brought the CD to
my office and she uploaded it onto my Dropbox
folder and that's where it remains.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
285
Q. Isn't it true that you're the one who
scanned the record and created the electronic
file for Raven?
A. No. I wouldn't agree with that. I
may have done -- occasionally she would have
brought something and dropped it off that I
would scan for her, but most of it was done by
Raven herself.
Q. I don't know to what extent we need to
belabor this particular point, but just so
that we remain clear, you recall back on March
20th of 2012 you gave a sworn statement to my
office?
A. I do.
Q. In this matter?
Q. And the transcript of that sworn
statement is at ODC Exhibit 18. And I'll tell
you that on Page 12 of the transcript
beginning at Line 14 your testimony was:
"I have the Mississippi record. I have
not been able to review all of it. It's
really long. I've not -- I've read
portions of the transcript from the
hearing -- the portions that affect our
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
286
adoption proceedings here because they're
disturbing, but I -- and I can give you
that record. I have it electronically."
And then if you turn to Page 13, beginning
at Line 6, you testified:
"She brought it to me.
Question: And you would have pleadings,
rulings?
Answer: I have the record that they gave
her for appeal. She brought it to me and
we scanned it for her."
Does that help maybe refresh your
recollection of those events?
A. I mean "we" -- my thoughts, my memory
was fresher then. I think that "we" probably
referred to she, I or me and her mother or me
and whoever. Like I said, sometimes I helped
her, but she did most of it.
Q. Didn't you scan it and then give her
access to that record through something called
Dropbox?
A. No. She uploaded that to my Dropbox
folder, absolutely. And in fact, although she
has all of her own, you know she's taken all
of her paper hardcopy, that still remains and
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
287
I was actually going to move it and put it
somewhere else, but her current attorney in
Mississippi just asked me to leave it there
because she was afraid that we would lose
something if I moved it. So it remains there
for her convenience.
Q. Who is Patricia Smith?
A. That's her current Mississippi
attorney.
Q. That's who currently or at some point
represented Raven in the Mississippi
proceedings?
A. I believe that's who -- oh, I'm
certain that's who represented her in the
appeal. Well I think Raven was supposed to
handle the appeal. But I'm certain that she
represented her after Alex left the case.
Q. You've had discussions with Patricia
Smith about the Mississippi proceedings?
A. Yeah. Sure.
Q. And you had over time, sensitive
discussions with Raven about the Mississippi
proceedings?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. You reviewed the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
288
Mississippi record at least in connection with
the Louisiana adoption proceedings?
A. Yes.
Q. And you reviewed the Mississippi
record when preparing an appeal in the
Louisiana proceedings?
A. Probably.
Q. Probably?
A. It's been a long time, but I would
assume I did.
Q. Okay. So -- and the reason I ask that
so then you would have known about the order
to seal the record in the Mississippi
proceedings, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. You knew it because you would have
reviewed the record and because Raven told you
about it?
A. Either or. Probably both.
Q. Okay. And you also knew about the
Agreed Judgment that was in the record?
A. Yes. I mean in a sense it -- yes.
Q. Okay. Back to several of the
stipulations. Stipulation No. 10 says that
Judge Thomas died in or around October of
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
289
2002?
A. Sure.
Q. Stipulation No. 11 says:
"On January 11, 2011, complainant Deborah
Gambrell was appointed by Mississippi
Governor, Haley Barbour, to replace Judge
Thomas and to serve as Chancellor, Place
1, of the 10th Chancery District of
Mississippi?"
A. Sure.
Q. Stipulation No. 12. One of the cases
inherited by Judge Gambrell was the
custody/visitation matter of Michael T. Boyd
versus Raven S. Boyd Maurer?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 13. Meanwhile, back on
June 10th of 2010, Raven Boyd filed a motion
for contempt in the Mississippi proceedings
alleging that Michael Boyd failed to pay child
support and sought to terminate Michael Boyd's
parental rights alleging that he failed to
maintain a relationship with the children for
one year; failed to pay court ordered child
support for almost two years; and molested
their children?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
290
A. Sure.
Q. If it would help, I think I've
provided you with a copy of the stipulations
if you want to follow along?
A. I thought that -- I mean I thought we
had stipulated to those. That this was in the
record.
Q. Okay. But it's nothing that is signed
by you and it's nothing that's been --
A. Right.
Q. -- filed into evidence which is why
I'm walking you through it today.
A. No. I apologize. I'm not -- I have
never questioned that this is a part of the
Mississippi record.
Q. Okay.
A. I just don't have firsthand knowledge
of it.
Q. I understand. I'm just -- I want yes
or no rather than sure.
A. Oh, I apologize. I'm sorry. I can
answer now.
MR. DUCOTE:
And just to be clear, I mean I filed
this as a pre-hearing stipulations and so
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
291
I think we can go ahead and make it part
of the record, the pre-hearing
stipulations that are attached to the
Respondent's pre-hearing memorandum are
indeed stipulations of fact that both
parties have agreed to.
MR. MANNING:
And I would love to. And my intent is
to offer it as an official exhibit when
I'm done. It'll be ODC 20. But the
problem with simply just doing that is
there are important contested facts that
were not stipulated to that do not make
sense if we just address them in a shotgun
fashion out of order. So I know it's
tedious, but I am really trying to move
through this as best we can.
THE WITNESS:
And to that end, I just want to say I
don't mean to be tedious either, but I do
want to be very careful of what conduct is
attributed to me and what isn't
attributable to me because I still
struggle with what conduct is offensive in
these proceedings.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
292
MR. MANNING:
And I think it makes it even more
important that we go through the
stipulations.
THE WITNESS:
Okay.
MR. MANNING:
Because if you have a problem with any
of this it needs to come out.
THE WITNESS:
Absolutely.
MR. MANNING:
I don't want you saying blanket I
agree with those statements if you have
concerns or you need to expound upon it
further.
THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. Okay. Ms. McCool, Stipulation No. 14
says, "On December 14th of 2010 the
Mississippi Court appointed a new guardian ad
litem to investigate the allegations of sexual
abuse." That's a record I guess maybe your
attorney has looked at that. So I guess I
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
293
have to ask if you still agree with that
stipulation today?
A. I'll agree that someone was appointed
as Guardian ad Litem, but he was not
qualified.
Q. Do you agree that his appointment was
at least in part to investigate the
allegations of sexual abuse?
A. Yes, which he wasn't qualified to do.
Q. Stipulation No. 15. In January of
2011, Raven Boyd's new husband, Dustin Maurer,
filed a petition for intrafamily adoption in
the 22nd Judicial District Court in St.
Tammany Parish, Louisiana, applying to adopt
the two minor children born to Raven and
Michael Boyd?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 16. Respondent represents
Dustin Maurer in the Louisiana proceedings. I
guess we should be more clear and say
represented. Formerly represented Dustin
Maurer?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Stipulation 17. The case was
allotted to Judge Dawn Amacker who stayed the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
294
matter pending the outcome of the proceedings
pending in Mississippi?
A. Unlawfully, yes.
Q. Okay. I would rather if you could
either agree or disagree with the stipulation
and then if you need to explain that would --
A. Yes. Unlawfully.
Q. Stipulation No. 18. On July 20, 2011,
Judge Gambrell held an in-chambers meeting
with counsel and the Guardian ad Litem in the
Mississippi proceedings?
A. What was the date?
Q. July 20, 2011.
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation No. 19. Following the
meeting, Judge Gambrell reportedly issued a
temporary order extending the father's
visitation to supervised overnight visitation
in his home with unrestricted standard
visitation every other weekend to begin in
August 2011?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And these are things that you
weren't directly involved in, but you've come
to know and understand from reviewing the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
295
record and having discussions with Raven and
her other attorney?
A. Well in fact it was the July 20th off
the record, improper hearing in-chambers that
prompted the emergency ex-parte motion in
Louisiana.
Q. And again --
A. Petition. Excuse me.
Q. -- you continue to comment about
improper or unlawful in-chambers meetings, but
you are not or have never been licensed to
practice in Mississippi?
A. No. But I'm an attorney and I can
read the law and I read the case law in
Mississippi and it was absolutely improper.
Q. Have you read the local rules or the
local procedures of that Chancery Court on how
they handle their domestic proceedings to know
whether or not there is some statement about
in-chambers meetings or the roles of Guardian
ad Litems?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. I have read the constitution however.
Q. Referring to the temporary order,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
296
that's the order that extended the father's
visitation and with unrestricted standard
visitation every other weekend to begin in
August of 2011; is it accurate to say that
both you and Raven disagree with that order?
A. The one that was issued on July 20th?
Q. Yes.
A. Correct. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Disagree with it meaning I think it
was unlawful and improper. Yes.
Q. At some point Raven obtained what
purported to be additional evidence of sexual
abuse against the minor children; is that
accurate?
A. Immediately following the order
improperly issued by Judge Gambrell, yes, the
child gave her the journal.
Q. Those were journals and the things
that we talked about earlier with Judge
Gambrell, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And I think she referred or someone
had identified them as the "Good Book" and the
"Bad Book"?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
297
A. Yes. She did refer to them that way.
Q. Okay. Stipulation No. 20.
Consequently, on August 4, 2011, respondent
filed for ex-parte relief on Raven's behalf in
the 22nd Judicial District Court asking the
Louisiana Court to exercise immediate
emergency temporary custody under the Uniform
Child Custody and Jurisdiction Enforcement
Act?
A. Correct. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 21. The petition also
asked that the previously stayed intrafamily
adoption be set for hearing on the court's
next available date?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 22. Judge Amacker
declined to exercise subject matter
jurisdiction in the matter?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 23. Respondent on behalf
of Raven Boyd Maurer, applied for writs with
the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeals
who denied same?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 24. On August 31, 2011,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
298
the Louisiana Supreme Court also denied the
writs?
A. Yes.
Q. And for the record, the writ
application with the Louisiana Supreme Court
is at ODC Exhibit 14. And then a print-out
documenting writ denied by the Supreme Court
is at ODC 15 on Bates page 115.
Q. Ms. McCool, Stipulation 25. The
hearing on Raven Boyd's Motion for Contempt
and to terminate parental rights in
Mississippi was scheduled before Judge
Gambrell on August 16, 2011?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 26. Judge Gambrell
subsequently denied the Motion to Terminate
Parental Rights, but found Michael Boyd in
contempt for failing to pay child support?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 27. Judge Gambrell
further found that Michael Boyd was entitled
to a reduction in child support payments and
she ordered the parties to participate in
family counseling and to undergo a forensic
review regarding allegations of sexual abuse
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
299
of the children?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 28. Raven Boyd Maurer
filed a pro se appeal. However, on April 9,
2013 the Court of Appeals for the State of
Mississippi dismissed the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction finding Judge Gambrell's judgment
was not a final appealable judgment?
A. I know that only because you told me.
Q. Okay. It is at ODC Exhibit 16 for the
record and I guess that exhibit speaks for
itself, Ms. McCool. Stipulation -- you also
know that because you have stipulated to that
in an attachment to your pre-hearing memo,
correct?
A. I meant that you brought that to my
attention in these proceedings.
Q. Okay. Not just today, but --
A. No. Not just today.
Q. Okay. Stipulation 29. Meanwhile
respondent and her client, Raven Boyd Maurer,
set up an online petition and used the
internet and social media to draw attention to
the related cases pending before Judge
Gambrell and Judge Amacker?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
300
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 30. Respondent posted
online blogs/articles about Judge Gambrell's
and Judge Amacker's handling of the respective
cases?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now I'm going to ask a series
of questions that are related to what are not
stipulations, okay? Your -- would you agree
that your online blog -- what do we call it?
Are some blogs and some articles or is it fair
to call them all articles or blogs or what
would you suggest? Like the ones that we've
looked at today. The Sheep Free Zone.
A. Sheep Free Zone is my blog site. So
you can call it a blog or you can call it an
article, but it is a blog site.
Q. Okay.
A. But I do think that there are other
things are being sort of confused. There are
websites and there are Facebook pages and
those things are different because of who owns
them and who controls them.
Q. I understand. But as far as the
things that you posted and you are in control
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
301
of and you created, it would be okay if we
called them online blogs or articles?
A. Sure.
Q. Okay.
A. Yeah.
Q. Anyway, back to my questions. Would
you agree that your online articles encouraged
others to contact the Judge's directly to
express their comments about these pending
cases?
A. Do I agree that my online articles --
yes.
Q. And we've looked at that and at ODC
12(A), 12(B), and 12(C), those articles and
blogs that we looked at, one being the Sheep
Free Zone and the other two related articles
in that line, do you recall looking at those?
A. There was the Sheep Free Zone which
is where the petition essentially was
re-posted on my blog; is that correct?
Q. Sure. If you would feel more
comfortable looking at it --
A. Yes.
Q. -- it's 12(A), 12(B) and 12(C).
A. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
302
Q. So if you'll look at 12a. First off,
let's -- we're going to look at 12(A) later
so I'll save those questions. But 12(A) on
the second page, you certainly see where it
says, "Please sign the petition; circulate"
and it also says, "And call Judge Amacker and
Judge Gambrell" on a specific date between
specific times?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. And then at ODC 12(B), an
online article by Nanine McCool, again on the
second page you'll see where it says, "Please
sign the petition and lend your voice to this
cause here or you can contact directly" and
then it provides the contact information for
the Judge's, correct?
A. That's correct. Those are the
petition -- those are Raven's petitions,
correct, which I promoted.
Q. Which you promoted and which you also
helped create?
A. I did help her write the petition.
Q. And then ODC 12(C), the Sheep Free
Zone which you said is your blog site?
A. Correct.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
303
Q. And that is another online blog or
article on the second page where you encourage
people or instruct people to call the Judge's
about these cases?
A. That is my article.
Q. Okay. And you also agree that the
domestic litigation in Louisiana and
Mississippi, both of those, all of those
matters were still pending when you were
posting these online blogs and articles?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. If you would, Ms. McCool,
turn in ODC Exhibit Book to ODC 10(B) as in
"boy".
A. "B".
Q. We've looked at this email from
Heather Lyons to Barbie Parham who was at that
time on Judge Gambrell's staff as she
explained to us today. Do you know who
Heather Lyons is?
A. I do not.
Q. Do you -- do you agree that Heather
Lyons was encouraged to contact the court with
regards to this particular case? Encouraged
by your petition or your blogs and articles?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
304
A. I think that's a fair conclusion I
would draw.
Q. And part of the reason that's a fair
conclusion is because she even signed the
online petition, right? We looked at that
earlier.
A. Yeah. Actually now that you bring
that to my attention. Actually I was thinking
because of her reference to the Supreme Court
case.
Q. And that was the case that you filed?
You brought up on behalf of Raven?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. So she actually did what she
was encouraged to do by the petition or by the
online blogs? She contacted the Judge and
voiced her opinion?
A. She contacted Ms. Parham.
Q. Right. Which was the email address
that you listed in your online petitions and
blogs, right?
A. Yeah. It's the email address that
Judge Gambrell lists online for her contact
information.
Q. Ms. McCool, you are aware that someone
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
305
sent a copy of the petition directly to Judge
Gambrell?
A. I am.
Q. Do you know who sent that?
A. I don't.
Q. Do you have any suspicions on who sent
that?
A. My guess would be Wanda Phillips.
Q. Why is that your guess?
A. Just because of who Wanda is. She's a
bit of a firecracker.
Q. Turn back one exhibit to ODC 10(A).
That's what I have been referring to as a
petition. 10(A). Are you familiar with this
particular document?
A. I am. But I don't -- this isn't the
whole petition, correct?
Q. I don't know. It says page one at the
bottom and it's numbered --
A. ODC 10(A)?
Q. -- the pages are numbered all the way
through.
A. And I could be wrong, but this I think
was part of the petition. It's the letter
that's generated by the petition. I mean I
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
306
don't know. I'm guessing. But okay.
Q. Well you will see that ODC 10(A) was
filed with the Chancery Clerk's Office?
A. Yes, I see that.
Q. And you heard the testimony from Judge
Gambrell and from Judge Amacker that says
copies of this petition was filed or sent
directly to them or their courts?
A. Yes.
Q. Right?
Q. Okay. So whether this is the complete
petition or some letter generated by the
petition or whatnot, you admit here today that
you assisted in creating and preparing the
petition?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And your client Raven Boyd was
also involved in creating and preparing the
petition and the sites to promote the
petition?
A. She wanted to do it, yes. And I
helped her.
Q. This petition, ODC 10(A), it was
posted and circulated through some of your
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
307
online blogs, your personal online blog, Sheep
Free Zone, wasn't it?
A. I believe the petition was. I don't
know if this was, but if you say it was I'll
take you at your word.
Q. Well let me ask you about Change.org.
What is Change.org?
A. Isn't that where the petition -- isn't
that the petition site?
Q. Yes.
A. Okay.
Q. Isn't Change.org the website that you
used, you and Raven used and maybe even others
to generate and create --
A. I think so, yes.
Q. -- the online petition that we're
looking at and talking about today?
A. Yes. And actually looking through the
exhibits, I think there's actually two.
Q. Two websites?
A. Two different petition sites.
Q. Okay. Do you know what the other --
A. I think it says "The Petition Site",
but then there's Change.org and then there's a
"Care 2". I honestly, I have to tell you just
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
308
because I'm looking at them, it looks like
they're at least two different ones here, but --
Q. Okay.
A. They're all the same petition it looks
like. It looks like they're coming from
different places.
Q. Turn back to that last exhibit, ODC
19, please.
A. Uh-huh (affirmative). I understand
what the Judge was going through.
Q. Me too. You'll see at the bottom,
this one is on the Change.org website?
Q. Okay. And Ms. McCool, were you
involved in posting or creating the
information that is contained on this
Change.org website?
A. I'm sure I was involved in it. Yes.
Q. You were, right?
A. Yes.
Q. You and Raven and others met and
brainstormed and came up with the idea to
start posting on the internet and through
social media to draw attention to these cases?
A. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
309
Q. While these cases were pending before
Judge Gambrell and Judge Amacker?
A. Correct.
Q. And the petition and/or information
that was uploaded to the internet, that was
done either at your house or at your office?
A. Probably.
Q. That's a yes or no.
A. It's been awhile. I know you asked me
that in the deposition so I would say one or
the other, yes. I don't clearly remember any
more.
Q. If I represent to you that in your
sworn statement earlier, you stated that that
was done either at your home or at your
office, would you agree with that today?
A. Yes. My memory was definitely fresher
then.
Q. In July of 2011 Judge Gambrell issued
an order basically re-establishing some
unsupervised visitation for Michael Boyd;
you're aware of that, right? We looked at the
July 20th --
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. Isn't is true, Ms. McCool, that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
310
it was just within two weeks of that order
that you and/or Raven created this online
petition and started with the internet
campaign to draw attention to these cases?
A. First we took the emergency petition
to the 22nd JDC and when Judge Amacker refused
to provide us an evidentiary hearing we took
writs to the First Circuit. And when the
First Circuit denied writs I think that's when --
Q. How quickly did that happen?
A. I think the same day. I think Judge
Amacker heard us on a Thursday. She denied us
on Friday. I took the emergency -- I drove
the emergency writ up to Baton Rouge and on
the way home I got the word that they were
going to deny it.
Q. And then it was after that that you
started with the online petition and the
internet?
A. Yes. It would have been after that.
Q. It was after you had --
A. It might have been between drafting
the application to the Supreme -- it might
have been after I then drafted an application
to the Supreme Court. And then while I was
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
311
doing that, I think Raven was working on the
petition.
Q. You would agree that at least one of
the reasons for the online petition and the
internet efforts was to convince Judge
Gambrell to reverse that custody order?
A. I would disagree.
Q. Well, Ms. McCool, during your sworn
statement on March 20th of 2012 we talked
about this issue. And on page -- that's at
ODC 18, Page 28. Transcript Page 28,
beginning at Line 20, I asked:
"Sure. When did that kind of take place?
When was the brainstorming and
developmental phase of this?"
And your answer was: "It would have been
from the point that Judge Gambrell issued
an ex-parte order. The order that she
issued to order the children back to
unsupervised visitation at the place where
they were molested took place in chambers,
off the record and I mean that's my
understanding and based on what's in the
record, that's what happened, but and it
would have been from that point. From
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
312
that date which was in July between then
and" and I then I say, "July of what
year?" And your answer, "Of 2011. And
then within two weeks of that date I would
say because there were some efforts made
in Mississippi to prevent the children
from having to go and those were not, you
know, they weren't effective." So the
next question was, "What else? What else
could be done to protect the children?"
A. Correct.
Q. And this was part of the "what else",
right?
A. Right. I never denied that we brought
the petition as an effort to protect the
children. I absolutely agree. That's what we
were doing.
Q. But your testimony was that you
availed yourself of the writ or the appeal
process because you wanted those orders
reversed?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When that did not happen, you said
there was then a brainstorming effort to kind
of figure out what else we can do?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
313
A. Correct.
Q. And my question is part of that "what
else" was the online petition and the internet
campaign?
A. To bring attention to the case so that
while the writ was pending in the Supreme
Court, the Supreme Court being a policy court,
that if the Supreme Court was aware that there
was a lot of interest in this particular
issue, that perhaps that would increase our
changes of getting the writ granted.
And with regard to Judge Amacker -- you
know I think this is one of my frustrations
with procedurally how this works. To say that
I could influence the Judge's to reverse what
they did -- there was nothing in -- Judge
Gambrell issued a completely improper --
should have been with no force and effect
order regarding visitation. Modifying
visitation without any prior notice to Raven
who had just had a baby and wasn't present at
that hearing, issued this order to give
unsupervised visitation to children where for
months there had been allegations of abuse and
Raven was trying to terminate his rights.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
314
She issues this completely improper order
and then it's in place and we -- Raven
attempted -- took every attempt she could in
Mississippi to -- Wanda I believe, it was
either Raven or Wanda, took the information to
the Guardian ad Litem. They took the
information to the police court -- to the
Sheriff's Office. The book that (redacted)
wrote and that got nowhere. I tried to get
Louisiana to exercise emergency jurisdiction.
That went nowhere. And so the idea that we
could, by filing a petition and force the
Judge to go back, open the case up and say
okay, I'm going to erase this and undo it,
it's absurd. It's patently absurd. The
process doesn't work that way.
Q. Well the case wasn't closed. It was
still pending.
A. But that issue --
Q. Right? Yes?
A. Yes. Of course the case was still
pending. And there was a -- still there was a
trial date coming up in August in Mississippi.
Q. And also correct, you didn't just file
a petition; you instructed or encouraged other
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
315
people to call the Judge's right? You don't
deny that, do you?
A. No. I do not deny that I instructed
or I encouraged people to call and say please
look at the evidence. Tell the Judge's to
look at the evidence, which is compelling; and
apply the law, which has not been done; and
protect the children if that's what the law
and evidence require.
Q. We'll get a chance to get your
response --
A. But let me just finish that because
that is important what I was trying to do was
I was trying to undo what they had done. What
I was trying to say was, what we all trying to
say was, if you -- if the law and the evidence
-- it's this legal proceeding. The law and
evidence should be where we start from. That
hasn't been looked at. In the upcoming
hearing, please look at it and make your
decision based on the law and the evidence.
If nothing else, base your decision on the law
and the evidence.
Q. Before we move on, in July of 2011,
Judge Gambrell expanded or re-established some
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
316
of Michael Boyd's unsupervised visitation with
the children, right? Yes?
A. Yes. By order of July 20th and she
also forced Raven, ordered Raven to pay $1,000
in Guardian ad Litem fees. Also completely
improper.
Q. And you disagree with that and Raven
disagreed with her ruling? Her order?
A. It was completely improper. No due
process.
Q. Which means you disagreed with it?
A. Yes. Absolutely. I said it earlier
that I completely disagreed her for those
reasons.
Q. Okay. So because you disagreed, you
all then sought writs and/or appeals of those
rulings, right?
A. Correct.
Q. You sought them in Louisiana and she
did pro se in Mississippi?
A. Absolutely. Because the correct legal
process to overturn a Judge is to file a writ;
to file an appeal; to seek whatever relief
Raven could seek in Mississippi and I sought
whatever relief was legally available to us in
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
317
Louisiana.
Q. You're right. The proper legal
process is to file an appeal or a writ which
you all did and you still did not get the
outcome that you and your client were looking
for, right?
A. We were unsuccessful in overturning --
well we were -- the appeal in Louisiana
obviously or the writ in Louisiana was
directed to Judge Amacker, not Judge Gambrell.
Q. So when you say, and we just read,
when you say that within two weeks of that
date, the July 2011 order, you're saying
because there were some efforts made in
Mississippi to prevent the children from
having to go and those were not -- you know
they weren't effective, so the next question
was what else? What else could be done to
protect the children? You're referring to
protecting the children from having to go back
and as you said earlier, visit the father who
has been alleged to be sexually abusing them
at his home, right?
A. Correct.
Q. You want to protect them from that,
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
318
right?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. But Judge Gambrell's order allowed
them back for unsupervised visitation with
their father, right?
A. Yes.
Q. So because the appeals or writs,
whether in Mississippi or Louisiana were
denied or unsuccessful in achieving that
protection, you then turned to the internet
and the online petitions, right?
A. And maybe I'm wrong about this, but if
you check the date that I filed the emergency
ex- parte petition in front of Judge Amacker,
it was within two weeks of that order. So
that's what I meant. What else can we do?
Well I'll file an emergency ex-parte petition
in Louisiana. And when that didn't work, I
took a writ to the First Circuit. I mean
that's my memory of how that went. Now it's
been two and a half years.
Q. We'll move on, but I would just
suggest for the record and for Hearing
Committee, if you go back and look at the
sworn statement transcript which is at ODC 18
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
319
and you start reading around page 27, 28 of
that transcript, you will see that what's
being discussed is the online petition and
specifically what is now ODC 19 and those
efforts. That's what's being discussed and it
speaks for itself. And I do appreciate your
explanations here today, but I think we can
move on.
Q. Would you agree, Ms. McCool, that the
online petition, Change.org, the other sites,
the blogs, the articles, discussed actions and
inactions by the Judges in that case?
A. Yes.
Q. And discussed allegations of sexual
abuse in your blogs and in the online
petition?
A. Yes.
Q. And linked to audio recordings,
correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. There were audio recordings -- Raven
actually took her cell phone, right? And she
hosted like a Q&A session with her kids,
right?
A. I would not describe it as a Q&A
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
320
session, but, yes. She had audio recordings
of her children voluntarily reporting the game
of butts and wee-wee's they were playing with
their daddy.
Q. Okay. And she shared that with you,
the recordings?
A. She did.
Q. How did the recordings get linked onto
the websites or to these blogs or whatnot?
A. We did it. I don't know if I could do
it again, but we did do that. We did link
them.
Q. You were involved in that process?
A. I was.
Q. Did you recall -- you said -- we
already established that the Change.org
website was one of the websites used to
promote the petition. But you said there may
have been another one too. Do you recall the
name of it? Or it was something like "The
Petition Site" or something like that?
A. I think one's "The Petition Site and
one's Change.org and I think one came first
and then second, but I'm getting that from
looking at the exhibits more closely.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
321
Q. Okay. We're going to touch on
stipulation No. 31. It says:
"The website instructed people to sign
this petition and to contact Judge
Gambrell and tell her what they think of
her handling of the case."
A. It -- this?
Q. Yes. Okay. Questions about that. It
was -- it was your idea to list the Judge's
and the Court's contact information in those
online postings, correct?
A. Probably.
Q. And it was your idea or you were
involved in the decision making to encourage
others to call the Judge's directly?
A. Sure. I mean I helped draft the -- I
wouldn't have encouraged to put the
information on that without further --
Q. Right?
A. Yes.
Q. You wouldn't have put their telephone
numbers if you didn't intend people to call?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. The information provided in
these blogs, these articles, the online
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
322
petition, was created in such a way to elicit
a response from the general public, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And then that elicited response, the
intent was then to take that response and to
contact and voice that response directly to
these Judge's?
A. Sure. Yes.
Q. Okay. All right. Stipulation 32.
According to the Change.org website, and I
think that's at ODC 19. Yes. According to
the Change.org website, the online petition
was started by Bridge to Justice, Slidell,
Louisiana. It says it. I'm looking at it and
I know you're not, but it says, "Sign this
petition below." It says, "Started by Bridge
To Justice, Slidell, Louisiana."
A. Correct.
Q. All right. Bridge To Justice is
something that you created, right?
A. Well I think there's a little bit of
confusion here and it's not your fault.
Bridge To Justice was a non-profit
organization that Raven and I discussed
starting going through the -- and at the time
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
323
the petition was started we used the name
Bridge To Justice, but it wasn't formally
organized.
Q. If it's not formally organized, how
does it qualified as a non-profit
organization?
A. Well it wasn't qualified as a
non-profit organization.
Q. Not in a legal sense?
A. Not in a legal sense.
Q. Okay.
A. But that was the intent. The intent
was that Raven wanted to start something to
help other people who were in her situation
and I was -- and I wanted to do that as well.
We were going to work together on that.
Q. But there was -- there was a website?
There was email capabilities for Bridge To
Justice; isn't that right?
A. Bridge To Justice did not have a
website during this period. It did have a
Facebook page that Raven -- you know Raven
controlled the Facebook page.
Q. And it had email capabilities?
A. There was -- I think there was a
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
324
'gmail' for Bridge To Justice. I think it was
a 'gmail' along with Facebook. I think
Facebook had email and then there was the
'gmail' Bridge to Justice.
Q. That was to facilitate communications
for Raven with others who may have come into
contact with the petition and the information,
right?
A. Well certainly for that purpose, but I
think for out purpose as well. Yes.
Q. Let's turn back and I'm going to try
to pick up the pace a little bit, but if you
turn back to ODC Exhibit 10(A), that's the so
called petition that was filed with the
Chancery Clerk's Office in Mississippi,
Exhibit 10(A).
A. I got it.
Q. Okay. And we looked at it and says it
was filed on August 23rd of 2011. Do you know
who filed that?
A. I do not.
Q. Have you ever asked Raven or Wanda
Phillips or anyone else if they filed it or
were involved in the filing of this petition?
A. I did not. And honestly, I think it's
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
325
-- no, I don't know. It never occurred to me
it was actually filed in the record. I know
it's been said, but I knew it had been faxed
to her. And I knew that it had been faxed to
both Gambrell and Judge Amacker very shortly
after it was done. But I didn't realize that
it had actually been filed in the record which
I think actually was probably pretty smart to
do it that way.
Q. Can I ask you if like this last
paragraph says, for example, "To Judge Deborah
Gambrell, we the undersigned ask that you
renounce jurisdiction in this matter to a
Louisiana Court because the children have
lived exclusively in Louisiana for the past
three years." And if you go further down it
says, "If you refuse to relinquish
jurisdiction to Louisiana, we insist that you
remove the Guardian ad Litem" etcetera,
etcetera. It contains other things too.
A. Yes.
Q. You were involved in actually crafting
the language that we're looking at in this
petition?
A. I can tell you that I specifically
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
326
crafted the language -- the SG versus DC, 13
73rd 269, Mississippi 2009 was/is exactly the
case that sets out how Guardian ad Litem's are
supposed to be designated in Mississippi; what
their jobs are; how the Judge is supposed to
manage them. The issue of having off the
record communications in-chambers with no
record of it, all that's addressed in that
case. It's a scathing opinion by the
Mississippi Supreme Court about how
inappropriate all those things are. So I am
sure that reference came from me.
Now the Guardian ad Litem in that case, it
was discovered by Raven after the hearing, is
that he was not even qualified to be a
Guardian ad Litem the entire year that he was
on the case serving as one.
Q. So that citation to that case --
A. Came from me.
Q. -- shows you even today that you were
involved in --
A. I've never denied that I was involved
in it.
Q. You're aware or were you aware prior
to today that at some point someone faxed a
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
327
copy of this petition to Judge Dawn Amacker
also?
A. Yes. I was aware shortly after that
happened.
Q. And you believe or strongly suspect
that that was either Raven Boyd or her mother,
Wanda Phillips in fact?
A. Right. I know that Judge Amacker said
that it was Raven's name on the fax machine
on the fax. So that was kind of surprising to
me. I would have guessed it was Wanda, but it
sounds like it was Raven.
Q. And you also acknowledge that Judge
Amacker or her staff returned that copy of
that petition to you and advised you that it
was filed by them and instructed you not to or
instructed you to counsel Raven against having
such communications with her?
A. I don't doubt that she did it. I
don't have an independent memory of it, but I
don't doubt her.
Q. Have you --
A. She's done that in other instances.
It's sort of typical.
Q. ODC 11(A). Have you seen that letter
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
328
before?
A. Is that the one sent to me?
Q. Yes.
A. Right. I have. So that's why I don't
doubt that she did it. I just don't have an
independent memory of it.
Q. That was address in August of 2011,
1772 Orleans Street, Mandeville?
A. Yes. Uh-huh (affirmative).
A. These are documents, you will see
they're attached to correspondence that was
sent to my office from Judge Amacker. So ODC
11(B) was the copy that she sent to me of what
was received by her office. You'll see the
third paragraph, it refers to things about
Judge Amacker and it says:
"To Judge Amacker, we the undersigned
insist that you withdraw the unlawful stay
on the adoption proceedings currently
pending in your court and in accordance
with Louisiana Children's Code Article
1253, a hearing be set with all due speed
to allow the girl's stepfather to show why
it is in the girl's best interest that
they be adopted by him, thereby
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
329
terminating all parental rights of the
girl's biological father." I'll end quote
there.
A. Yes.
Q. Those were the issues pending in the
case filed before Judge Amacker, correct?
A. The adoption was pending in front of
Judge Amacker at that time.
Q. And those were the issues in the
appeal that you took on behalf of Raven to the
First or the writ to the First Circuit and to
the Louisiana Supreme Court?
A. That was one of them, yes.
Q. The stay and the subject matter
jurisdiction issues?
A. Actually, no. It was the stay and the
emergency jurisdiction issue.
Q. Correct.
A. Not subject matte jurisdiction.
Q. And she declined to exercise subject
matter jurisdiction --
A. No. Incorrect. Oh, I'm sorry.
You're right. She exercised subject matter
jurisdiction in the adoption proceeding and
stayed unlawfully, indefinitely.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
330
Q. In our opinion?
A. No. By the law. The law says you
shall set an adoption proceeding within 60
days unless there's an opposition in which
case you would set it -- you shall set it
within 90 days and you may continue it for
good cause one time and I think that's for 60
days.
Q. And neither --
A. But not indefinitely.
Q. Neither the First Circuit nor the
Supreme Court disturbed her ruling in that
case?
A. All they did was deny writs. That's
not -- that doesn't mean that the decision is
correct. It just means they refused to hear
the case.
Q. Ms. McCool, were you also involved in
crafting the language that we just read?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Okay. And we're talking about the
Judge Amacker language in the petition at ODC
11(B)?
A. I helped, absolutely. I helped write
these petitions.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
331
Q. All right. Stipulation No. 33. The
website promoting the online petition contains
information about the sealed Mississippi
proceedings and Louisiana proceedings?
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 34. The website and/or
online blogs and articles posted by respondent
to promote the online petition referred to
audio recordings of the minor children and the
other purported evidence of abuse and states:
those recordings. Why? Because for 4.5
years they have simply refused to do so.
On August 16th, 2011 Judge Deborah
Gambrell in the Chancery Court of Marion
County, Mississippi once again refused to
admit all of (redacted) evidence,
including these recordings, and ordered
that the minor children have visits with
their father in the house where they both
report having been molested by their
father in the past."
That's the end of that stipulation. Do
you still agree with that?
A. Do I agree that's what is says, yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
332
Q. Yes. Do you -- that is what it says,
but we need to be clear and I know you're not
trying to be cute, but your lawyer attached
these to you pre-hearing memo and say we
stipulate to these as factual. They are the
true. Not just do you agree does that it says
what I just read? I need to know as it is
purported to be a stipulation of truth, of
fact, do you agree with that today? That you
said those things in your online blogs and
articles? It's just a direct quote.
A. That -- whether or not I said them,
it's two and a half years later. Who's
responsible for what part it? What I can tell
you because that paragraph relates to things
that went on in Mississippi, that's Raven's
version of events. I wasn't there. Raven.
Q. Do you want to now back out of
Stipulation 34?
A. If you're asking whether or not that
was part of the petition -- that is part of
the petition.
Q. That's all I'm asking. Is that a
truthful statement?
A. It's a truthful statement that is part
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
333
of the petition.
Q. Yes. Yes. I'm sorry. Maybe we're on --
A. It's a truthful statement that is part
of the petition.
Q. Maybe we're chasing each other around
the bush. It is a truthful statement that
that is a part of the petition that you helped
create?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. I apologize.
A. No problem.
Q. Stipulation 35. Respondent has since
acknowledged that the audio recordings in
question were not offered into evidence on
August 16, 2011?
A. I do know that, but they were not.
Q. Okay. You know that to be true today?
A. Based on having read the transcript.
Q. And these are not stipulations now
these are questions. Isn't it also true that
you know to be a fact that neither Raven nor
her attorney even offered the audio recordings
into evidence at the August 16, 2011 hearing
before Judge Gambrell?
A. That's true.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
334
Q. And you also know that Raven nor her
attorney never offered those audio recordings
before any hearing held by Judge Gambrell?
A. Oh, I don't know. Up to that date I
would say that that was true.
Q. Up to what date?
A. The date that the petition was
written.
Q. And up to the date of your sworn
statement?
A. It's possible. Probably. I only say
that because I don't -- I don't know what
happened after that date as far as so much of
the case. I haven't followed the case very
closely after that date.
Q. Let me ask you then, do you admit
today on the record in these proceedings that
for you to say that Judge Gambrell refused to
admit the recordings at the August 16, 2011
hearing, that's a false statement? That's not
true?
A. I think that's incorrect. True. It's
an incorrect statement. Sorry.
Q. Okay. I understood. But maybe that's
scary. Okay. Ms. McCool, you agree that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
335
that's a false statement?
A. Incorrect.
Q. That false statement, that untrue
statement is repeated on the Change.org
website?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's at ODC 19?
Q. Okay. And I'm sorry, but I have to
ask you to turn all the way to the back of the
book again.
A. Okay.
Q. To ODC 19, the Change.org website. I
have got to do a better job of putting my
exhibits in order here. All right. Ms.
McCool, the Change.org website. This online
petition.
Q. Okay. On the second page towards the
middle you'll see that it says:
hear any evidence or to protect
(redacted)", I'm sorry. Strike that. "To
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
336
protect the minor children even though the
law requires her to have a hearing and to
take evidence."
A. Yes.
Q. "Minor child still loves her daddy.
She just wants him to stop what he's doing to
her. She does not feel safe with him alone.
She said as much in her journal. But Judge
Gambrell refused to allow it as evidence and
Judge Amacker just ignored her." I'll stop
there.
A. Yes.
Q. Stipulation 36. Not withstanding the
online comments Judge Amacker actually stayed
the Louisiana proceedings and declined to
exercise subject matter jurisdiction in
deference to the proceedings pending in
Mississippi?
A. Just to be clear, she exercised
subject jurisdiction over the adoption and
stayed it indefinitely which is a violation of
the law.
Q. All right.
A. She refused to exercise subject matter
jurisdiction over the emergency petition for
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
337
custody. Two different proceedings. Two
different jurisdictional questions.
Q. Right.
A. Okay.
Q. Yes. And it is a little confusing
because there are actually three matters; one
in Mississippi and two in Louisiana.
A. Correct.
Q. Although they're all related they I
think have three separate docket numbers
maybe.
A. Right. And nobody questions
Mississippi's jurisdiction over the custody
issue.
Q. Well, and I guess getting to the
question about this because I want to know
what you admit here today. And I'll tell you
the reason I ask. The reason I ask this is
because if you are found to have done
something wrong, okay, one of the things that
needs to be looked at is whether or not, in
hindsight, there's any remorse for the way
some of this was handled, okay?
So I want you to hear that from me to know
why I'm asking the next few questions of you.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
338
A. Sure.
Q. So my question is that while you
disagree and while you even have stated
repeatedly that Judge Amacker's ruling was in
violation of the law, right? She nevertheless
stayed the first proceeding?
A. Unlawfully.
Q. And declined to exercise subject
matter jurisdiction and stayed the second
proceeding?
A. No. She didn't stay the second.
Q. Okay. She just declined to exercise
subject matter jurisdiction?
A. Correct. And refused to allow an
evidentiary hearing according to law.
Q. Okay. But in her reasons for that it
was pending the outcome of the Mississippi
proceedings?
A. Yeah. Not a legitimate or -- it's not
a lawful reason to stay an adoption.
Q. Don't you think it is a misleading or
a misrepresentation when you don't say those
things? You don't say she stayed the first
one pending the Mississippi proceedings and
declined to exercise subject matter
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
339
jurisdiction? You simply say, here's the
recordings; this is what's happening. But
Judge Amacker just refuses to hear or consider
any of the evidence in violation of the law.
Do you think that looking back, everything you
know about this that that's a little
misleading or misrepresentative?
A. Mr. Manning, as we've discussed, no
personal animosity towards you, but I think
that so much of what's in this complaint and
what's been put forward in here is misleading
and false. But the one thing I don't believe
is misleading is the fact that the Childrens
Codal Articles expressly states what the Judge
shall do and Judge Amacker ignored it. I also
know that we went pursuant to Code of Civil
Procedure, Article 3945 seeking an emergency
order, an emergency hearing before her.
We followed all of the rules. We abided
by the law. To the letter, we abided by the
law and she denied us. She refused to
exercise subject matter jurisdiction on the
issue of the emergency -- emergency custody
without taking any evidence. Just chose not
to do it. And the very basis of an emergency
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
340
petition, emergency jurisdiction on a UCCJEA
is that there is some imminent harm presented
to the children. If her decision -- I can't
tell what her decision was based upon because
she would not take any evidence. And
therefore, I have nothing to appeal.
It's ingenious the way she denies the
evidentiary hearing so all I can do is take a
writ because I have no record to appeal. She
wouldn't even allow us to present on the
record. She made us approach the bench and
talk to us off the record. She would not take
any evidence. She refused. And then when she
denied -- she didn't even deny us that day.
She said I'll get back to you later.
The next day when she issued her order
refusing to exercise emergency jurisdiction,
she completely ignored the issue of our
request for relief as to the adoption
proceeding. Didn't even address them. And
according to 3945, even though she denied ex-
parte relief, we were entitled to a hearing
within 30 days. She refused to grant us one.
The law says she's supposed to grant us one.
I am --
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
341
Q. That's okay. And so --
A. But it's, you know, for me, I'm
required to abide by the law and I do abide by
the law. I followed it to the letter.
Q. Ms. McCool?
A. Judge Amacker, Judge Gambrell they
just make it up as they go. Please forgive me
for that. I'm going to --
Q. What does the law say is your remedy
under those circumstances? What does the law
say because you were telling us you're a --
A. The law says --
Q. -- proponent of following the law.
A. I am.
Q. What does it say you can do under
those circumstances? Right. You can take a
writ?
A. I did take a writ.
Q. And you took a writ to the Louisiana
First Circuit, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. They could have granted your writ,
right?
A. Yes.
Q. But they did not?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
342
A. They did not. But it doesn't mean
anything about the substance of the writ or
whether or not the Judge's ruling is correct.
You know that.
Q. I understand.
A. Well I think that it's misleading for
you to suggest otherwise.
Q. I'm only asking what you did because
what does the law say you can do after that?
You can take a writ to the Louisiana Supreme
Court, right?
A. Which I did.
Q. And you followed the law and you did
that?
A. To the letter.
Q. And they denied writs also?
A. They did. Which also means absolutely
nothing about the substance of the underlying
matter. Nothing.
Q. What does the law say, if anything,
you can do after that? I mean you've
exhausted what the law allows you to do. What
is your recourse then under the law?
A. Weep for the children.
Q. Okay. Can you cite me a law that says
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
343
you can take to an online campaign to try to
get the Judge's to change their mind?
A. This is the United States of America.
The land of the free. The home of the brave.
Cite me a law that says I can't.
Q. The rules that you are charged with
are in the formal charges.
A. They do not say that I can't take -- I
cannot assist a client to craft an online
petition seeking whatever help she can to
protect her children because the legal system
absolutely failed her --
Q. Ms. McCool --
A. -- because the Judge's and the
processes will not follow the law, will not
obey the law, but hold us to the letter of the
law.
Q. Stipulation number 37 --
A. Yes.
Q. -- says, and it's a long one.
A. Okay.
Q. Says, "Respondent", that's you?
A. Yes.
Q. "Respondent used the internet and
social media to solicit signatures for
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
344
the online petition and provided the
following instructions: Sign our
petition telling the Judge's that
there can be no justice for the minor
children or any child if the law and
evidence is ignored. Tell them they
must look the evidence before they
make a decision that will affect the
rest of the minor children's lives.
Ask yourself, what if these were your
daughters? Have questions? Want to
do more to help? Email us at Bridge
To Justice at gmail.com and someone
will respond within 24 hours. Want to
see more? Go to" then there's a link
and it says, "And read the writ
submitted to the Louisiana Supreme
Court on August 12, 2011." Stop for a
minute.
That's the writ you filed?
A. Correct.
Q. Back to the stipulation. "Horrified?
Call the Judge's and let them know."
A. Correct.
Q. This is your language, correct?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
345
A. I helped.
Q. Yes. Stipulation 38. Respondent
admits it was probably her idea to list the
Judge's and the Court's contact information on
the online blogs, articles and petitions.
A. Yes. I said that.
Q. Stipulation 39. Respondent admits the
online petition and solicitation of others to
contact Judge Gambrell and Judge Amacker was a
campaign to influence the Judges to apply the
law and look at the evidence?
A. Absolutely.
Q. In those specific cases?
A. Sure. But all of them would be okay
with me as well.
Q. While those cases were still pending
before those Judge's?
A. Wouldn't do them any good to do it
afterwards.
Q. And at some point at least after writs
had been denied or appeals denied in
Mississippi and Louisiana? Yes?
A. At that point, why would it matter?
Q. Yes?
A. I'm sorry. Maybe I didn't understand
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
346
the question.
Q. The postings and the comments we just
looked at were still being circulated at least
at some point even after Louisiana and
Mississippi had denied writs and/or the
appeal?
A. What do you mean circulated?
Q. Still being promoted on the internet.
A. Promoted how?
Q. Through blogs. Through articles that
we've looked at. Through the Change.org
website which is still accessible even today.
A. But the fact that it's out there -- I
mean once it's out there, it's out there.
There's, you know, it's really hard to do away
with it. But promoting it? I mean I don't
know that I've promoted the petition --
Q. Well what would you --
A. -- since the Supreme Court denied
writs.
Q. What would you call "liking" and
"sharing" and "tweeting" about these things?
Would you not call that promoting it?
A. That particular cause?
Q. Yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
347
A. I would say that the cause of
promoting greater awareness within the justice
system about how cases involving allegations
of sexual abuse are just horribly mishandled
almost -- it happens far too often. In fact,
we need to educate our system to do a better
job of that. Yes. We continue to promote
that. We continue to want to promote
awareness about the way the system fails
children. Absolutely.
But as far as (redacted) and (redacted), I
mean once the Supreme Court denied writs in
Louisiana, we were out of options. So
whatever we wanted to happen with, you know,
trying to get the Supreme Court to take
notice, that people with concerns about this
just so maybe they would pay attention. Well
once they denied writs, there was nothing to
be done. Right? I mean there's nothing left
which is the real tragedy for those children.
Q. You used not just the online petition,
and we've also talked about the online blogs
and articles, but also Twitter, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. In discussing these events, right?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
348
And you promoted the online petition through
Twitter also?
A. I certainly did.
Q. You linked the audio recordings
through Twitter, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. You referenced and if I'm getting this
right, tweeted, about Judge Gambrell and Judge
Amacker's handling of these cases? Their
rulings in these cases?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. I want to and I am not
going to suggest we go through all of them,
but I want to look at some examples of your
tweeting activity about these cases.
A. Sure.
Q. So in ODC exhibit book if you'll look
at ODC Exhibit 17? First, turn to the second
page, Bates stamp page 128.
A. Got it.
Q. Is this your Twitter account?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Okay. If you would, going with the
Bates stamp page numbers, if you'll turn to
Bates stamp page 133. And actually, this is
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
349
Stipulation No. 40. It says, On December 11,
2011, Respondent tweeted: "Judge Gambrell at
it again. Turned a four y/o (year old) child
over to a validated abuser. Please tell me
what it will take for everyone to say enough."
Q. That's your tweet, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. That's a statement that you made?
That's not a statement that someone else made
that you then just retweeted?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. Turn to Bates page 151.
Q. Somewhere down around the middle of
the page and again, this is also part of one
of the stipulations. This is stipulation 41
and it is on August 24th of 2011, Respondent
tweeted to At the Lens NOLA --
Q. Stating, "Focus your lens on why Judge
Amacker won't protect these girls." End
quote. It goes on to say respondent provided
a link to the audio recordings and the online
petition.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
350
A. Correct. Yes.
Q. Okay. If you will turn to the next
page, Bates page 152 and look at the August
24th tweet at the bottom of the page. And
this is Stipulation 42. It says, "On August
24th, 2011 respondent tweeted to
@ronthibodeauxtp. Ask Judge Amacker why she
won't listen." Respondent then provided a
link to the audio recordings and the online
petition.
A. Yes.
Q. You are the one physically --
A. This is me.
Q. -- typing this out and tweeting this?
A. They're all me.
Q. You don't have a ghost writer?
Somebody that handles your Twitter account?
A. No.
Q. Who is Ron Thibodeaux, TP? Is that
someone from Times Picayune?
A. That would be my guess.
Q. Ms. McCool, I'm going to -- I'll give
you credit for this because of a couple of
years ago or a year and a half ago during the
sworn statement you educated me on Twitter.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
351
So tell me if this is right? People can
follow you on Twitter, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And if they follow you on Twitter
there's like a feed and things that you Tweet
will appear on their feed but it's always a
rolling feed and at some point stuff
disappears because new postings have been
tweeted?
A. That is my experience with Twitter,
yes.
Q. If someone is not following you, for
example, if Ron Thibodaux at the
Times-Picayune was not following you, if you
mention his --
A. The "at" (@) --
Q. -- Twitter handle --
A. Right. The "at".
Q. -- in your tweet --
Q. -- then there is something that may
alert him that he has been mentioned in a
tweet --
A. I think it --
Q. -- and that may then increase the
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
352
likelihood that he'll actually see the tweet?
A. Yes. And actually I think now it
actually goes as a direct message. So it will
actually show up in an inbox.
Q. Okay.
A. I mean that's my experience on the
other end of it.
Q. Right. Turn to Bates page 158. And
all the way at the bottom of the page the
August 24th tweet. You tweeted (hashtag)
"#justice for" and it lists the first names of
the two minor children and it says, "Hear what
Judge Gambrell and Judge Amacker refused to
hear." And then there is a link there.
Actually two links. Are those the audio
recordings that Raven made of the two minor
daughters?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. You posted those? You linked
those through your Twitter?
A. Absolutely. Yes.
Q. When you did that, were you aware of
the Agreed judgment in the Mississippi
proceedings?
MR. DUCOTE:
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
353
Object again. As I pointed out, she
was not a party to that. She did not sign
that. There was no -- ever any
proceedings naming her as a party in a
judgment. So it's argumentative. That
order doesn't apply to her and I've argued
that. So --
BY MR. MANNING:
Q. I just asked if she was aware of the
Agreed Judgment. It's in evidence.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. So we were on Bates page 158.
So it says, "Hear what Judge Gambrell and
Judge Amacker refused to hear." Do you agree
that we've established that those audio
recordings were never offered into evidence
before Judge Gambrell?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Bates page 204. At the top of
the page, August 17th tweet and this is a
stipulation. On August 17th of 2011,
Respondent -- now what the stipulation says is
that you retweeted this. But actually you
tweeted this, right? This was your words?
A. It looks like it, yes.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
354
Q. Okay. So let's correct that. And it
should say on August 17th of 2011 the
Respondent tweeted, "Make Judges protect
(redacted) and (redacted) from abuse by their
father." And then Respondent provided a link
to the online petition?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. Bates page 211. I think
it's the second posting on that particular
page. August 16th, and this is also
Stipulation No. 44. On August 16th, 2011, the
day before Judge Gambrell held a hearing in
the Mississippi proceedings. Actually the day
of the hearing in the Mississippi proceedings,
right? So on August 16th of 2011, the day
that Judge Gambrell held a hearing in the
Mississippi proceedings, Respondent tweeted,
"Judge's are supposed to know shit about the
law; aren't they? And like evidence and shit?
Due process." And then you provided a link to
the online petition.
A. I did.
Q. You're referring to Judge Gambrell in
that tweet, aren't you?
A. Probably.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
355
Q. Bates page 212. The very next page.
The top of the page. This is Stipulation 45
and it says on August 16th, 2011 Respondent
tweeted, "Gimme, gimme, gimme evidence. Want
some? I got it. Think you can convince a
Judge to look at it? Sign this petition."
Respondent provided a link to the online
petition?
A. Yes.
Q. The next page, Bates page 213.
A. Are you're going to skip the evidence
stupid tweet?
Q. Yes. I'm giving you a break on that
one. All right. Bates page 213, Ms. McCool.
This is stipulation 46 and it says on August
16th of 2011, Respondent tweeted, "I am so
going to have to change jobs after this (at)
@RussellCrowe. Come on. I'm risking
sanctions by the Louisiana Supreme Court. You
could be a huge help." I need you to explain
this one to me.
A. So I had filed my writ application by
this time. And I was very maybe a little
wound up. And I'm very passionate about the
law. And so I pushed the envelope in that
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
356
writ. I was concerned that because of the
language and how confrontational I was in that
writ that I would be sanctioned.
Q. Okay. So you were concerned about how
direct you were in the writ?
A. Right. In fact, I actually wrote it
and then had to go back to it and tone it down
and it was still was very strong.
Q. It's your testimony that although this
was the date of Judge Gambrell's hearing that
what you're concerned about is not your online
campaign against Judge Gambrell? You're
concerned about what you said in your writ?
A. Well because it says I'm risking
sanctions by the Louisiana Supreme Court. So
that is what I'm thinking or referring to.
Q. Okay. Okay. I want to, if we can,
and this is only in the interest of time, but
please, if we need to look at the documents
let's look at them, but we've seen them
several times today, because I want to talk
about some of those online blogs and articles.
A. And can I just clarify my last
response as well?
Q. Sure.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
357
A. I'd also like to point out that you
have a writ application in here so the date
that it was filed, it's on the writ
application. And so I think that would
clarify some of these issues of when things
happened. The date that I filed the emergency
petition for ex-parte custody, the date that I
filed that I think is incredibly relevant if
you want to say that I did things at a certain
time for a certain reason.
Q. Can you turn to ODC 12(A) and tell me
if you actually wrote this article? 12(A).
Q. It's the one that says, "Make
Louisiana and Mississippi Courts protect
(redacted) and (redacted). And it says
sponsored by Bridge To Justice.
A. I'm not sure. It sounds a lot like
Raven, but it's been awhile. --
Q. Would she have, to your knowledge --
would Raven have been authorized or allowed to
post online articles claiming to be sponsored
by Bridge To Justice?
A. Sure.
Q. She was part of that Bridge To Justice
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
358
kind of thought process with you during that
time?
A. Right. Yeah. Absolutely.
Q. Okay.
A. She was almost Bridge To Justice.
Q. So you don't know if that was you or
Raven that posted this?
A. I couldn't say for sure. Once again,
it's probably something we talked about and if
she wrote it I probably helped her write it,
but I don't -- you know I don't recognize it
specifically as my writing, but it very well
could be. I really don't remember.
Q. Okay.
A. But I don't disagree with anything
that's in here. So --
Q. We're kind of getting a lot closer to
me being done here, Ms. McCool.
A. Okay.
MR. DUCOTE:
If I could interrupt here and I
certainly appreciate the graciousness of
the panel starting at 8:00. I have to be
in court, as we discussed in the pre-trial
conference and with counsel, tomorrow
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
359
morning in Strasburg, Pennsylvania where
it's minus 10 degrees right now. But the
last flight I can catch today I think is
at 5:40. I don't know that we're going to
finish. I hope you have spare time to
allow me to catch that last flight and I
respectfully ask if we could recess this
and adjourn to another day. I don't think
it's going to be that much longer, but I
know we're kind of dragging on here.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I don't think we really have any
choice?
MR. MANNING:
It's your call.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
If we can't finish, yes.
MR. MANNING:
How much longer do you have, Mr.
Ducote?
MR. DUCOTE:
Well you're --
MR. MANNING:
The absolute, last minute you can walk
out the door here?
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
360
MR. DUCOTE:
Seven minutes. Because that's talking
about getting out of here, getting to the
airport.
MR. MANNING:
And I'll say and I know that the Chair
knows this as well, you alerted us to this
ahead of time. It was something that was
a concern before we started Ms. McCool's
testimony. I really didn't want to get
halfway through and then have to break,
but we're here where we are so I don't
know what any other fair resolution to
that would be.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I agree. Is now a good time to stop?
MR. MANNING:
Good as any I suppose.
MS. BENOIST:
Before we conclude for the day, I want
to be sure that you had mentioned one of
the minor's names, that it's stricken from
the record.
MR. MANNING:
Thank you.
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
361
MS. GOLDSMITH:
And you also had mentioned it.
THE WITNESS:
I'm sorry.
MS. BENOIST:
No. We just want to be sure that it's
stricken from the record. That's all.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Can you do a search for those names?
THE COURT REPORTER:
I will redact the words from the
record.
MR. DUCOTE:
I guess maybe substitute just initials
or something. I think if we just take the
names out it's just going to be a hole.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
I think most of the time we referred
to them as the minor children.
MR. NELSON:
Minor children.
MR. DUCOTE:
Minor children.
MR. MANNING:
Would this, the fact that we're having
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
362
a break and we're actually going to come
back and reconvene before we wrap, would
this be a good time for us to take our
respective exhibits now and also redact
the minors names from our own exhibits?
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Sure.
MR. DUCOTE:
Could I just inquire. I noticed here --
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Are we off the record? Are we --
MR. DUCOTE:
We could do that. Are we going to --
I'm sorry, how are we going to pick
another date?
THE COURT REPORTER:
Do you want to -- you may have to go
on the record and just state that you're
going to recess now and you're going to
pick a date to reconvene and then we can
shut all this down.
MS. GOLDSMITH:
Yeah. Let me do that. At this time
the parties have realized that they're not
going to be able to finish today. So we
(225) 216-2036
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
363
are going to go ahead and recess. We're
going to leave the proceedings open and
we're going to decide upon another date to
conclude the proceedings. So at this time
we're going to go off the record.
(THE HEARING CONCLUDED AT 4:09 P.M.)
(225) 216-2036
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2 This certification is valid only for a transcript
3 accompanied by my original signature and official seal on this
4 page.
5 I, SUSAN ERKEL, Certified Court Reporter, in and for the
6 State of Louisiana, as the officer before whom this hearing was
7 taken, do hereby certify that the foregoing 363 pages were
8 reported by me in the voice-writing method, and was prepared and
9 transcribed by me or under my personal direction and
10 supervision, and is a true and correct transcript to the best of
11 my ability and understanding;
12 That the transcript has been prepared in compliance with
13 transcript format guidelines required by statute or by rules of
14 the board;
15 That I have acted in compliance with the prohibition on
16 contractual relationships, as defined by Louisiana Code of Civil
1 7 Procedure Article 1434 and in rules and advisory opinions of the
18 board; and
19 That I am not related to counsel or to the parties herein,
20 nor am I otherwise interested in the outcome of this matter.
21
22
23
24
25
SUSAN ERKEL
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER
LICENSE NO. 24005
(225) 216-2036
J
I
1 REPORTER'S l? AGE
2
3 I, SUSAN ERKEL, Certified Court Reporter in and for the
4 State of Louisiana, before whom this hearing was taken, do
5 hereby state on the Record:
6 That due to the interaction in the spontaneous discourse o
7 this proceeding, dashes (--) have been used to indicate pauses,
8 changes in thought, and/or talkovers;
9 That same is the proper method for a Court Reporter's
10 transcription of proceedings, and that the dashes (--) do not
11 indicate that words or phrases have been left out of this
12 transcript;
13 That any words and/or names which could not be verified
14 through reference material have been denoted with the phrase
15 n (spelled phonetically) . n
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SUSAN ERKEL
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER
LICENSE NO. 24005
(225) 2I6-2036

IN RE: JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL
13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
#
#justice (1)
352:11
$
$1,000 (1)
316: 4
@
@ronthibodeauxtp (1)
350: 7
@RussellCrowe (1)
355:18
0
08 (2)
174:25;214:13
09 (1)
175: 1
1
1 (17)
19:21;28: 5;50:11,
18,23;51: 2;55: 9,19;
56: 2, 8,15;128: 9;
200:25;232:10;
269:15;270:21;
289: 8
10 (9)
57:11,18,20;
128:14;150:18;
151:20;256: 3;
288:24;359: 2
10A (8)
186: 2;305:12,14,
20;306: 2,24;324:13,
16
10B (3)
179:16;181: 9;
303:13
10c (2)
73:21;80: 7
10th (4)
170: 2;189: 9;
289: 8,17
11 (14)
57:23;65:20;
136:17,18;137: 2, 9;
138:18;139: 7;
249:14,15,16;289: 3,
4;349: 1
115 (1)
298: 8
117 (1)
170:25
11A (4)
71:17;138:18;
139: 6;327:25
11B (3)
69:24;328:13;
330:23
11th (1)
65:21
12 (13)
140:21;141: 1;
163: 1, 7;177: 8;
178: 3, 6;264:22;
282:17,19;285:19;
289:11;344:18
12/21/2010 (1)
227: 8
12:30 (1)
168:10
1253 (2)
77: 4;328:22
128 (1)
348:19
12A (11)
100: 8,10;208:19;
210:14;301:14,24;
302: 1, 2, 3;357:11,
12
12B (9)
211:24;252:14,16,
18,20;253: 3;301:14,
24;302:10
12C (5)
105: 9;215:23;
301:14,24;302:23
13 (11)
121:10;177: 8;
178: 4,15;247: 4;
264:22;282:17;
283: 2;286: 4;
289:16;326: 1
133 (1)
348:25
13A (5)
109:20;140:13;
141:18;160: 7;161: 2
13B (2)
110:25;121: 6
13C (1)
116: 1
13d (5)
93:10;118:25;
119: 5, 9;121:12
13e (3)
120:11,13;121:15
13th (1)
189:15
14 (4)
128:19;285:20;
292:20;298: 6
14th (4)
179:22;180:18;
182:18;292:21
15 (5)
128:20;210:24;
268:15;293:10;
298: 8
151 (1)
349:13
152 (1)
350: 3
158 (2)
352: 8;353:12
15th (2)
102:21;211: 6
16 (9)
194: 8;212:25;
217:12;293:18;
298:13;299:10;
333:15,23;334:19
16th (18)
177:21,25;179:11;
180:23;181:20;
194:19;213: 4;
214: 3, 6,16;218: 1;
255: 8;331:14;
354:10,11,15;355: 3,
16
17 (6)
31:16,19;128:23;
238:12;293:24;
348:18
172 (1)
75: 4
1772 (2)
268:11;328: 8
17th (4)
211:25;353:20,21;
354: 2
18 (5)
128:24;285:18;
294: 8;311:11;
318:25
18b (1)
53:13
19 (19)
14: 1;50: 8,11;
53:13;55: 9,19;56: 3;
73:21;80: 7;81:21;
88:14;190: 1;197:20;
294:15;308: 8;
319: 4;322:11;
335: 7,13
1972 (1)
170:20
1978 (1)
170:22
1980 (3)
170: 5, 7;259: 7
1982 (1)
60: 9
1st (1)
60:14
2
2 (9)
19: 7;27: 1;56: 8;
270:10;281:13,24;
282:14,15;307:25
20 (13)
129: 1;183: 9;
213:21;249: 3;
252: 4;256:11,22;
257:24;291:10;
294: 8,13;297: 2;
311:12
2000 (2)
269: 7,17
2002 (1)
289: 1
2003 (1)
270: 7
2004 (3)
52:10,15;107:21
2006 (1)
270: 7
2006-0136G-TH (1)
270:25
2007 (2)
172:17;271: 9
2008 (17)
60:13,24;175:24;
206: 3;220:19;
221: 2, 5, 9;222: 2;
225: 6;228:15;
229:15,17;230:15;
281:13,24;282:15
2009 (2)
60:14;326: 2
2010 (5)
172: 4, 8,23;
289:17;292:21
2011 (66)
65:21;105:13;
136:18;137: 2, 9;
138:17;139: 8,24;
170:10;171:13,25;
173:23;177:22,25;
179:11,23;180:18;
182:18;186:16;
194: 8;207:20;
212: 1,25;216: 3;
217:12,18;230: 5,10,
12;249: 4;250:13;
252: 4;256: 7,11,22;
257:24;270:15;
289: 4;293:11;
294: 8,13,21;296: 4;
297: 3,25;298:13;
309:19;312: 3;
315:24;317:13;
324:19;328: 7;
331:14;333:15,23;
334:19;344:18;
349: 2,18;350: 6;
353:21;354: 2,11,15;
355: 3,16
2011-14457 (1)
76:14
2012 (25)
110:24;111: 5;
114: 4;115: 1,25;
116: 6;119:14;
121:10,14;135:22;
136: 2;137:12;
138:20;139: 8;
140:13,18,21,21;
141: 2,24,25;227: 4;
261:14;285:12;
311: 9
2013 (12)
93:15;94:21;
120:23;227: 4;
228:23,23;229:15,
25;230:13,17;
261:14;299: 5
2014 (6)
128: 9;151:22;
234:17;235:23;
240:14;247: 4
204 (1)
353:19
20th (25)
214:23,24;215: 2,
4;249:12,13,15,16,
19,22;250:13;252: 7,
9,10,22;253:12;
255:12;256: 7;
258: 2;285:12;
295: 3;296: 6;
309:23;311: 9;316: 3
21 (3)
236:23;249:15;
297:11
211 (1)
354: 8
212 (1)
355: 1
213 (2)
355:10,14
22 (5)
107:21;138:17;
282:18;283:23;
297:16
22nd (22)
26:14;59:15;
60:11,21;76:15;
88:25;89:23;91:18;
93:15;104:11;
106:23;108:20;
109:25;128: 9;
153:14;154: 6,16;
155: 3;293:13;
297: 5;310: 6;335:21
23 (7)
128:13;186:16;
228:23;238:12;
240:15;241: 5;
297:20
23rd (1)
324:19
24 (8)
239: 3;240:15,17;
241: 5,12;244: 9;
Min-U-Script Associated Reporters, Inc.
(504) 529-3355
(1) #justice - 24

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
297:25;344:14
24th (4)
349:18;350: 4, 6;
352:10
25 (5)
217:18;241:11,16;
242:20;298: 9
253.1 (2)
111:22;115:22
25th (3)
52:14;105:13;
216: 2
26 (1)
298:15
269 (1)
326: 2
27 (3)
84:14;298:20;
319: 1
28 (13)
116: 6;119:14;
121:14;137:12;
138:20;139: 8;
140:21;141: 2,24;
299: 3;311:11,11;
319: 1
29 (1)
299:20
2b (2)
40:13;127:12
3
3 (7)
56: 8;120:23;
150:20;235:23;
240:14;241:16;
270:14
3.5a (5)
20: 3;21: 1, 8,15;
25:25
3.5b (5)
20:13;21: 3, 8,14,
19
3.5d (1)
20: 6
3:00 (2)
215:19,19
30 (7)
168: 1;204: 2;
218:17;254:15;
259:20;300: 2;
340:23
305 (1)
228:24
3068 (1)
59:17
31 (8)
114: 4;135:22;
136: 2;140:13,21;
141:24;297:25;
321: 2
31st (3)
110:24;140:11;
142:18
32 (1)
322: 9
33 (1)
331: 1
34 (2)
331: 6;332:19
343 (1)
53:14
35 (1)
333:12
36 (1)
336:13
37 (1)
343:18
38 (1)
345: 2
39 (1)
345: 7
39401 (1)
169:21
3945 (2)
339:17;340:21
3rd (2)
234:17;247: 4
4
4 (9)
56: 9;113:16;
207: 3, 5;231: 3;
244:11;245:10;
270:22;297: 3
4.5 (2)
90:15;331:12
4:09 (1)
363: 7
40 (1)
349: 1
41 (2)
113:10;349:17
42 (1)
350: 5
43 (1)
81: 6
43rd (1)
189:20
44 (4)
113:14,16;247: 3;
354:11
45 (2)
268:24;355: 2
46 (3)
114:19,20;355:15
46-2006-0136 (1)
250:14
48 (1)
244: 9
5
5 (18)
26:21;56: 9;
111: 5;112: 6,11,13,
19;115: 1,25;121:10;
140:18;274:15;
276: 4;277: 4,16;
280:23,24;281:12
5:00 (2)
102:20;210:23
5:40 (1)
359: 4
55 (1)
210:17
5th (2)
142:12;249:14
6
6 (12)
56: 9,16;236:24;
274:21;279:15,24,
25;280:22;281:15,
20,21;286: 5
6:00 (3)
254:22,23,23
60 (2)
330: 3, 7
641 (1)
169:20
646 (1)
53:14
6th (2)
207:20;269:17
7
7 (7)
56:20;176:23,25;
263:24;281:11,11;
282:14
701 (1)
59:16
70433 (1)
59:17
70448 (1)
268:12
73rd (1)
326: 2
74 (2)
236:18,21
75 (1)
270: 4
77 (2)
236:18,21
8
8 (7)
56:21;205:15;
281:10,13,17,18,22
8.2 (1)
18:20
8.4a (2)
23:10;26: 1
8.4c (1)
107:11
8.4d (1)
26: 5
8:00 (1)
358:23
8:30 (2)
102:20;210:23
80 (1)
171: 2
807 (1)
169:21
81 (1)
251:19
863 (2)
125:17;126:10
864 (2)
126:17,24
8th (5)
220:19;221: 2, 5,
9;222: 2
9
9 (11)
56:23;57:11,18,20;
75: 4;151:22;207:13;
236:10;242:20;
282:13;299: 4
9:00 (1)
250:14
9:10 (1)
179:23
90 (2)
268:24;330: 6
93 (1)
269: 5
94 (1)
184:11
95 (1)
269:25
97 (1)
269: 7
97-9-55 (1)
201:15
985-809-5309 (2)
162:15,19
A
abeyance (1)
175: 3
abide (2)
341: 3, 3
abided (2)
339:19,20
ability (4)
54:13;144:20;
219:13;261: 5
able (6)
144:22;263: 6;
266:17;269:11;
285:22;362:25
above (2)
204: 3;216:11
abridge (1)
18:14
absolute (1)
359:24
absolutely (22)
39:25;55:25;
71:10;85:12;89:18;
90:24;147:23;161: 8;
286:23;292:11;
295:15;312:16;
316:12,21;330:20,
24;342:17;343:12;
345:12;347:10;
352:21;358: 3
absurd (2)
314:15,15
abundance (3)
111:17;115:16;
119:23
abuse (53)
13: 8;24:12,22;
28:20;29:15;30: 5,
18;64:14,16;88:10;
89:13;106: 7;123:13;
124:18;175:12;
176: 4;178:20;
181:14;182:19;
187:12;193:10;
197: 5;202: 5, 9;
213:10;216:19;
221:24;222:25;
223:25;228:11;
233: 1;254: 1;
261:16;262: 5,18;
264:25;275:12,18;
276:21;278:14;
279: 1,21;280:19;
283: 7;292:24;
293: 8;296:14;
298:25;313:24;
319:15;331:10;
347: 4;354: 4
abused (8)
29: 3;79: 7;123: 4;
209: 9,23;213:23;
258:11;274:18
abuser (1)
349: 4
abuses (1)
212:20
abusing (3)
28:12;174:16;
317:22
accepted (1)
224:25
access (8)
146: 4;219:11;
227:16;231:11,22;
232: 4;233: 8;286:20
accessible (4)
36: 5;80:19;
(504) 529-3355
(2) 24th - accessible

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
233: 5;346:12
accidental (1)
284:13
accomplish (2)
18: 3;103:11
accomplishments (3)
154: 2, 8;156:21
accordance (4)
77: 3;111:21;
115:21;328:20
according (5)
80:17;322:10,11;
338:15;340:21
account (3)
97:22;348:21;
350:17
accountable (3)
37:25;38:12,22
accurate (8)
82: 5;92: 1,14;
195:12;209:17;
275:22;296: 4,15
accurately (3)
278:16;279: 2;
280: 8
accusations (1)
28:19
accuse (1)
73:12
accused (3)
117:24;174:15;
185:11
accuses (1)
28:11
Accusing (2)
184: 6;203: 2
accustomed (1)
171:16
achieving (1)
318: 9
acknowledge (1)
327:13
acknowledged (1)
333:13
across (7)
75:17;135:12;
161: 6;182:23;
218:19;244:23;
245: 2
Act (4)
233:18;235: 3;
237: 4;297: 9
acting (3)
17:21;278:11,22
action (6)
63:25;72:14;
81:15,17;97:14;
238:16
actionable (6)
32:17;33:14;34: 3,
21;35: 2;48:22
actions (8)
25: 4;27: 3;38:22;
143:10;152:10,12;
205:13;319:11
active (3)
268:17;270: 6, 8
actively (2)
110:10;141:15
activities (1)
138:22
activity (1)
348:15
acts (1)
23:17
actual (6)
46: 2;47:14;
144: 2;231:12;
258: 4, 7
actually (46)
13:21;16:13;48: 9;
50: 2;61:11;67:23;
70: 6;88:23;91: 7;
164:15;171: 7;
173:21;186:12;
218:20;244:16;
245: 4;266:12;
267:20;268: 9;
273:16;274:11;
287: 1;304: 7, 8,14;
307:18,19;319:22;
325: 2, 7, 8,22;
329:16;336:14;
337: 6;348:25;
352: 1, 2, 3, 4,15;
353:23;354:13;
356: 6;357:12;362: 1
ad (30)
28:13;173: 4, 5;
187: 8;215:14;
226:17,23;227:10,
19;263:13;274:22;
275: 4, 7,15;276: 6,
19;277: 7,22;278: 6;
282: 9;292:22;
293: 4;294:10;
295:21;314: 6;
316: 5;325:19;
326: 3,13,16
ADA (1)
20:18
addition (6)
118: 7;164:12;
198:23;230:21;
267: 8;273: 8
additional (3)
94: 4;128: 6;
296:13
address (30)
12: 4, 7;27:20;
35:25;38:14;45:22;
52:21;55:14;56:24;
59:12,16;101:12;
145:19;169:18,22;
179:22;180:11,23;
190: 5;198:12,14;
234: 5;242: 1;268: 6,
11;291:14;304:19,
22;328: 7;340:20
addressed (11)
28: 1;37:11;50:25;
58: 4;67: 2;77:23;
101: 7;179:23;
192:20;205:16;
326: 8
addresses (3)
25:10;38:13;
180:16
addressing (2)
12:14;177:15
adds (1)
96: 5
adequately (1)
36: 2
adjacent (1)
235:11
adjourn (1)
359: 8
adjudged (2)
278: 9,20
adjudication (3)
29:19,20;175:10
administration (3)
26: 4,11;60: 4
administrative (2)
71:22;91:22
Administrator (5)
180: 4;198:11,13;
237:15;255: 1
admissibility (2)
50: 7;54: 4
admission (2)
101:13;117:25
admissions (4)
46:25;117:20;
177:15;242:18
admit (14)
45: 7;48: 2;55:18;
117: 2;120: 8;
194:11;196:10;
217:15;283:15;
306:14;331:17;
334:16,19;337:17
admits (3)
197: 4;345: 3, 7
admitted (16)
17:21;27:13;45: 4,
10;46: 9;94:16;
101: 8;116:21;
118: 9;121:21;
122:16;162:24;
196:14;222:21;
233: 4;269:16
adopt (2)
61:23;293:14
adopted (3)
21:22;77: 7;
328:25
adoption (44)
61: 5,18;62: 6;
63: 6,14;64: 5;65: 9;
67:20;75:22;76:22;
77: 2;81:17;84:21,
24;89: 9;112:22;
113:19;124: 3, 5, 7,
19,20,23;129:12;
164:25;166: 3;
171: 6;233:16;
238: 3;273: 3,23;
274: 5, 6;286: 1;
288: 2;293:12;
297:13;328:19;
329: 7,24;330: 3;
336:20;338:20;
340:19
adoptions (4)
164:14,17,18,22
advance (2)
61:13;254:14
adversarial (5)
156:22;157: 3, 9,
12,25
advise (2)
131:25;137: 1
advised (5)
133: 6,16;221:20;
259:15;327:15
Advocacy (4)
221:13,22;224: 6;
260: 6
advocate (4)
218:21;226:25;
261: 1;269:10
affect (4)
144: 5;218: 6;
285:25;344: 8
affected (1)
85: 5
affects (1)
159: 5
affiliated (1)
134:17
affirmative (19)
103:22;160: 2;
186:19;189:18;
241:17;250:22;
278: 4;285:16;
306:11;308: 9,13;
328: 9;335: 8,18;
349: 6,14,20;351:20;
357:13
afoot (1)
157:23
afraid (4)
248:22;262:13,14;
287: 4
afternoon (5)
167:23;168:21;
220: 5;265:23,24
afterwards (1)
345:19
AG (1)
243: 9
again (73)
13:10;14: 1;18:25;
19:23;21:16;26:25;
33:20;34: 1;37:19;
39:17;42: 3;45: 1;
46: 1;55: 4;57:23;
61:13;65: 2;66:14;
68: 2, 7;73: 4;80: 6;
84: 7;90:19;97:25;
98:12;99:23;103: 2;
106: 2,10;108:12;
109:10;114: 8;
115: 2, 3,23;118:25;
119:17;121:19;
125: 3;137:12;
151:14;152: 4;
160:25;178: 3,24;
180:17,22;192:16,
22;194:10;210:13;
212:17;216: 5,22;
217: 5,15,20;238: 5;
266:18;269: 4;
276:17;280:10;
283:11;295: 7;
302:11;320:11;
331:16;335:11;
349: 3,16;353: 1;
358: 8
against (55)
21:19;28:19,19;
35: 9;40: 1,17,23;
41: 8;58:19;66: 6,13,
19;69:10;87: 1;
97:15;110:11;118: 1,
10;120: 9;122:17;
125:13;126: 2, 6,11,
15;128:25;131:21;
132: 3, 8;133: 7,17,
25;134:24;136:20;
141:11,16;144: 2,17,
24;145: 2,23;159:13;
207:15;211:21;
234: 9;240:11;
241:13;242:24;
243: 5,14;248: 7;
270:16;296:14;
327:17;356:12
agencies (5)
178:13,23;227:17;
283: 1,10
agency (8)
127:18;204:10;
239:25;240:10;
241:20,25;242: 2;
248: 9
ago (9)
107:18;130:19;
183: 9;202: 2;
231:17;273:17,24;
350:24,24
agree (48)
12:20;30: 1;51: 9;
(504) 529-3355
(3) accidental - agree

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
127:18;144: 1;
215: 9;224:14,18;
255:24;256: 2;
257:21;260:14;
266:17;267: 4,14;
275:14;276:18,23;
277: 1,11;279:23;
280: 1,12,20;282:10,
12;285: 4;292:14;
293: 1, 3, 6;294: 5;
300: 9;301: 7,11;
303: 6,22;309:16;
311: 3;312:16;
319: 9;331:24,25;
332: 6, 9;334:25;
353:14;360:16
agreed (35)
13:14;24:25;28: 2;
29:12;172:22;
173:13;176:17;
177: 1, 8;178: 4;
179: 3;193:18;
215: 6,17,21;222:22;
223:11;224: 4;
253: 7;256: 4;
257:18,22;264: 3,10,
15,22,23;282:15;
283:12,16,24;
288:21;291: 6;
352:23;353:10
agreement (6)
12:19;13:25;
51:19;56:10;264: 9,
14
agreements (1)
283:14
ahead (16)
12: 7;13:13,18;
43: 1;67:13;151:19;
174:22;204:20,24;
205:14;214:20;
234:15;237: 7;
291: 1;360: 8;363: 1
airport (1)
360: 4
alert (3)
35:13;237:22;
351:22
alerted (1)
360: 7
Alex (3)
255: 7,18;287:17
Alexander (3)
250:19;283:19,25
allegation (2)
47:19;160: 8
allegations (53)
24:11;28:14,21;
29: 5,21,25;30:18;
47: 6;50:19,23;
64:14,15;74: 2;
88:10;91:11;99:13;
106: 7;161:11;
165:24;175: 4, 5,11;
176: 4;187:11;
193:10,13;202: 3, 5;
212:12;216:19;
218:12;221:23;
233: 1;254: 1;
261:16;262: 5;
265: 1;274:17,23;
275:11,17;276:20;
278:13;279: 1,20;
280:18;282: 1;
292:23;293: 8;
298:25;313:24;
319:14;347: 3
alleged (11)
13: 7;17: 8;24:22;
31:20;47: 2;50:17;
64:16;178:19;
212:19;283: 6;
317:22
allegedly (3)
61:20;79: 6;
189:22
alleging (2)
289:19,21
allotted (4)
63:17;113:20;
272:22;293:25
allow (24)
45:10,11,20;67:13;
74:20,22;77: 5;84: 7;
96: 2,14;97:10;98: 6;
125:20;195:11;
197: 2, 6;231:10,11;
267:12;328:23;
336: 9;338:14;
340:10;359: 6
allowed (6)
45:12,15,23;
193: 1;318: 3;357:21
allows (3)
14: 2;232: 3;
342:22
almost (8)
30: 7;76: 6;94:22;
120:12;284:13;
289:24;347: 5;358: 5
alone (2)
195: 9;336: 7
along (4)
173:25;196: 1;
290: 4;324: 2
although (5)
18:17;96:20;
286:23;337: 9;356: 9
always (4)
167:10;270: 2, 3;
351: 6
Amacker (126)
17: 1;19:21;24: 8;
25:11;26:13,17;
27:11;32: 4;34: 5,16;
35: 7,10;39:16,22,
24;40: 2,20,25;41: 4,
11,12;46:25;47: 5, 7,
21;58: 8, 9;59:14;
70: 1;74:19;76:25;
88:25;89:23;91: 8,
18;95:10,17;96:19;
97: 5, 7;98:10,18;
100:17;101:21;
102:19;104:10,16;
106:23;107:19;
108:20;122:25;
128: 8,14;130:11;
152:16;153:14;
154: 6,18,21,22,25;
155: 9;156: 1;
159:13;162:19;
166:17;169: 7;
209: 3;210:22;
233:11,14;234: 7;
235: 1,24;236:24;
237:21;238:13,21;
239: 9,16,24;240: 9;
241:12,24;242: 7,21;
243: 4;246:12;
247: 5;248:13,17,20,
25;272:23;293:25;
297:16;299:25;
302: 6;306: 6;309: 2;
310: 6,12;313:12;
317:10;318:14;
325: 5;327: 1, 8,14;
328:12,16,17;329: 6,
8;330:22;335:21;
336:10,14;339: 3,15;
341: 6;345: 9;
349:22;350: 7;
352:13;353:14
Amacker's (14)
23:24;25: 7;27: 4,
12;40:18;41: 3;
68:10;107:17,19;
153: 6;155:23;
300: 4;338: 4;348: 9
Amber (1)
91:19
Amended (1)
255: 2
Amendment (3)
18:13;22:22;97: 4
America (2)
95: 4;343: 3
and/or (14)
14: 3;26: 1;32: 5;
34:18;64:22;67:21;
108: 6;109: 3;
224:16;309: 4;
310: 2;316:16;
331: 6;346: 5
Angry (2)
75:10;92:20
animosity (1)
339: 9
Annotated (1)
201:15
announced (2)
264: 8;283:13
announcement (1)
251:16
announcing (1)
264:13
answered (4)
94: 3;160:25;
237:19;241: 4
anticipate (1)
22:20
anymore (2)
147:21;273:19
apologies (2)
44: 6,21
apologize (10)
41:18;42: 5,22;
45: 2;62:14;163:10;
275: 3;290:13,21;
333:10
appalled (1)
224: 9
apparent (1)
18:24
apparently (5)
28:15;42: 7;79: 5;
86:15;135: 8
appeal (23)
64:25;65:12;91: 3;
166: 7;210: 9;
232:16;234: 4;
274: 6;284:18;
286:10;287:15,16;
288: 5;299: 4, 6;
312:19;316:23;
317: 3, 8;329:10;
340: 6, 9;346: 6
appealable (1)
299: 8
appeals (7)
65: 5;232:17;
297:22;299: 5;
316:16;318: 7;
345:21
appear (5)
33:21;149: 6;
200:22;206: 1;351: 6
appearance (21)
26:22;27: 2, 8;
40:11;47: 8,10,23;
48:10;111:18;
115:17;119:24;
139: 9;140:15,24;
141:25;142:15,17;
148: 5,11;161: 4;
272: 9
appeared (3)
28:17;96:24;
175: 7
appearing (1)
143:24
appears (4)
70: 5;154:12;
177: 3;195:21
appellate (9)
36: 7;232: 4, 7,13,
21;284: 7,10,15,22
applicable (3)
35:16;116:24;
121:24
application (12)
34:11;53:18;54: 9;
101:24;104:15;
272: 9;298: 5;
310:23,24;355:22;
357: 2, 4
applied (2)
269: 6;297:21
apply (12)
34:19;38: 1, 3;
39: 6;74: 5;155:10;
156:14;248:24;
259:17;315: 7;
345:10;353: 6
applying (3)
40: 8;112:21;
293:14
appoint (4)
226: 6, 8,19;227: 5
appointed (21)
170: 9;172: 5, 9,
11,12;173: 6;177:11;
226:11,14,16,21;
227: 2, 8,11,11;
274:22;275:10;
282: 9;289: 5;
292:22;293: 3
appointment (1)
293: 6
appreciate (5)
10:21;120:12;
166:14;319: 6;
358:22
approach (3)
205: 7;243: 9;
340:11
appropriate (9)
13:12;54: 7;87:19;
109:12;156:12;
178:13;246: 1;
271:24;283: 1
April (1)
299: 4
areas (2)
229:20;269:20
arena (1)
30: 1
argue (3)
52:24;152:15;
166: 8
argued (2)
62:24;353: 6
argument (2)
11: 1;46: 2
argumentative (1)
(504) 529-3355
(4) agreed - argumentative

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
353: 5
arguments (1)
125:23
arises (1)
15:10
arm (5)
226: 4, 7,13,25;
227:14
arose (1)
233:16
around (8)
36:13;241: 9;
262:15;268:19;
288:25;319: 1;
333: 5;349:15
article (23)
38: 6,13;77: 4;
100:12;101:18;
102: 6;103:21;
105:11;111:22;
115:22;125:17;
126:10,17;208:20;
211:25;212:23;
300:17;302:11;
303: 2, 5;328:21;
339:17;357:12
articles (22)
24: 6;216:16;
217: 6;300:11,12;
301: 2, 7,11,14,16;
303:10,25;319:11;
321:25;331: 7;
332:11;339:14;
345: 5;346:10;
347:23;356:22;
357:22
ASAP (1)
254:24
ascertain (2)
31:17;73: 9
ascertainable (1)
36: 9
aside (3)
30: 9;32:25;264: 6
assigned (4)
76:17;173:17;
187: 8;220:10
assignment (2)
111:21;115:20
assist (2)
284:18;343: 9
assistance (1)
270: 8
assistant (3)
71:22,25;91:23
assisted (2)
23:19;306:15
assisting (1)
23:16
assume (10)
82:13,21;88: 8;
126:25;135:11;
172:24;177:17;
214:12;259: 5;
288:10
assumed (3)
134:22;137: 7;
223:14
assuming (4)
76:18,21;132:19;
167:23
assumption (1)
88:11
assure (1)
28:25
attach (2)
70:25;222: 9
attached (6)
38:18;223: 7;
266:10;291: 3;
328:11;332: 3
attachment (3)
72:18;228:20;
299:14
attachments (1)
50: 9
attack (1)
18:18
attacks (2)
203:22;218:23
attempt (14)
23:13;29: 6;93:25;
104: 7;178:19;
183:18;185:23;
188: 6, 7;211:13,14;
224: 5;283: 6;314: 3
attempted (3)
224:16;228: 7;
314: 3
attempting (3)
28:18;40: 5;261: 6
attempts (2)
179:14;261: 4
attended (1)
268:14
attending (1)
132:16
attention (13)
10:25;67: 8;75: 7;
181:11;205: 7;
231:15;299:17,23;
304: 8;308:24;
310: 4;313: 5;347:17
attorney (47)
19:10;21:24;22: 6,
18;66: 6;67:16;
70:20,23;84:17;
91:20;92:18;105: 2;
125:21;126: 2, 8,19;
134: 7,14,25;136:20;
138: 9,15;141:15;
148:18,19;185:15;
189: 7;204:14;
212: 8;234:14;
242: 9;250:17,21;
264:21;269: 9;
271:13,16,21;272: 1;
284: 1;287: 2, 9;
292:25;295: 2,13;
333:22;334: 2
attorneys (8)
72:17;93: 1, 7;
140: 7;144:19;
145:19;166: 4;
174:21
attorney's (7)
35: 7;86:24;
140:10;149:18;
188:18,22;196:19
attributable (1)
291:23
attributed (2)
151:12;291:22
audio (47)
24:19;88: 8,19;
89:12,20;90: 1, 3;
106:18;178:17;
179: 6,14;192:14;
193: 7, 9,16;194: 3,
18,22;197:13;
212:18;214: 1;
216:23;217:24;
221:24;222: 4,24;
223: 2,23;224:16,25;
228:10,13,13;
264:24;283: 4;
319:18,21;320: 1;
331: 9;333:13,22;
334: 2;348: 4;
349:24;350: 9;
352:15;353:15
audios (1)
227:25
August (56)
102:21;105:13;
138:17;177:21,25;
179:11,22;180:18,
23;181:20;182: 4,17;
184: 1;186:16;
194: 8,19;199:12;
210:24;211: 6,25;
212:24;213: 4;
214: 2, 6,16;215:20;
216: 2;217:12,18,25;
251:21;294:21;
296: 4;297: 3,25;
298:13;314:23;
324:19;328: 7;
331:14;333:15,23;
334:19;344:18;
349:18;350: 3, 5;
352:10;353:20,21;
354: 2,10,11,15;
355: 3,15
authenticity (6)
49:24;53: 6;55:22;
277:15,15;280: 7
authority (13)
19: 9;22: 5;34:13;
37:20;38:23;104:14;
126: 1;157:10;
227:20;230: 3,10,16,
16
authorized (1)
357:21
available (9)
14:18;36: 7;38:21;
178:12;231: 1;
282: 5,25;297:14;
316:25
availed (1)
312:19
avoid (8)
27: 2, 8;40:10;
111:17;115:17;
119:23;142:15;
147:19
aware (33)
62:23;72:21;98: 9;
126:17;127:11;
135: 9;174: 8;
201:10;203:12,24;
230:23;231: 5, 7,13;
232: 1, 7,19,23;
235:20;243:25;
246:19;247:14;
248: 4;277: 3;
283:19;304:25;
309:22;313: 8;
326:24,24;327: 3;
352:22;353: 9
awareness (2)
347: 2, 9
away (8)
105: 8;172: 3, 7;
198:22;219: 3,13;
261: 5;346:15
awhile (3)
271: 6;309: 9;
357:19
B
BA (1)
60: 1
baby (3)
255:19;257: 6;
313:21
back (71)
34: 7;44: 5,17,24;
60: 3;62:17;63:14;
66:14;69:12;71:16;
72: 9;74:14;81:20;
82:11;93: 9;113: 6;
121: 3, 6;122:22;
128:15;130: 6;
134: 9;136:12;
139:24;159:22;
178: 3;188:19;
189:25;195:19;
197:17;200:19;
205: 1;206: 2;207: 4;
208: 7,12;214:13;
216:13;220: 3;
223:22;224:13;
228:15;237:17;
238:23;243: 2;
255:25;256: 3;
258:24;268:23;
269: 3;274:14;
285:11;288:23;
289:16;301: 6;
305:12;308: 7;
311:19;314:13;
317:20;318: 4,24;
324:11,13;332:18;
335:10;339: 5;
340:15;344:22;
356: 7;362: 2
backdrop (1)
30:12
background (10)
28:20;59:19;
61:10,12;170:15;
260:10;268: 4, 8,13;
271:22
backlog (2)
174: 2;181:24
backwards (1)
100: 9
bad (7)
40: 4;195:24;
196: 6,10,16,21;
296:25
bad-mouthing (1)
129:17
Baldwin (1)
206: 4
Ballet (1)
236: 2
bar (12)
116:24;121:24;
234:11;235:19;
240: 3;241:22;
242: 6,14,18;243: 4;
246:15;247:21
Barbie (6)
188:14;199: 5;
237:14,16;254:25;
303:17
Barbour (2)
170: 9;289: 6
barraged (1)
218:11
barred (1)
20:19
Bars (2)
38: 7;246: 8
base (2)
157:21;315:22
based (19)
33:11;41:11;47: 1,
3;48: 5;54:16;89: 7;
130: 1;139: 9;
214:14;276:18;
(504) 529-3355
(5) arguments - based

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
277: 6;279: 4,11;
282: 1;311:23;
315:21;333:18;
340: 4
basic (2)
13: 6;32:12
basically (4)
62:20;94:25;
219: 2;309:20
basis (7)
26:23;39:10;68: 7;
176: 9;215:16;
254: 4;339:25
Bates (20)
81: 5, 6;113:10;
114:18;210:16;
282:18;283:23;
298: 8;348:19,24,25;
349:13;350: 3;
352: 8;353:12,19;
354: 8;355: 1,10,14
bathroom (2)
167:19;257:18
Baton (2)
60:19;310:14
battles (1)
213: 1
bear (1)
219: 5
bearing (1)
167: 8
became (2)
72:20;98: 9
become (1)
159: 3
begin (4)
142:23;189: 3;
294:20;296: 3
beginning (8)
85: 9,15;95: 2;
106: 2;216:14;
285:20;286: 4;
311:12
begins (1)
85:17
begun (1)
132:25
behalf (11)
11: 9;64:24;95: 7;
102: 1;224:15;
278:11,22;297: 4,20;
304:12;329:10
behest (2)
178: 8;282:21
behind (1)
41:13
belabor (4)
16: 6;55: 2;267: 2;
285:10
belief (2)
86: 2;193:15
beliefs (1)
218: 5
believes (1)
108: 2
bells (1)
132:22
below (3)
91:17;216:22;
322:16
Ben (1)
268:14
bench (12)
142:21;144:23;
170:10;171:13,25;
172:25;174: 2;
177:13;181:23;
233:15;238: 9;
340:11
benefit (1)
201:25
Benoist (9)
10: 6;44:12,16;
49: 9;58:24;162:22;
167: 2;360:19;361: 5
best (8)
28: 4;65: 4;77: 6;
197:10;257:12,13;
291:17;328:24
better (6)
13:11;145:14;
188:20;218:18;
335:14;347: 6
beyond (4)
86: 7;99:12;
117:15;160:23
bias (16)
27:14;41: 7;46:25;
47: 2,14,20;48:17;
116:22;117: 2;
118: 1,10;120: 8;
121:22;122:16;
144: 2;159: 9
biased (6)
39:25;40: 7;48: 2;
141:11;142:13;
144:16
big (2)
237:11;249:20
Billy (3)
172: 5, 9;226:12
binder (2)
65:17;189:25
binders (1)
65:16
biological (2)
77: 9;329: 2
birth (1)
254: 3
Birthday (1)
254:21
bit (7)
14:13;30: 8;42:11;
268:18;305:11;
322:21;324:12
blanket (1)
292:13
blog (15)
95: 3;100:12;
105:11;109: 9;
137:14;208:20;
211:25;300:10,15,
16,17;301:20;
302:24;303: 1;307: 1
blogs (25)
24: 5;95: 8,20;
99: 6;216:16;217: 6;
300:11,12;301: 2,15;
303:10,25;304:16,
21;307: 1;319:11,15;
320: 9;321:25;
331: 7;332:10;
345: 5;346:10;
347:22;356:22
blogs/articles (1)
300: 3
Board (11)
13: 3;14: 3;40:15,
22;41: 7;139: 3;
141: 7;204: 3;239: 8,
11,21
Bogalusa (2)
59:21,23
Bolshoi (1)
236: 2
bond (1)
254:14
book (27)
81:20;93: 9;
112:16;176:18,21;
186: 1;195:24;
196: 3, 5, 6, 6, 8, 9,
10,21,21;197:17;
200:18;249:20;
252: 6, 8;296:24,25;
303:13;314: 8;
335:11;348:17
books (4)
49: 5;142:21;
176:19;252:11
born (2)
61:23;293:15
both (29)
12: 9;16:19;17: 2;
24: 9;32:11;36: 5;
61:17;65: 2, 5;75:25;
85: 4;90:24;107:18;
109:17;116: 7;
117:14;132:15;
180:15,16;194:14;
263: 7;274: 3;282: 8;
288:19;291: 5;
296: 5;303: 8;325: 5;
331:20
bottom (18)
70: 5;81: 5;91: 5,
10,12;105:18;
108:18;186:22;
190: 4;197:14,21;
210:15;216: 9;
277:11;305:19;
308:11;350: 4;352: 9
bound (1)
39:17
Box (1)
169:21
boy (4)
69:25;179:16;
211:24;303:14
Boyd (85)
23:22;25: 2;28: 9,
10,11,12;61:24;
63:11,11;70: 6, 6;
75:24;82: 3;89: 8,11;
105:23;123: 1;
124: 1;129:11,17,21;
171: 9, 9,24;172:13;
174:15,16;175:11;
177: 2,18;183: 8,20,
24;187:17;189:11;
191:19;194:17,21;
199: 4;206: 4;
216:18;220:12,12;
230:25,25;238: 1;
244:23;250:15,15;
255: 3;263: 3, 7;
264: 3, 4,20;270:23,
24;271: 4;272: 8;
274:10,12,17,18;
278: 5,10,21;279: 5,
19;280:17;281: 6;
283:15,20;289:13,
14,17,19;293:16;
297:21;298:17,21;
299: 3,21;306:18;
309:21;327: 6
Boyd's (18)
15: 7;61:14;85:18;
177:19;181: 5;
232:12;256:12,22;
263: 3,12,13;264:21;
276:21;283:25;
289:20;293:11;
298:10;316: 1
bparham (2)
180:10;198:12
bparham' (1)
180: 3
bparham@coforrestmsus (1)
179:24
brainstormed (1)
308:22
brainstorming (2)
311:14;312:24
brave (1)
343: 4
breached (1)
107:23
break (10)
92:13;167: 1,17,
19;168:17;219:21;
268:18;355:13;
360:11;362: 1
breath (1)
105: 8
Bridge (16)
100:18,21;322:13,
16,19,23;323: 2,18,
20;324: 1, 4;344:12;
357:17,23,25;358: 5
Bridges (5)
172: 6, 9,24;
226:12;227: 9
BridgeToJusticecom (1)
101:23
brief (11)
12:10;23: 2;36: 6;
45: 2;96:18;220: 1;
232:13,23,24;
265:14;273:18
briefed (2)
36: 1;47: 9
briefly (7)
18:11;59:18;74: 1;
131: 8;159:21;
170:14;178: 5
bright (1)
229: 1
bring (9)
14: 1;26:20;97:13;
196: 8;207:25;
208:11;259:11;
304: 7;313: 5
bringing (1)
253:25
broadly (1)
20:14
brought (18)
63:11;64:10;
65:10;67: 8;109:13;
175: 9;192: 2;207: 4;
231:15;237:11;
261:18;284:23;
285: 6;286: 6,10;
299:16;304:12;
312:14
building (1)
240: 4
bully (3)
85: 8;87: 8;143: 3
bunch (1)
137:12
burden (2)
15:16;32: 9
bush (1)
333: 6
business (1)
47:17
busy (1)
237:10
butts (1)
320: 3
C
(504) 529-3355
(6) basic - butts

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
call (58)
25:18;40:19;58: 5,
7;74:13;90:12;
91:14;92: 9;102:18;
103: 4, 5;129:15;
134:14;135:24;
136:16;141:13;
144:10;154: 2;
155:24;183: 1;
184: 2, 9,10,16;
189:22,23;198: 1,21;
200: 5;208: 3;
210:21;234: 3;
235:21;237:13,25;
238: 1;242: 6, 9;
243:15,18,22;
247:23;251:15;
258:18;300:10,12,
16,16;302: 6;303: 3;
315: 1, 4;321:15,22;
344:23;346:21,23;
359:15
called (36)
16:24;71: 3;75:11;
92:23,24;93: 1;95: 3,
9;96:18;111:15;
115:10;119:21;
130: 7,25;132:11;
135:19;141: 6;
153:14;185:16;
195:23;196:21;
208:15;215:24;
219: 4;220:25;
224: 8;233:18,22;
236:25;238:14,23;
268:23;283:11;
286:20;301: 2;
324:14
calling (8)
92:21;183:23;
199: 3,13;204:22;
206:17;211: 6;
237:22
callous (1)
30: 8
calls (18)
41: 5;71:14;74: 6;
90:10;117: 8;118:18;
122: 4;183: 2,11,16,
23;185: 5;193:21;
199: 1, 9,15;200:10;
205:22
came (25)
52:19;62: 7;69: 2,
16;96: 4;135:11;
148: 4;151:22;
173:14;179: 5;
184: 2,16;190: 4;
223:11;238: 9;
257:23;271: 6, 9;
277:19;280: 5;
283:13;308:22;
320:23;326:12,19
campaign (12)
147:12,23;153:16,
24;154: 3;189: 8;
259: 3;310: 4;313: 4;
343: 1;345:10;
356:12
can (123)
13: 2,17;15:24;
21: 8;33:24;42:17;
45: 3;46:11;48:21;
51: 9;52: 6, 7;62:21;
69:12;73: 3, 8,22;
75: 3;78: 4,13;80:20;
83: 4;85:17;87: 6;
90:16;91: 7;92:13,
25;93:21;94: 4,14;
96:17;97:13;103: 9;
106:18;108:10,12;
117:13;118:12,20;
122: 6;126:21;
146: 4;147: 4;
150:16;152:22;
153: 1, 1,20;154: 2;
155:13;157:13;
161: 9;162:10;
163:21;167:19;
168: 1;170:25;
171:19;176: 2;
180:25;187:13;
193: 3,23;195:16,19;
201:17;206:21;
207:25;218: 3;
219:20;221:11;
222:15,19;226: 6, 7;
229:15;234: 2;
240:22;245: 3,11;
246: 6;250: 7,11;
254:24;256: 3, 6;
257:13,17;265:13;
286: 2;290:21;
291: 1,17;295:13;
300:16,16;302:14;
312:25;318:16;
319: 7;325:10,25;
332:14;340: 8;
341:15,16;342: 9,10,
21,25;343: 1,10;
344: 4;351: 1;355: 5;
356:17,23;357:11;
359: 3,24;361: 9;
362:20
candidate (3)
152:25;153: 9;
159:12
Canon (4)
19:21;27: 1;40:13;
127:12
Canons (2)
185:22;260:22
capabilities (2)
323:18,24
capacity (2)
170: 4;245: 7
caps (1)
251:13
car (1)
208: 7
care (4)
69:13;185:11;
273:12;307:25
careful (3)
145: 6,14;291:21
case (219)
16: 4,12,22;18:12;
20:12;21: 6, 9,11,13,
18;23: 1;25: 8;28: 5,
24;33:24;36: 2, 4,10,
12,18;47:12,13;
52:11;53: 8;57: 4, 6;
62:21,25;64:13;
70:20;75:13;76:14,
20;78:24;82:11,15,
24;83:24;85: 4,11,
18;86:22,25;87: 7,
17;89:16;92:12;
96:11;99:14;102: 8,
13;103: 3, 8;104: 6,
8;106: 4;110:15,18;
113:23;116:17,24;
117: 3;118:24;
119: 1,11;120: 7,18;
121:24;122:10,13,
14;123: 1,18,22;
124:19,20,23;
129:10;131:11,12,
14;135:23;142:21,
24;143: 2, 4,13,16,
25;146: 1;148: 2, 4,
16,20,21,23;151: 9,
21;152:10,12,23,23;
153: 2, 7, 8,10,11;
155: 7;156:16,18;
165:23;169: 4;
171: 8,11,12,24;
172:14,16,19;
173:17,19;174:10;
177: 2;178:25;
181:11,14,21;
183:20,24;185: 3, 9,
13,19;187: 9,18,22;
188: 8;189:13;
191: 3,13,20;192:23;
196:20;199: 4, 8,10;
200: 8;202: 7;
204:16;206:17,24;
209:22;211: 8;
216: 7,18;218:24;
219:14;220: 7,13,16;
221: 1;225:23;
226:10,24;228:19,
21,25;229: 7, 8, 9,12;
230: 2, 7, 8,17,17,25;
232:14,25;236: 5,25;
238: 2;245: 2, 4;
246: 6,18;247:11;
248: 2;249: 5;
250:14;251:14;
270: 7;271:10;
272: 8;275: 8;
284:22;287:17;
293:24;295:14;
303:24;304:10,11;
313: 5;314:13,17,21;
319:12;321: 6;
326: 3, 9,13,17,18;
329: 6;330: 5,13,17;
334:14,14
cases (73)
16:18;18: 2;20: 9;
23: 6,24,25;24:17,
19;27: 6,15;32: 5;
34:18,21,23;36:13;
38:17;41: 3;48: 5, 6;
54:13;60:15;61: 1, 2;
63: 4;76: 5,16;77:10;
84:16;86:24;99: 9,
19;116:23;121:23;
126: 8,13;137:21;
138: 4;139:10;
144:21;146: 9;
147:20,25;148:25;
149: 3;156: 4;158: 3;
170:24;171: 1, 2, 4;
172:14;174: 3;
176:15;181:25;
220:10;232:22;
235:10;245:14;
255:18;289:11;
299:24;300: 5;
301:10;303: 4;
308:24;309: 1;
310: 4;345:13,16;
347: 3;348: 9,10,15
cast (1)
30:18
catch (2)
359: 3, 6
caught (1)
205:10
cause (15)
126: 2, 6;175:16;
199:18;205:15,20;
207: 1;219: 7;264: 5;
270:24;277:19;
302:14;330: 7;
346:24;347: 1
caused (3)
13:14;161: 3;
174:20
caution (3)
111:17;115:17;
119:23
caveat (1)
54:22
cc (4)
136:25;137: 8;
233:14;248: 7
cc'd (6)
139:23;233:11;
246:12;247: 5,10,17
CD (2)
284:19,23
cell (1)
319:22
center (3)
58:22;221:13,22
certain (16)
14:14;45: 3;53: 3;
103: 8;117:19;
138: 9;148:25;
156: 9;165:19;
176: 1;222:19;
267: 4;287:14,16;
357: 9,10
certainly (16)
14:12;15: 9,21;
43: 7;84:24;87:15;
134:20,23;137:15;
161:14;165:24;
279:11;302: 4;
324: 9;348: 3;358:22
certified (4)
207: 3, 6;244:12;
245:12
Chair (11)
10: 4, 9;11:24;
14: 5;41:15;43: 9;
58:23;169:12;
201:24;266: 1;360: 6
Chairman (2)
62:10;158: 9
chambers (5)
43: 2;145: 6;
228: 3;261:19;
311:21
chance (3)
19: 6;219:10;
315:10
Chancellor (6)
66: 8;172:10;
209:21;230:19;
231:16;289: 7
Chancellory (1)
230:20
Chancery (24)
14:20;16:23;36: 8;
169:23;170: 1,10,23;
177:14;186: 9,15,15;
187:16;194: 9;
209:11;213: 8;
217:13;231: 2;
270:17,25;289: 8;
295:17;306: 3;
324:15;331:15
change (5)
85: 7;104:23;
155: 6;343: 2;355:17
changed (3)
95: 3;225:25;
231:25
Changeorg (17)
81:22;190: 5;
(504) 529-3355
(7) call - Changeorg

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
307: 6, 7,12,24;
308:12,17;319:10;
320:16,23;322:10,
12;335: 4,13,16;
346:11
changes (2)
161: 8;313:11
changing (1)
173: 4
charge (4)
32:22;33:11;
95:13;243:10
charged (10)
18:16,21;19:14,16;
20: 3;22: 9, 9;27:22;
118: 3;343: 6
charges (18)
13: 1;16: 7, 9;
17: 9;20:23;73:12;
98: 4;118: 4;149:16;
159: 3, 4;174:19;
175: 2,14;176: 5;
242: 8;254: 5;343: 7
charging (1)
19: 1
Chase (3)
226:21;227: 2, 5
chasing (1)
333: 5
chatter (1)
206:23
check (7)
96:20;121: 3;
146:14;147:13;
165:13;168:16;
318:13
checked (3)
79: 7;146:20;
147: 9
checking (1)
183: 4
cherry-picking (1)
149: 3
chewed (1)
253:24
child (24)
13:22;39: 4;
146: 3;151:24;
184: 7;187:11;
197: 4;213:18;
221:22;226: 9;
233:17;235: 2;
237: 3;250:23,24;
289:19,23;296:18;
297: 8;298:18,22;
336: 5;344: 5;349: 3
children (132)
12:24;13:22;
14:17;24:12,17,18,
20;28:13;38: 1, 4;
39: 6;61:23;64:16,
17;74: 4;75:14;
78:17,21,25;79: 5;
82: 3, 8,21;85: 4,19;
87:22,24;88: 3, 9;
89: 3;95: 8;102:22;
104:17;105:17;
106: 5;107: 2;123: 7,
13;124:18;129:11;
131: 9;145:20;
146: 1, 9;155:10,25;
156: 9;164:21,24;
165: 7,12;166:10;
170:21;174:17;
176: 6;178: 9,18;
179: 1;180: 1;
181:17;187: 1;
190: 8,17;191: 2, 4,
13,20;193: 7;194:13;
195: 6;209:23;
210:25;212: 6, 7,13;
216: 7,18;218:22;
221:14,17;227: 1,12;
228:11;236: 3;
259:18;260: 2;
261: 1,10,24;263: 6,
14;269:11;274:11,
19;276:21;278:14,
24;279:19;280:18;
282: 3,22;283: 5;
289:22,25;293:15;
296:14;299: 1;
311:19;312: 6,10,16;
313:23;315: 8;
316: 2;317:15,19,20;
320: 2;325:14;
331: 9,19;336: 1;
340: 3;342:24;
343:11;344: 5;
347:10,20;352:12;
361:19,21,23
children' (1)
259:24
Childrens (1)
339:13
children's (6)
75:16;77: 4;
108:24;232:14;
328:21;344: 9
child's (2)
151: 9;221:19
chilling (1)
85:12
choice (1)
359:13
choose (1)
254:24
chose (1)
339:24
chosen (1)
124:14
Christmas (2)
262: 2;263: 9
chronologically (1)
120:25
Church (2)
259:14;260: 7
Circuit (11)
65: 6;102: 2;
109:14;153: 6;
297:22;310: 8, 9;
318:19;329:11;
330:11;341:20
Circuit's (1)
151:21
circulate (3)
102:17;210:20;
302: 5
circulated (3)
306:25;346: 3, 7
circulating (3)
201:12;203:13;
233:24
circumstances (5)
32:17;54:17;
148:14;341:10,16
citation (1)
326:18
citations (1)
20:10
cite (5)
201:14;203:16;
230: 2;342:25;343: 5
cited (4)
20: 9;34:13;36:11;
38:24
cites (3)
19: 9;22: 5;37:19
Civil (9)
47:16;111:22;
115:22;125:17;
126:18;164:12,16,
17;339:16
claiming (1)
357:22
claims (1)
29:15
clarified (1)
229:13
clarify (6)
14:13;28: 2;
118: 5;276:22;
356:23;357: 5
clarity (1)
245: 3
Class (2)
237:16;258: 3
classes (2)
259:12,14
clear (28)
20:20;21: 6,20;
22:14;29:12;30:15;
32:10;41:22;48:23;
50: 5;51: 8;63:25;
74:16;101: 5;133:21;
135:14;145:22;
202:17;210:15;
267:17,19,24;272: 2;
285:11;290:24;
293:20;332: 2;
336:19
clearly (9)
20:13;24: 3;27:19;
41: 7;51:21;98:16;
166: 2;202:19;
309:11
Clerk (20)
36:15;173:25;
188:11;192: 4,17,21;
199: 6;206: 7;207: 5;
241:20,21;242: 1;
244: 7;245:14;
249: 8,24;251: 2;
253:22;263:14;
282: 5
Clerk's (8)
165: 2,15;186: 9,
16;187:16;221: 4;
306: 3;324:15
click (2)
86:20;87:23
clicked (2)
86: 3,17
clicking (1)
87:16
client (20)
17:23;21:24;
23:22,22;64:24;
67:24;69:18;70:23;
84:18;120: 9;122:18;
134:10;144: 6;
149: 5;152:22;
273: 8;299:21;
306:18;317: 5;343: 9
clients (4)
64:24;67:22;
145:20;150: 2
client's (1)
146: 9
close (3)
59: 5;169:10;
174: 6
closed (4)
84:21;93:19;
104:24;314:17
closely (2)
320:25;334:15
closer (1)
358:17
closing (1)
53:21
clue (1)
248: 9
Coast (2)
268:16,18
Codal (1)
339:14
Code (20)
19:22;26:25;40: 8,
12;47:15;53:12,19;
54:10;67: 3;77: 4;
111:22;115:21;
125:17;126:18;
127:12;138:13;
201:15;203:16;
328:21;339:16
coerce (1)
261: 6
collaboration (1)
157: 3
collect (1)
188:14
College (12)
14:18;36: 5;
132:15,16;170:20;
184:10;232: 2, 2,11;
233: 7;235:15;
268:20
Columbia (2)
59:16;208:10
combination (1)
107: 9
comfortable (2)
171:20;301:22
coming (11)
45: 1;70: 9;75: 2;
149:15;179: 7;
199: 9;205:22;
260:25;263: 8;
308: 5;314:23
commence (1)
215:16
comment (4)
30:23;75: 2;
145:18;295: 9
commentary (1)
100: 9
comments (21)
18:22;51:16;
69:20;72:20;73: 2, 2;
75: 1,10,12;98: 3;
103: 4;186:18;
199:17;202: 9,14;
250:24;251: 4,13;
301: 9;336:14;346: 2
commit (1)
202:22
committed (2)
35: 6;203: 3
Committee (31)
10: 5, 9,10,18;
11:13,25;12:20;
14: 4;15:18;19: 6;
31: 9,21;41:15;
42:15;43:16;50:16;
52:25;58:22;59: 9;
78: 5;80: 8;94: 5;
99:25;169: 6;185: 4;
218: 4;240: 4;
243:19;266: 2;
268: 3;318:24
Committee's (2)
16: 8;49: 3
committing (1)
244:24
(504) 529-3355
(8) changes - committing

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
communicate (3)
211:15;245:16,23
communicating (2)
136: 4;137:16
communication (31)
20: 7,15;21:20,23;
22:19,24;35: 4;
37:21,22;39:12;
42:14;67: 7;70:23,
25;71: 1;72: 7, 9;
80:14;92:11;102:11;
127:14,20;129: 7;
134: 9,13;136:22;
156: 4, 6,11;188:11;
237: 2
communications (21)
17:13,25;19:19;
20:19;21: 4,10;
22:11,23;37:18,19;
40: 3;67:17;73:14;
74:18,25;92:19;
128:16;203:22;
324: 5;326: 7;327:18
companion (5)
204:16;238: 2;
246:18;247:11;
248: 1
Company (1)
236: 2
compare (1)
196:12
compelling (2)
53:25;315: 6
compiles (1)
232: 3
complainant (3)
16:22;159: 4;
289: 4
complaint (80)
14:22;28: 6;31:24;
32:10,22;37:15;
40:17,23;51: 3, 5;
58:19;66: 3, 6,13,19;
69: 3,10;99:13,14;
110:11;125:13;
127: 5, 8;128: 5,25;
131:19;132: 1, 7;
133: 1, 7,17,25;
134:24;136:20;
139:22,24;140:23;
141:16,19;142:22;
149:14;159:11;
169: 2, 5;201: 3;
202:15,20,23;
203:10;204:25;
211:21;233:10;
234: 6, 8;235:19;
239: 7,10,13,20;
240: 1, 3,10,16;
241: 1, 8,13,23;
242: 5,13,24;243: 5;
246: 1,13;247:21;
248: 6,11,11;270:16,
22;339:10
complaints (3)
50:22;229:22;
246:21
complete (6)
46: 8,17;49:19;
284: 3, 8;306:12
completed (2)
273:23,25
completely (9)
160:19;218:12;
233: 5;313:17;
314: 1;316: 5, 9,13;
340:18
complex (1)
181:25
complied (1)
208:15
complying (1)
245:20
computer (1)
182:25
computers (1)
180:16
concern (11)
12:21;28:16;93: 3,
3, 6;135:12,13;
158:13;199:18;
253: 5;360: 9
concerned (23)
42: 2;61:20;67:19;
71: 6;73:18,23;
129:24;130: 8,25;
132:13;138: 4;
144: 6;157:17;
174:23;199:23;
200: 4, 7,12;237:23;
356: 1, 4,11,13
concerning (10)
46: 2;57: 2;62:11;
64:15;67:22;72:10,
21;75:14;77:14;95: 8
concerns (5)
45:22;211:10;
262:13;292:15;
347:16
concert (2)
178:17;283: 4
concerted (1)
190: 9
conclude (3)
32:18;360:20;
363: 4
concluded (2)
274: 4;363: 7
conclusion (8)
90:10,13;117: 8;
118:18;122: 4;
193:21;304: 1, 4
conclusory (1)
202:11
conduct (32)
17: 8;19:22;23:11,
12,14;26: 3;27: 1;
32:14;33:22;34:12;
35: 1;40: 9,13;45:11;
47: 3;51:25;80:12;
107:13,24;123: 2;
124:15;127:12;
138: 9;140:10;
144:22;169:16;
202:10;218: 5;
258: 8;260:22;
291:21,24
confer (4)
10:13;44: 7;
201:17;223:21
conference (22)
173:23,24;181:22;
182: 1, 2, 5,10;
215: 4, 9;223: 9,10;
224: 2;226: 3;251: 7,
17,18,21;252:24;
253: 7;256: 2;
257:16;358:25
conferences (1)
238: 7
conferring (2)
44:10;223: 8
confidential (7)
41:23;45:13,14,17;
137: 5;248: 5, 8
confidentiality (1)
45: 9
confined (1)
54: 9
confirmed (2)
253: 8;257:23
confirming (1)
257:19
conflict (4)
116:22;117: 2;
121:22;233:16
confluence (1)
143: 6
conformed (1)
257:23
confrontational (1)
356: 2
confused (1)
300:20
confusing (1)
337: 5
confusion (2)
13:15;322:22
connecting (1)
68:11
connection (16)
66: 6;67:20;
117:12;127: 2;
128: 4;136:20;
147:23;153:16,23,
25;154: 3;155: 1;
164:22;165: 8,22;
288: 1
conscious (1)
33:19
consequently (2)
20: 1;297: 3
consider (16)
54:14,23;84:10;
88:19;90:13;121:25;
160:10;194: 5,25;
196:25;217: 9;
226: 4;254: 8;273: 7;
331:11;339: 3
consideration (3)
109:22;148: 9;
213:11
considered (5)
21: 8;33:25;
145:23;156: 4;
188:10
considering (1)
52:25
consistent (1)
120: 3
consisting (1)
31:16
conspiracy (2)
201:12;203:14
conspires (1)
261: 4
conspiring (1)
203:24
constantly (1)
218:11
constitute (1)
266:25
constitution (2)
171: 1;295:24
constitutional (2)
31:13;46: 3
contact (31)
23: 8;35:21;92: 4;
93:23;128:20,21,24;
136:13;154: 9,18,19,
20,22,24;155: 2;
156: 7,10;162:18;
198: 6;241:15;
301: 8;302:14,15;
303:23;304:23;
321: 4,10;322: 6;
324: 7;345: 4, 9
contacted (13)
73:15;127: 6;
128:23;135:15,17,
19;155: 8;204:11,13;
208: 6;244: 6;
304:16,18
contacting (3)
23: 9;38:17;39: 2
contacts (1)
156:13
contain (1)
12:23
contained (6)
22: 3;51:10;
117: 1;232:12;
281:12;308:16
containing (1)
283:16
contains (7)
12:22;125:22;
126:20,20;137:12;
325:20;331: 2
contempt (13)
145:23;173: 2, 4;
177:18;180:24;
181: 3;207:14,23;
243:12;244:18;
289:18;298:10,18
contend (2)
53: 1;90: 6
content (5)
78: 7;93:20;
185: 4;188: 4;211:12
contention (3)
29:14,18;150:23
contentious (2)
28: 7;274:16
contents (1)
72:11
contested (3)
56:19,24;291:12
context (7)
12:13;28: 3,18;
30:19,19;54: 1;
157: 5
Continuation (2)
279:14,25
continue (7)
93:22;94:24;
221:20;295: 9;
330: 6;347: 7, 8
continued (1)
42: 2
continuing (3)
64: 2;149:15;
150: 1
contrary (4)
26:10;175:13;
211:17;259:11
control (2)
231:14;300:25
controlled (1)
323:23
controls (1)
300:23
convenience (1)
287: 6
conversation (23)
66: 5,16,17;68:23;
129:23;130:19;
131: 9,17;132: 6,14,
23;133: 5,14,22;
136:19;138: 3;
146: 8;196:15;
221:19;235: 1, 7;
243: 3;273:18
conversations (7)
12: 3;49:13;
(504) 529-3355
(9) communicate - conversations

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
132:10;133: 3;
146: 7;235:14;
262:24
convey (1)
248:22
conveyed (1)
248:14
convince (2)
311: 5;355: 5
convincing (2)
32:10;48:23
convincingly (2)
24: 4;27:20
Coordinator (1)
237:16
copied (2)
250: 2;253:17
copies (5)
182:14;207: 3;
250: 9;266:11;306: 7
co-proffer (1)
46: 6
copy (33)
19: 3;36:23;49:19;
69:25;70: 9;103:21;
115:12;136:21;
137: 1;139:25;
163:11;180: 6;
186: 6;191: 8;
208:20;236:10,20;
246:18;249: 8;
253:16,21;267:18;
284: 3, 6, 8,10,15,21;
290: 3;305: 1;327: 1,
14;328:13
Corey (1)
112:21
correctly (1)
272:20
correspondence (4)
65:22;66: 1;93:13;
328:11
corrupt (1)
97:18
costs (1)
13: 9
Council (1)
243:23
Counsel (62)
11:10,13,19;17:19;
22:16;43: 3;44: 2;
49:21;58: 6,17;
62:23;65:23;66: 8;
93:15;96:11;105:22;
107:19;110:12;
111:16;115:13,16;
117:10;119:22;
125:14;126:23;
127: 7,22,24;128: 2,
17,21;131:20;136: 5,
14;137: 4,17,24;
141:17;146: 8;
148:16;168:25;
178:10;180: 8;
182: 1;201: 4,18;
215: 8,15;245:17,24;
255: 4, 6, 7, 8;
261:19,20;266: 8;
270:15;282:23;
294:10;327:17;
358:25
counseling (1)
298:24
counselor (2)
178:21;283: 8
counselors (1)
173: 6
Counsel's (2)
176:22;265:18
count (5)
31:15,22;50:23;
75: 9;191:17
country (1)
36:14
County (14)
169:23;181:10;
186:10;194:10;
200: 4;208: 8,10;
209:12;213: 9;
217:14;235:11;
270:18,25;331:16
couple (12)
10: 7;20: 9;65:16;
66: 4;107:18;168:23;
173:11;176:19;
177: 7;231:17;
263:24;350:23
course (7)
20:16;32: 9;62: 8;
71:12;173:18;
183:11;314:21
courses (2)
132:16,17
Court (205)
14:20;16:24;
20:12,17;21: 6,17;
25:12,13;27:12;
31:12;36:12;37:10;
41: 3,24;43:20;
52:10;53: 9,12,15,
16;54: 2,12;57: 5;
59: 9,15;60:18,25;
61: 2, 3;63: 4;64:13;
65: 7;69:19;70: 1;
77: 3,13,15,18,23,24;
89: 1;90: 8,16;92: 5,
20;99:10;100:17;
101:24;102: 3, 6, 9;
103:23;104:15;
105: 4;106:24;
107: 6;108: 8,21;
109: 5,15,25;111:13,
20;115: 6, 8,19;
116:21;119:19;
120: 1;121:20;
123: 1,10,11;124: 6,
8;127:14,17;129:13;
130:23;135:11;
141:12;145: 5,21,23;
146:12;149: 6;
153:15;156:23;
157: 1, 9,10;158:12;
164: 5, 6;165:13;
166: 7;169: 9,16;
170: 1, 6,23;172: 5,
8;177:14;178:11;
180: 4;181:12;
184:19;186: 8;
187: 1,17;188: 5;
194: 9;198:11,13,24;
199:21;200: 3,22;
208: 8;209: 2,11,20;
210:10;211:14,15,
15;213: 8;217:14;
218: 7,20;219:11;
220: 8,15;222: 8;
226: 5, 7,13,25;
227:14;228: 8,22;
229: 5, 6,13,25;
231: 2;232: 4, 7,16;
237:15;244: 4;
253: 8,19;254: 8,25;
257:16;260:19,25;
261: 8;264: 5, 8,13;
270:18,25;282: 6, 8,
24;283:13;289:23;
292:22;293:13;
295:17;297: 5, 6,22;
298: 1, 5, 7;299: 5;
303:23;304: 9;
310:25;313: 7, 7, 7,
8;314: 7;325:14;
326:10;328:20;
329:12;330:12;
331:15;335:22;
342:11;344:18;
346:19;347:12,15;
355:19;356:15;
358:24;361:10;
362:16
courthouse (5)
70:14;75: 6, 8;
169:24;200:16
Courtney (9)
199: 6;208: 6,11,
17;221:11;228: 4;
240: 5,23;244:10
Courtney's (1)
255:13
Courts (10)
38:12,17;39: 2;
93:25;100:13;
109:17;176: 4;
208:22;306: 8;
357:15
Court's (15)
22:13;36: 8,15;
52:20,22;63:14;
145:25;229:10,16;
230:21;232:15;
237: 2;297:13;
321:10;345: 4
cover (4)
18:11;71:25;72: 3;
101: 2
covered (1)
281:11
Covington (2)
59:17;75: 5
craft (1)
343: 9
crafted (1)
326: 1
crafting (2)
325:22;330:19
create (3)
302:21;307:14;
333: 8
created (16)
24: 4;60:17,20,23;
79: 4;95:16;96:25;
98:11,21;100:22;
142:16;285: 2;
301: 1;310: 2;322: 1,
20
creates (1)
98: 1
creating (4)
12:21;306:15,19;
308:15
credibility (1)
18:18
credit (1)
350:23
crimes (1)
204:14
criminal (13)
97:15,18;174:19;
175: 2, 5,13,19;
176: 5;202:10;
229:22;242: 8;
243: 9;271:22
criminally (1)
243: 7
criticize (2)
19:11;22: 7
criticizing (3)
18:16;19: 2,15
cross (1)
73: 3
crucial (3)
32: 7, 8;68: 4
Cullen (13)
116: 2, 3,13,14;
118:24;119: 1, 8,11;
120: 3, 7;121: 2,12;
122:14
current (4)
61:14,16;287: 2, 8
currently (5)
77: 2;187: 8;
270:11;287:10;
328:19
custody (27)
28: 7;61:19;63:13,
25;64:13;65:11;
67:21;81:15;84:21;
85: 1;129:10;156:25;
166: 6;187:12;
221:10;233:17;
235: 2;237: 3;
250:24;272:19;
297: 7, 8;311: 6;
337: 1,13;339:23;
357: 7
custody/visitation (2)
270:23;289:13
cut (1)
267: 7
cute (1)
332: 3
cyber (1)
204:14
D
DA (3)
221:20;254: 5;
255:22
dad (3)
184:17;221:22;
254:22
daddy (3)
195: 7;320: 4;
336: 5
dad's (2)
254: 9,11
Damon (2)
11: 9;58:16
danger (1)
248:15
dare (1)
262:19
Darlene (1)
43:23
Data (2)
232: 3,11
date (47)
66: 5,16;103: 5;
110:23;111: 4;
114: 2, 5,24;115:24;
116: 5;119:13;
120:22;121: 8;
128:11;132:11;
136: 1;159:24;
160: 3;180:17;
182:17;212: 1;
213: 3, 3;218: 1;
233:24;251:21;
294:12;297:14;
302: 7;312: 1, 4;
314:23;317:13;
318:13;334: 4, 6, 7,
9,13,15;356:10;
357: 2, 6, 7;362:15,
(504) 529-3355
(10) convey - date

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
20;363: 3
dated (8)
105:12;139: 6;
141: 2;179:22;
207:20;211:25;
216: 2;217:18
dates (3)
66:22;121: 5;
214:17
daughters (5)
218:18;260: 3;
274:10;344:11;
352:17
Dawn (30)
16:25;26:13;32: 4;
34: 5;58: 7, 9;59:14;
70: 1;88:25;89:23;
91: 8,17;95:10;
96:19;98:18;100:17;
104:10;106:23;
108:20;153:14;
154:18,21,22,25;
162:19;209: 3;
272:22;293:25;
327: 1;335:21
day (31)
78:21;85:24;99: 5,
18;103: 5;106:13;
109: 8;134: 5,18;
149: 7, 7;191:25;
211: 7;217: 1,20;
233: 5;251: 5, 6, 9;
253: 9;255: 4;264: 4;
277:19;310:11;
340:14,16;354:12,
13,15;359: 8;360:20
days (11)
76: 7;134: 5;
180:19;254:15;
256: 3;268:24,24;
330: 4, 6, 8;340:23
DC (1)
326: 1
deal (6)
24:10,10;39: 9;
101:14;144:21;
246: 8
dealing (1)
135: 7
deals (2)
16:12;72: 7
dealt (3)
46:11;47:19;
214:12
Deborah (21)
16:23;32: 4;34: 4;
58:20;70: 2;91:16;
100:17;168:18;
169:20;186:23;
194: 9;198: 7;209: 3,
11;213: 7;217:13;
244: 2;270:17;
289: 4;325:11;
331:14
deceit (1)
107:14
December (4)
172:23;174:25;
292:21;349: 1
decide (6)
15:20;149: 4, 9;
150: 8;204:18;363: 3
decided (3)
45: 5, 8,10
decision (14)
22:25;36: 7;52:11,
19;94: 7;149:23;
155: 7;315:21,22;
321:14;330:15;
340: 3, 4;344: 8
decisions (6)
18: 1;35:23;93:25;
94: 1;104: 8;218:14
decline (1)
64: 3
declined (8)
63:21;64: 4;
297:17;329:20;
336:15;338: 8,12,25
declining (1)
64:21
defamatory (1)
93:20
defendant (3)
189:13;264: 6;
277:24
deference (1)
336:17
deferring (1)
62: 9
definitely (2)
79: 2;309:17
definition (2)
32:12;39:18
definitions (1)
33:15
degree (1)
230: 1
degrees (1)
359: 2
delay (2)
174:20;175: 6
delegated (1)
208:17
deliberative (1)
117:12
DELTA (3)
231: 9,23;251: 2
demands (1)
187:14
denied (25)
31:12;47: 5;52:14;
65: 6;109:17;274: 4;
297:23;298: 1, 7,16;
310: 9,12;312:14;
318: 9;326:22;
339:21;340:14,21;
342:16;345:21,21;
346: 5,19;347:12,18
denies (1)
340: 7
deny (6)
47:22;310:16;
315: 2, 3;330:14;
340:14
Department (4)
176:12;185:15;
224: 7;260: 7
depending (1)
10:15
deployed (1)
269: 1
deposition (29)
40:25;107:17;
128: 8,12,14;131: 7,
14;168:24;172:21;
220:22;221: 4;
230:24;234:17;
235:23;236: 6, 8, 9,
11;239:16;240:14;
241: 3;246:23,25;
247: 3;249:11;
250: 1;251:23;
253:14;309:10
depositions (1)
131:15
derogatorily (1)
145:24
derogatory (1)
98:24
describe (1)
319:25
describing (1)
222:25
description (1)
49:18
Desert (1)
268:23
designate (2)
49: 6;226:23
designated (1)
326: 4
designed (1)
218:24
desk (1)
256: 6
despite (3)
22:20;24:23;
142:14
detail (1)
97:12
details (4)
36: 4;106: 4;
124:21;153:11
determination (2)
204: 9;209:22
determine (4)
54: 3;123: 3;
246: 3;263: 2
devastating (1)
85: 3
developmental (1)
311:15
Deveraux (1)
63: 3
dialog (1)
97:19
died (4)
170: 9;227: 9;
254:17;288:25
differ (1)
279: 9
different (13)
76:20;132:16;
161:10,12;166: 5;
170:25;242: 3;
300:22;307:21;
308: 2, 6;337: 1, 2
differently (1)
230:10
difficult (2)
218: 9,13
direct (7)
35:21;93:22;
99:25;213:19;
332:11;352: 3;356: 5
directed (8)
66: 2;69:18,20;
71:25;87:14;93:14;
221:12;317:10
direction (2)
278:12,23
directive (1)
72:12
directly (11)
25:25;52:22;57: 3;
67: 8;294:24;301: 8;
302:14;305: 1;
306: 8;321:15;322: 6
disagree (10)
54:21;98: 6;
277:14;294: 5;
296: 5,10;311: 7;
316: 7;338: 3;358:15
disagreed (6)
23:21,23;316: 8,
11,13,15
disagreement (1)
95:17
disallowed (1)
196:14
disappears (1)
351: 8
Disciplinary (49)
11:10,19;33: 3,15;
34:12;38:13;40:15,
22;41: 6;53: 8,10,17;
54: 6, 8,13;58: 6,17;
65:23;66: 8;93:14;
110:12;125:13,14;
126:22;127: 7,15,17,
21,24;128: 2,17,21;
131:20;136: 5,14;
137: 4,17,24;141:17;
168:25;176:21;
180: 8;201: 4;239: 8,
21;245:17,24;
265:18;270:15
discipline (3)
41:25;54: 1;
126:23
disciplined (1)
158:21
disclosed (2)
178:10;282:23
disclosing (2)
141:18;193:16
disclosure (4)
68: 9;85:23;
191:23;282: 7
disclosures (2)
106:11;216:25
discomfort (1)
280: 6
discovered (2)
148:24;326:14
discovery (1)
168:24
discretion (1)
165:18
discretionary (2)
124:11,15
discuss (21)
24:15;36:18;42: 8;
44: 9;45: 3;52:23;
136:22;152:23;
153: 2,10;157:24;
183:18,24;193:13;
199: 8;224: 3;
228:17;229:12,19,
23;235: 3
discussed (24)
13:10;22: 3;24: 6,
14;45: 7,11;46: 4;
56:21;96:12;101:25;
131: 1;192:23;
199: 2;202: 1,18;
213:25;258: 4;
319: 3, 5,11,14;
322:24;339: 8;
358:24
discussing (11)
68:24;88: 9;
106: 3;113:19;
153: 3;193:10;
216:17;223:24;
229: 7, 8;347:25
discussion (8)
42:11;43: 2;45: 4;
52:20;66:10,11;
99: 9;151:23
discussions (6)
50: 3;117:11;
274: 8;287:18,22;
295: 1
(504) 529-3355
(11) dated - discussions

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
dishonesty (1)
107:13
dismissed (1)
299: 6
dispute (1)
30: 3
disputed (1)
29: 7
disputes (2)
171: 4, 5
disregard (2)
18:20;33:10
disseminate (4)
32: 2,24;36:19;
229:23
disseminated (4)
25: 1;130:24;
179: 6;264:25
disseminating (1)
176: 8
dissemination (1)
179: 2
distanced (1)
78:24
District (19)
26:15;57: 5, 6;
59:15,22;60:11;
89: 1;106:24;108:21;
109:25;111:19;
115:19;120: 1;
153:15;170: 2;
289: 8;293:13;
297: 5;335:22
disturbed (1)
330:12
disturbing (3)
75:13;212:19;
286: 2
division (12)
63: 4;76: 4, 5;
89:16;104:11;
119:25;148:22;
149: 1,21;150: 2;
152:24;204:15
Divisions (1)
60:23
divorce (1)
165: 9
divorces (1)
171: 6
docket (9)
63:14;164:12;
230:25;231:11,22;
249:25;251:15;
253:18;337:10
document (11)
71:17;94:16;
100: 1;114:15;
163: 6;178:19;
186: 3;190: 4;
191:16;283: 6;
305:15
documentary (1)
20:25
documenting (1)
298: 7
documents (18)
14:24;15:19;
27:16,18;56: 1,14;
57:19;66:21;74: 2;
76: 2, 9;117:14;
223: 5;246: 2;280: 1,
7;328:10;356:19
domestic (11)
24: 7;25: 8;29:22;
35:24;37:13;171: 3;
175: 6,18;269:10;
295:18;303: 7
done (34)
25: 1;48:11;61: 1;
71: 2;120:12;127: 9;
133: 2;138:12;
175:21,23;188:10;
208:18;218:21;
234:22;237: 9;
247:10,18,22;260: 4,
6;285: 5, 7;291:10;
309: 6,15;312:10;
315: 7,14;317:18;
325: 6;327:23;
337:19;347:19;
358:18
door (1)
359:25
dots (1)
68:11
doubt (3)
327:19,21;328: 5
doubts (1)
279:11
down (34)
29:11;42:11;53: 8;
85:14;88:23;92:13;
99: 1;151:22;172: 5,
7;181:18;187: 5;
191:17;195: 4;
205:25;206: 1;
209: 6;213:14;
223: 9;224:21;
233:17;237: 8,16,18;
238: 3;239:14;
247:23;253:25;
255:24;266:20;
325:16;349:15;
356: 7;362:21
down-trodden (1)
260: 9
draft (1)
321:16
drafted (2)
255: 1;310:24
drafting (1)
310:22
dragging (1)
359:10
draw (5)
255:17;299:23;
304: 2;308:24;310: 4
drawing (2)
200:17;257: 1
drive (1)
218:19
drop (2)
66:14;82:11
Dropbox (3)
284:24;286:21,22
dropped (2)
268:14;285: 6
drove (1)
310:13
Drug (1)
165:16
DUCOTE (156)
11:11,13;12: 2,11,
18;14:11;15:23;
27:24;30:14;31: 2, 8;
42: 9,19;43: 6;45: 6,
20,25;46:15;49: 1,
15;50:13;54:19;
55: 6,10,20,24;56: 5,
18;57:12,16,22;
66:24;67: 9;68: 1;
69: 5;72:24;73:25;
77:20;78: 9;79: 9,13,
20;80: 1;83: 1,10,14,
18;86: 5,10,16;
88:13;89:21;90: 9;
94: 8;95:11,24;96: 3;
97: 1,24;99:11;
100:23;101: 4;
103:12;107: 7,15;
112: 5,12;113: 2;
117: 6;118:17;
122: 3,24;123: 5, 8,
24;124: 4, 8,21;
128:11;129:19,22;
130:18;131: 5;
133:20;134: 3;
136: 9;138:23;
140: 6;142:19;
144:19;145:10;
146:18;147: 1, 5,21;
151:18;152: 6,14;
153: 4,18;154: 4;
155: 5,13,16,21;
158:17,20;159: 7,17,
22;160:21;161:18,
22;162: 4, 9,13,16,
25;163: 9,14;167:14,
18;168: 3, 7;184:12;
192: 6,15;193:20;
201:16,21;202:16;
219:19,24;220: 4;
228:18;252:25;
253:10;261: 9;
263:18;265: 5;
266: 1, 3,21;275:19;
276: 8,12;290:23;
352:25;358:20;
359:20,21;360: 1;
361:13,22;362: 8,12
Ducote's (1)
30: 2
due (16)
46: 3;64:13;74: 9;
77: 5;99:20;111:14;
115: 9;119:20;
181:12;182:13;
213:20;214:25;
253: 6;316: 9;
328:22;354:20
duly (3)
58:10;168:19;
265:20
DUPUY (1)
43:15
during (17)
17:14;20: 8,15;
21: 5,11;102:19;
139: 7;164:10,10;
167: 9;210:22;
261:25;263: 4;
311: 8;323:21;
350:24;358: 1
Dustin (9)
61: 6,14,22;62: 2;
112:21;273: 1;
293:11,19,21
duty (7)
19:12;22: 8;47:13;
268:17,23;270: 6, 9
E
earlier (19)
85:22;105:10;
109: 7;129:23;
132:10;160:13;
161: 6;175:25;
198:21;200:20;
202:18;249: 2;
252: 2;281: 4;
296:20;304: 6;
309:14;316:12;
317:21
early (3)
12:16;160: 5;
174:18
ears (1)
119: 7
ease (1)
262: 1
easily (2)
165:14;200: 6
East (1)
60:18
Eastern (1)
57: 5
eat (3)
167:15,23;168: 2
educate (1)
347: 6
educated (1)
350:25
education (1)
60: 9
educational (3)
59:18;170:15;
268: 7
effect (4)
21: 7;196:11;
225:11;313:18
effective (2)
312: 8;317:17
effectively (1)
149: 3
effort (12)
22:25;31:17;
35:22;77:17;82:17;
94: 6,10;133:23;
155: 5;190: 9;
312:15,24
efforts (8)
23: 4;25:17;42: 2;
75:15;311: 5;312: 5;
317:14;319: 5
either (30)
13: 2;14: 1;42: 1;
65:14;75:25;109: 3;
119: 7;134:15;
188: 6;193:17;
196: 1;199: 7;202: 2;
226:24;227: 4;
228: 2;235: 9;262: 7,
15;273:21;274: 6;
275:16;276:19;
288:19;291:20;
294: 5;309: 6,15;
314: 5;327: 6
elected (5)
60:12,13,17;
170: 6;258:25
election (2)
145: 1;158:22
electorate (5)
37:24;259:16,19,
21;260:16
electronic (1)
285: 2
electronically (1)
286: 3
elicit (1)
322: 1
elicited (1)
322: 4
eligible (1)
270:11
else (33)
10:15;35:15;
69:10;73: 3, 5;74: 5,
6, 7;89: 8,12;96: 5;
98: 1;99:16;118: 9;
142: 8;167: 8;
174:25;194:17;
196: 2;219: 6;265: 6;
(504) 529-3355
(12) dishonesty - else

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
287: 2;312: 9, 9,12,
25;313: 3;315:22;
317:18,18;318:16;
324:23;349:10
Elshock (1)
57: 7
Email (25)
25:10;179:18,20,
21;180: 7,11,15,17;
181: 8;182:17,23;
185: 5;188: 1;
198:11,12,14,15;
258:18;303:16;
304:19,22;323:18,
24;324: 3;344:12
emails (1)
189:22
embedded (1)
52:18
emergency (30)
63:12;65:11;
75:23;89:10;221:10;
272:17;276: 5;
277: 6,17,20;279:18;
280:16;295: 5;
297: 7;310: 5,13,14;
314:10;318:13,17;
329:17;336:25;
339:17,18,23,23,25;
340: 1,17;357: 6
employment (1)
156:23
enclose (1)
136:21
encourage (3)
35:20;303: 2;
321:14
encouraged (7)
301: 7;303:23,24;
304:15;314:25;
315: 4;321:17
encourages (1)
97:14
end (12)
19:13;205:18;
209:16;211: 4;
213:24;246:20;
249:10;291:19;
329: 2;331:23;
349:22;352: 7
ended (2)
240: 5;274: 2
enforce (2)
173: 1, 8
enforcement (8)
29:23;178:23;
204:10;233:18;
235: 3;237: 4;
283:10;297: 8
engage (1)
107:13
engaged (3)
23: 4;108: 3;138: 9
enjoined (2)
278:12,23
enlighten (1)
197: 8
enough (3)
168: 6;205:24;
349: 5
ensure (1)
76:13
enter (1)
148:17
entered (4)
43:12;109:12;
177:10;215: 5
entering (1)
148:19
entire (5)
54:14;165:15;
232:12;282: 4;
326:16
entitled (4)
208:21;212: 4;
298:21;340:22
envelope (2)
188:15;355:25
equally (2)
116:24;121:24
erase (1)
314:14
erred (1)
52:25
error (3)
209:19,23;244:14
especially (3)
22:24;175: 5;
200:13
essentially (2)
129:16;301:19
established (4)
51:21;177: 9;
320:16;353:15
establishment (1)
266:25
estates (1)
171: 3
Estimate (1)
269:24
etcetera (9)
136:23;137:15,15;
154:10;204:15;
227:18;234: 4;
325:19,20
ethical (2)
35:16;105: 7
Ethics (1)
185:22
ethnic (1)
260: 9
evaluate (1)
54:14
even (52)
12:16,25,25;18:15;
20:19;48: 4;50: 4;
61:11;68: 5;72: 6;
88: 3;89: 4,14,25;
90:20;100:25;101: 7;
104:13;107: 2;
108:25;137:22;
140:16;142:22;
159: 3;160:18;
162:23;167:25;
174:19;185:12,19,
24;200: 9;206:17;
209:13;224: 5;
231: 1;232:23;
257:17;292: 2;
304: 4;307:13;
326:15,20;333:22;
336: 1;338: 3;
340:10,14,20,21;
346: 4,12
event (2)
162: 3;169:11
events (4)
143: 7;286:13;
332:17;347:25
eventually (6)
52: 8;110:17;
149:15;240:16;
241: 1, 7
everybody (8)
206: 1,21;215: 7;
219: 6, 8,11,12;
224:21
everybody's (1)
182:11
everyone (12)
10: 3,15;11: 6;
42:25;43:10;44: 1,
25;85:11;207: 9;
266:12;267:18;
349: 5
everything's (1)
165: 4
evidence (118)
16: 6;24: 3;26: 8,
18;32:11;36:22;
37: 5;38: 1, 3;39: 5;
45: 3, 6,12,15,23;
48:17,23;50:12;
53: 1, 6,12,19,23;
54:10,15;56: 7;
57:18;67: 3;74: 4;
78:11;81:22;89: 3, 6,
13,24;90: 4;94:11,
17;95:14;107: 1, 3;
108:23;109: 1;
124:16;150:18;
151:20;154:15;
155:10,15,17,24;
156:15;157: 4,18;
162:24;163: 3;
173:12;181:14;
182: 6,19;194:11,19,
22;195:11,18;
196:22;197: 3, 6;
209: 8,13;213:10,17,
24;214: 2, 5, 6, 8, 9;
217:16,25;222:12;
224:16,25;232:10,
15;233: 3;256: 8;
258:20;259:17;
276:11;290:11;
296:13;315: 5, 6, 9,
16,18,21,23;331:10,
17;333:14,23;
335:24;336: 3, 9;
339: 4,24;340: 5,13;
344: 6, 7;345:11;
353:10,16;354:19;
355: 4,11
evidenced (1)
144:16
evidencing (1)
41: 7
evidentiary (10)
52:21,23;123: 2;
124:16;195:15;
210: 8;258: 8;310: 7;
338:15;340: 8
evil (1)
97:18
ex- (6)
20:18;21:19;
22:10;37:17;318:14;
340:21
exact (4)
66:22;76: 9;
109: 6;130:19
exactly (7)
31:19;50: 5;
106: 9;109: 8;
204:12;276:25;
326: 2
EXAMINATION (9)
58:11;122:24;
159:19;162:13;
164: 3;168:20;
220: 4;264: 1;265:22
examinations (1)
278:25
example (8)
36:21;51: 2,14;
160:20;164: 8;
165: 3;325:11;
351:13
examples (1)
348:14
except (7)
43:11;44: 1;
178:10,12;270: 6;
282:23,25
exceptions (2)
62:24;89:15
excess (1)
84:14
excluded (2)
213:10,24
exclusively (3)
60:25;187: 2;
325:15
Excuse (1)
295: 8
excused (1)
265:10
executed (1)
172:23
exercise (15)
63:21;64: 3,22;
124:14;297: 6,17;
314:10;329:20;
336:16,24;338: 8,12,
25;339:22;340:17
exercised (2)
329:23;336:19
exercising (1)
218:10
exhausted (1)
342:22
exhibit (72)
13:20;49: 5;51: 2;
52: 1;56:23;65:20;
69:24;71:16;81:20,
21;85:14;93: 9,10;
100: 8;105: 9;
109:19;112: 2,11;
114:16;116: 1;
118:24;120:11;
136:17;140:13,25;
150:19;151:19;
152: 5;154:17;
155:13;176:23,25;
179:16;186: 1, 2;
190: 1;195:23;
200:19,25;205:15;
207:13;208:19;
210:13;211:23;
214:21;215:23;
221:24,25,25;222: 1;
231: 3;253: 1;
258:21;262:14;
263:23,24;270:21;
276: 3;282:14;
283:24;285:18;
291: 9;298: 6;
299:10,11;303:13;
305:12;308: 7;
324:13,16;348:17,18
exhibits (51)
10:23;12:14,25;
13:15;14: 6,16,24;
17:17;18: 7,25;
20:25;29: 8;41:20;
42:13;49: 4,18,20,
22;50: 1, 7, 9,11,21;
51:10,12;52: 3,18;
55: 5,19,23;56: 2, 8,
15,19;65:18;73: 1;
100:10;140:14;
176:18,22;190:13;
222: 3, 6, 8,10,13;
307:19;320:25;
(504) 529-3355
(13) Elshock - exhibits

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
335:15;362: 4, 5
ex-husband (1)
174:16
exist (2)
142: 1,18
expand (1)
263: 4
expanded (3)
180:24;254:18;
315:25
expanding (1)
254: 8
ex-part (1)
37:22
ex-parte (36)
17:13,24;19:19;
20: 7,14;21: 4,10;
22:18,23;35: 4,21;
37:18,18;39:11;
40: 3,19;70:22;72: 6;
73:14;75:23;80:14;
87: 3;89:10;92:11,
18;134:13;156: 4;
188:10;203:22;
272:17;273:24;
295: 5;297: 4;
311:18;318:17;
357: 7
expect (6)
38: 2;102:23;
105: 3, 6, 8;211: 1
expected (1)
103: 7
expecting (2)
103:16;179:25
expedited (2)
109:22;135:22
experience (6)
158:11;187:10;
271:18,21;351:10;
352: 6
expertise (1)
156:24
explain (21)
66:15;74: 1;78: 5;
94:15;134: 3;139:21;
176: 2;184: 8;
201:15;202:14;
203:17;206: 2,22;
218: 4;233:20;
237: 7;251: 1,12;
267:14;294: 6;
355:20
explained (4)
82:12;100: 6;
231:21;303:19
explanations (1)
319: 7
explicit (1)
228:10
expound (1)
292:15
express (5)
38:11;93:24;
117:24,25;301: 9
expressing (1)
38:18
expressly (11)
27: 6,13;111:11;
116:21;117: 2,19;
118: 9;120: 8;
121:21;122:16;
339:14
extended (1)
296: 1
extending (1)
294:17
extent (13)
13: 2;28:23;36: 3;
55:11;59: 7;66:17;
90:25;91: 1;94: 3;
202: 8;276: 9,13;
285: 9
extra (1)
48:17
extraneous (1)
87: 3
extreme (8)
27:13;116:22;
117: 2;118: 1, 9;
120: 8;121:22;
122:16
extremely (2)
75:13;212:18
F
face (2)
47:25;132:19
Facebook (20)
95: 1, 9;96: 6,23;
97:21;98:11,13,15,
25;99: 3;145: 8,15;
146:15;147: 7,13;
300:21;323:22,23;
324: 2, 3
facilitate (1)
324: 5
facilitation (1)
133:24
fact (50)
15: 6;21:25;24:23;
26: 3;27:23;30: 3, 6;
32:14,16,19;37:12;
47: 6,21;48:12;
51:22;53: 7,16;54: 6,
13;68: 2;73: 5;74:20;
84: 4;96: 4;97: 3;
102: 7;110:14;
139: 6;176:10;
181:13;202:22;
207:14;233:20;
235:17;238: 2;
239:24;266:23;
267:23;275:23;
286:23;291: 5;
295: 3;327: 7;332: 9;
333:21;339:13;
346:13;347: 5;
356: 6;361:25
facts (13)
28:24;29: 7;31:18;
36: 3;51:24;61:12;
62:11;125:23;
126:20;229: 8;
232:13;266:16;
291:12
factual (7)
29: 9;32: 8;34:16;
48:20;90:12;108: 3;
332: 5
factually (1)
32:11
Fager-Baldwin (1)
250:16
failed (4)
289:19,21,23;
343:12
failing (1)
298:18
fails (1)
347: 9
fair (10)
30:21;185:10;
211:17;219: 1;
226: 5;260:11;
300:11;304: 1, 3;
360:13
falls (1)
260:21
false (46)
18: 4;19:17;22:10;
25: 6,21;26:16;
27:15;28:21;32: 2,
15,16,19,24,25;
33:13;34:19,20;
39:14,18;46:20,22;
80:15;90:22;107: 4;
108: 6;109: 3, 6;
118: 3,15;121:25;
125:23;126:20;
142: 3;143: 9;
160:15,19;194:25;
197: 1;214:18,19;
217:21;218:12;
334:20;335: 1, 3;
339:12
falsehoods (1)
99: 9
falsely (1)
18:19
familial (1)
47:17
familiar (15)
15:18;16:11;
42:25;71:18;76:20;
125:16;150:21;
169:13;174: 9;
228:19,24;229:24;
277:12;281: 6;
305:14
families (2)
102:18;210:21
family (23)
13:23;60:18,25;
61: 1, 3;63: 3;85: 3;
92:20;105: 4;145:21;
156:22;157: 9;
171: 5, 8;183:25;
219: 5;269: 9,22,24;
270: 2, 8;281: 7;
298:24
family's (1)
75:16
far (13)
45:18;99:12;
129:14;144: 6;
145: 2;157:23;
209:20;210: 4;
275:15;300:24;
334:13;347: 5,11
fashion (1)
291:15
father (22)
24:23;39: 4;77: 9;
123:14;181:16;
184:11;194:14,16;
209:10,15;212:14;
213:22;221:15,17;
254: 2;258:11;
317:21;318: 5;
329: 2;331:20,22;
354: 5
father's (2)
294:17;296: 1
fault (1)
322:22
fax (14)
25:10;69:16;
70:10,12,17;75:18;
92: 1;135:12;162:14,
19,21;198: 9;327: 9,
10
faxed (6)
67:23;162:17;
244: 4;325: 3, 4;
326:25
feared (1)
262: 7
fearful (1)
263: 8
February (4)
234:17;235:23;
240:14;247: 3
federal (2)
57: 3;97:16
fee (1)
206:19
feed (4)
147:14;351: 5, 6, 7
feeding (1)
40:15
feel (8)
103:20;104: 6;
143:18;160: 5;
195: 9;218: 9;
301:21;336: 7
feelings (3)
84: 3;218: 4;
248:23
fees (3)
254:14,16;316: 5
felony (3)
201:14;203: 3,15
felt (9)
94: 6, 9,12;143:15,
20,20;218:25;
248:14;261:21
female (2)
260: 3;261:21
few (8)
12: 2;76: 7;84:12;
134: 5;165:20;
254:19;273:17;
337:25
Fifth (1)
97: 4
fight (3)
87: 6;143: 2, 2
figure (3)
188:15;263: 6;
312:25
figured (2)
240:24;248: 9
file (63)
36:16,23;37: 4, 6;
56: 7;57:17;64:25;
66:12,19;125:12;
126:10;127: 8;
128:24;131:19;
132: 1;133: 1;
134:24;159: 2;
163: 2;166: 5;173: 3,
13,25;176: 6;188:12;
193:17;204:24;
206:11;208: 8,11;
220: 8;222: 9;
229:15;234: 8;
235:19;239: 7,10,12,
20;240: 1,10;241: 1,
13;242: 5;244: 4, 8;
245:15;247:20;
250: 6;253:25;
257:25;258: 5, 7;
280: 2;281:14,25;
282: 4;285: 3;
314:24;316:22,23;
317: 3;318:17
filed (105)
19: 4;31:11;39:16;
42:13;51: 3, 4;58:19;
61: 6,18;65: 5;66: 7;
75:24;89:10;109:21;
110: 4,23;113:25;
114: 3, 5;116: 5,13,
(504) 529-3355
(14) ex-husband - filed

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
20;120:20,22,25;
121:15,20;125:23;
126:14,15;127: 3, 6;
132:25;135:21;
140:12,22;141: 6;
142:22;148: 6;
149:16;159: 4,12;
160: 8;161: 2,11;
164:14,15;169: 2;
172:25;174:19;
176: 5;177:18;
181:11;186:12;
187:16;201: 3;
208:10;211:20;
221:12,16;223: 6;
233:11,16;238: 3;
240:16;241: 7;
246: 1,13;254:13;
262:10;263: 3;
266: 8;270:16;
272:13;273: 4;
276: 5;277: 7, 8,21;
279:17;280:15;
282: 2;289:17;
290:11,24;293:12;
297: 4;299: 4;
304:11;306: 3, 7;
318:13;324:14,19,
20,23;325: 2, 7;
327:16;329: 6;
344:20;355:22;
357: 3, 6, 8
files (13)
36:25;40:17,23;
41:10;126:19;141: 9;
174: 5;176:13;
223: 6;224: 2;
229:14;231:20;
237: 8
filing (11)
39:24;69: 3,10;
132: 7;133: 7,24;
234: 5;242:13;
248: 6;314:12;
324:24
filings (1)
248:15
fill (1)
266:15
final (4)
29:20;232:18;
267: 7;299: 8
finally (1)
48: 3
find (19)
30:12;75: 3;80: 9;
97: 6;120: 2;156: 2;
167:25;182:14;
188:21;200: 6;
206: 8;236:13,15;
242:17;247:23;
254: 4;259:18;
271:13,16
finding (5)
29:24;112:24;
175:10;240: 5;299: 7
findings (3)
53: 7;276:24;
277: 1
fine (10)
12:11;15: 9,12;
43: 5;46:14;54:25;
78: 1;80:25;149: 4;
171:19
finish (6)
133:13;268:21;
315:12;359: 5,17;
362:25
finished (2)
132: 4;163:13
firecracker (1)
305:11
First (116)
10: 8;13:16;18:13;
22:22;31:22;32:20,
23;34: 6;35:24;
39:21;42: 4;47: 2;
52:20;56:25;58: 5, 5;
60:12;62:16;65: 6;
66:23;71: 1;72:22,
25;74:24;76:11;
81: 8;85:23;92: 8,16;
93:18;98:13,14;
101:20;102: 2;
104:10;105:16;
106: 1,11,22;108:18,
24;109:14;110: 6;
111: 7;117: 7;
127:20;128:21,22,
23;132:24;133: 5,14;
134:12;136: 9,12;
139:22;140:25;
142: 2;151:20;
152:20;153: 6;
156:17;159:25;
160:16;164: 9;
170:11;173:22,24;
181:20,20,23;
186:20;189: 4;
190: 7,14,17;191: 4,
23;192: 1;195: 5;
200:19;201: 7;
209: 1;212: 5,10;
215:20;216: 6,14,24;
217:21;235: 1,16;
238: 1,19;243:25;
254:15,19;264:10;
271: 3, 7;275: 5;
297:22;302: 1;
310: 5, 8, 9;318:19;
320:23;329:11,11;
330:11;338: 6,23;
341:20;348:18;
352:11
firsthand (3)
274:24;280: 4;
290:17
fit (1)
205: 1
five (4)
61: 2;132:21;
219:20;265:13
flight (2)
359: 3, 6
flip (2)
159:22;197:16
fluctuate (1)
270: 3
focus (2)
201: 8;349:21
folder (2)
284:25;286:23
follow (10)
102:21;159:20;
205: 3, 8;210:24;
263:22;290: 4;
343:15;351: 2, 4
followed (4)
334:14;339:19;
341: 4;342:13
following (11)
25:15;45: 4;88:18;
279:16;280:14;
294:15;296:16;
341:13;344: 2;
351:12,14
follows (5)
31:25;58:10;
168:19;265:21;
276: 1
foot (1)
245: 8
force (3)
211:15;313:18;
314:12
forced (1)
316: 4
forensic (2)
221:13;298:24
forgetting (1)
69:13
forgive (1)
341: 7
form (4)
68:19;109: 8;
136:11;166: 6
formal (6)
13: 1;118: 4;
127:17;149:16;
159: 3;343: 7
formally (4)
66:18;265:10;
323: 2, 4
Formerly (1)
293:21
forms (1)
247:24
Forrest (2)
169:23;181:10
forth (2)
31:24;122:22
fortunately (1)
225:22
forum (1)
38:10
forums (1)
18: 5
forward (2)
159:25;339:11
found (12)
28:15;38:14;
72:21;132:17;
241:21;242:17;
275:16,16;276:19;
298:17,21;337:19
foundation (2)
77:21;276: 3
four (8)
88:21;125: 9;
194: 6;217:10;
222: 3;268:16;
274:11;349: 3
frame (1)
16: 4
Franklin (1)
268:14
frankly (5)
87:20;129:25;
134: 7,22;137: 7
fraud (1)
107:14
free (16)
18:13;95: 4;
105:10,12;109: 7;
163:19;166:17;
215:24;265:12;
300:14,15;301:16,
18;302:23;307: 2;
343: 4
fresher (2)
286:15;309:17
Friday (7)
181:12;215:18;
233:22;235:18;
238: 6;254:23;
310:13
friend (1)
273: 7
friends (2)
146: 4;210:21
friend's (1)
102:18
front (14)
49: 5;65: 3,17;
81:16,17;85:10;
86:22;112:13,14;
125: 4;156: 5;
262:11;318:14;
329: 7
frustrations (1)
313:13
full (3)
10:25;46: 2;174: 4
fully (2)
70: 8;265:10
further (16)
35:19;53: 8;55: 2;
113: 5;159:18;
187:13;219:16;
235:13;278:20;
279:19;280:17;
282: 6;292:16;
298:21;321:18;
325:16
future (4)
18: 1;21:13;46:11;
104: 7
FXA (1)
151:22
G
GAL (18)
206: 6,18,18;
223:18;226: 1, 4,14;
250:25;254: 1, 3, 8,
11;255:20,20;
261:13,21;262:11,11
Gambrell (111)
16:23;19:16,20;
23:23;24: 8;25: 7,11;
32: 4;34: 5,14;40: 4,
16,19;41: 5;51: 3;
58:20;66: 9;68:24;
69: 3,19;70: 2;71: 4,
5;73:16;85:10;
91:17;93:23;100:18;
101:21;102:19;
129: 7, 8,16,18,25;
130: 6, 7, 8;131: 7,
18;132: 6,11;133: 5,
15,22;135:15,24;
137:23;138: 3;
139:23;141: 7;
144:11;168:18;
169:20;179:25;
181:13;185:17;
186:23;194: 9;
195:11;197: 6;
198: 7;201:24;
209: 3,11;210:22;
213: 8;217:13;
236:11;258:25;
270:17;289: 5,12;
294: 9,16;296:17,21;
298:13,15,20;
299:25;302: 7;
304:23;305: 2;
306: 6;309: 2,19;
311: 6,17;313:17;
315:25;317:10;
321: 5;325: 5,12;
331:15;333:24;
334: 3,18;336: 9;
341: 6;345: 9;348: 8;
(504) 529-3355
(15) files - Gambrell

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
349: 2;352:13;
353:13,17;354:12,
16,23;356:12
Gambrell's (8)
34: 6;128: 4;
213:16;299: 7;
300: 3;303:18;
318: 3;356:10
game (1)
320: 2
gather (2)
224: 6,12
gathering (1)
138:21
gave (18)
172:21;199:18;
220:21;227:19;
234: 5;239:24;
241:15,19,25;
250:13;251:22;
252: 6;253:17;
254: 3;271:17;
285:12;286: 9;
296:18
GED (1)
268:15
general (6)
53:10;74:12;
131:10;146: 8;
234:15;322: 2
generally (1)
174: 8
General's (2)
204:14;242: 9
generate (2)
138:23;307:14
generated (6)
25:20;138:24;
140:23;141:25;
305:25;306:13
generating (1)
138:20
gentleman (1)
174:23
gestae (1)
52: 1
gets (5)
53: 9;92:16;
143:11;254:22;
275:21
ghost (1)
350:16
gimme (3)
355: 4, 4, 4
girl (1)
221:24
girls (17)
64:19;76:13;77: 6;
102:25;103:15;
104:13;181:15;
191: 9;209: 9,14;
211: 3;213:21;
223:24;255:19;
258:10;274:13;
349:22
girl's (5)
77: 5, 8;328:23,24;
329: 2
given (4)
72:15,16;249:10;
282: 8
gives (2)
103: 4;227:23
giving (2)
65: 3;355:13
glad (3)
43: 9;158:16;
250:12
global (1)
104:22
globo (2)
112: 2,11
gmail' (3)
324: 1, 2, 4
gmailcom (1)
344:13
goal (1)
18: 3
goes (18)
36:15;72:16;
73:20;83:23;95:19;
97: 3;99:12,23;
155:22;157:15;
159: 8;187: 3,14;
232:24;249:12,14;
349:23;352: 3
GOLDSMITH (77)
10: 2, 4;11:20;
15:11,25;31: 4;
42:16,21,24;43:25;
44: 4,14,19,23;
46:13;48:24;55:17;
57:25;58:23;59: 2;
67:12;68:16;74:17;
77:25;78:12;79:17,
23;80:24;84: 6;
94:18;95:22;96: 1,
13;97: 9;98: 5;
100: 3;108: 9;113: 7,
11;118:11,19;122: 5;
147: 3;155:12,19;
159:14;162:11;
163:12,16;164: 1;
166:16,20,24;167: 4;
168: 5, 9,13;171:18;
193: 2,22;201:19;
203: 6;219:22;
220: 2;252:17;
265: 7,11,15;359:11,
16;360:15;361: 1, 8,
17;362: 6,10,22
Good (29)
10: 3;11:12,21;
58:12,13;100: 2;
122:25;164: 7;
168:21;171:22;
191: 8;196: 3, 6, 7, 9,
16,21;214:11;220: 5;
260: 4;265:23,24;
269:13;296:24;
330: 7;345:18;
360:16,18;362: 3
Google (3)
95: 5;147:14;
200: 6
govern (2)
53:20,24
Government (1)
60: 1
Governor (2)
170: 9;289: 6
graciousness (1)
358:22
graduated (8)
59:23,25;60: 9;
170:16,19,22;269: 4,
7
grandchildren (1)
261:24
grandma (1)
254:10
grandmother (2)
215:18;254:19
grandparent's (1)
254:10
grant (2)
340:23,24
granted (2)
313:11;341:22
granting (3)
276: 4;277: 5,16
graphic (2)
64:15;165:23
great (2)
97:12;165:11
greater (1)
347: 2
grew (1)
268:13
ground (1)
47:11
grounds (11)
41: 9;47: 8,15,23;
50:15;116:23;117: 7;
121:23;138: 5;
143:19;208: 2
groups (1)
259:14
grown (1)
200:15
grueling (1)
213: 1
Guard (2)
268:16,18
Guardian (31)
28:13;173: 4, 5;
187: 8;215:14;
226:17,23;227:10,
12,19;263:13;
274:22;275: 4, 7,15;
276: 6,19;277: 7,22;
278: 6;282: 9;
292:22;293: 4;
294:10;295:20;
314: 6;316: 5;
325:19;326: 3,13,16
guess (27)
30:20;50: 8;51:25;
58:15;62:13;100:11;
132:17;134:21;
135: 1, 6;140:18;
151:15;174: 7;
191: 7;225:16;
264: 9;275:13;
280:10;292:24,25;
293:20;299:11;
305: 8, 9;337:15;
350:21;361:14
guessed (1)
327:11
guessing (1)
306: 1
guided (1)
54: 8
guilt (2)
29:19,25
guilty (2)
175:11;204: 1
H
hac (3)
17:22;245:20;
272: 9
Haley (1)
289: 6
half (9)
88:21;125: 9;
149:13;194: 7;
217:11;268:17;
318:21;332:13;
350:24
halfway (1)
360:11
halls (1)
144:14
hallway (1)
93: 5
hand (4)
11:22;156: 7;
192: 2;236:12
handed (2)
249:24,25
handle (6)
205: 6;234: 1;
239:13;287:16;
295:18;351:17
handled (6)
35:12;62:19;
84:15;164:17;
165:21;337:23
handles (2)
242:14;350:17
handling (5)
23: 6;188: 8;
300: 4;321: 6;348: 9
hands (2)
24:22;244:10
handwrite (1)
251:16
handwriting (4)
111: 8;115:15;
119:16;161:17
handwritten (4)
162: 1;215: 3;
220:22;253:19
Hang (3)
133:10;199: 7;
232: 6
happen (9)
30: 5, 7;135: 5;
166:11;202: 7,12;
310:10;312:23;
347:14
happened (29)
39:19;76:10;79: 6;
84:13,15;140:19;
141:24;142:10,11,
23;148:13,15;
150:10,10;153:10;
156:19;160: 9;
161: 3;197:10;
202: 7;222:16;
227:22;231:21;
245:13;253:22;
311:24;327: 4;
334:13;357: 6
happening (7)
40: 6;143:18;
149:19,21;246:20;
255:14;339: 2
happens (5)
92:21;147:24;
174:25;227:23;
347: 5
harass (1)
188: 7
harassed (1)
200:10
harassment (2)
145:24;218:15
hard (6)
10:22;66:21;
115:12;150:10;
215: 6;346:15
hardcopy (1)
286:25
harm (10)
73:20;80: 9,10,11,
16;83:23,24;95:19;
99:23;340: 2
Harrington (3)
20:17;21:16;22:14
hash (1)
256:15
(504) 529-3355
(16) Gambrell's - hash

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
hashtag (1)
352:10
Hattiesburg (7)
169:21,21;188:18,
21,23;207: 4;208: 9
hazy (1)
246: 5
head (2)
149:22;229: 2
hear (36)
11: 1, 1;17:15;
20:24;22:21;23: 3;
35: 3, 4;39:22;40:24;
60:15,25;89: 2,24;
90: 4;106:19;107: 1;
108:23;134:22;
157:18;169: 8, 9;
170:24,25;171:19;
181:13;182:18;
185:10;330:16;
335:24;337:24;
339: 3;352:12,14;
353:13,14
heard (20)
48:14;73: 2;74:19;
88:20;89:15;90:14;
134:18;158: 2;
185:13;194: 5;
217: 9;223:14,16;
224:12;228: 4;
281: 4, 7;306: 5;
310:12;331:11
Hearing (83)
10:18;14: 4;41:15;
43:16;48: 8;52:24;
58:22;59: 7;62:23;
77: 4;89: 5;90:20;
94: 5;107: 3;109: 1;
119: 6;121:13;
123: 2;124:16;
147: 8;157: 1;169: 6;
177:20,25;179:12;
180:19,22;181:20;
182: 4,16,21,22;
183:25;184: 1;
185:25;194:19,23;
196:18;199:11;
210: 5;211: 7,18;
212: 2,25;213: 4, 7;
214: 3, 6, 9,16,18;
219: 8;222:21;
224:20;233:25;
251:19;256:14;
258: 9,12;277:19;
285:25;295: 4;
297:13;298:10;
310: 7;313:22;
315:20;318:23;
326:14;328:22;
333:23;334: 3,20;
336: 2;338:15;
339:18;340: 8,22;
354:12,14,16;
356:10;363: 7
hearings (5)
157: 3;167: 9;
174: 6;179: 8,11
hearsay (14)
50: 1;51: 1, 7, 9;
52:15,17;53: 2,19,
25;55:12;66:25;
67: 2;74:21;192:23
Heather (8)
179:21;184:24;
189:21;198:17,18;
303:17,20,22
held (7)
105: 6;175: 3;
181:21;294: 9;
334: 3;354:12,16
help (16)
57:10;113: 1;
158:22;159: 1;
266: 4;271:11,13,16,
23;286:12;290: 2;
302:22;323:14;
343:10;344:12;
355:20
helped (9)
286:17;302:21;
306:23;321:16;
330:24,24;333: 7;
345: 1;358:10
helpful (3)
62:14,15;271:23
helps (1)
57:13
hence (1)
232:18
henceforth (1)
231:19
hereby (6)
111:13;115: 6, 8;
119:19;278: 9,12
herein (2)
278:15;282: 9
Here's (3)
255:16,22;339: 1
herself (16)
17:11;23:10;
25:24;27: 5,14;
39:23;40: 3,10,22;
47: 5;48: 5, 7,13;
132:22;244:24;
285: 8
High (4)
59:23;170:16,17;
268:14
higher (1)
105: 6
hindsight (1)
337:22
hire (1)
272: 1
History (2)
60: 1;232:25
hit (2)
233:24;238:10
hold (6)
37:24;38:11;
50:17;90:20;244:17;
343:16
holding (2)
38:21;53: 9
hole (1)
361:16
holidays (2)
261:25;263: 5
home (9)
75: 8;184:18;
198:22;254:10;
294:19;309:15;
310:15;317:23;
343: 4
homes (1)
75: 3
honest (1)
248:10
honestly (2)
307:25;324:25
honesty (2)
141:14,20
Honor (12)
58:12;59:11;
101:20;105:17;
112:17;118:25;
119: 9;120:13;
121:19;176:25;
220: 5;260:25
honorable (5)
19:24;20: 1;58: 9;
168:18;205:16
hope (3)
30: 6;266:19;
359: 5
hopefully (4)
45:22;58:25;
266: 4;267: 1
hoping (1)
248:10
horribly (1)
347: 4
Horrified (6)
91:14;93: 6,24;
197:23;198: 1;
344:22
horror (1)
93: 6
host (1)
38:19
hosted (1)
319:23
hours (5)
102:20;202: 2;
210:23;244: 9;
344:14
house (10)
165:13;184: 2,16;
194:14;200: 3;
213:22;254:11,20;
309: 6;331:20
housekeeping (2)
12: 5;182:16
huge (1)
355:20
Human (5)
176:12;185:15;
218: 8;224: 7;260: 7
hundreds (1)
92:25
hurrying (1)
267:15
husband (10)
52:12;61:14,17,21;
183: 9;271: 7, 8, 8;
273: 1;293:11
I
idea (10)
130:21;149:13,14,
17;249: 1;308:22;
314:11;321: 9,13;
345: 3
identification (6)
56: 2,15;57:20;
163: 7;195:24;
196:13
identified (6)
14: 7;45:18;49:17;
75:22;216:23;296:24
identify (2)
13:17;190:10
identifying (1)
98:12
identities (1)
13: 9
identity (1)
43:14
Ignatiev (6)
196: 2;250:19,20;
264:17;283:19,25
I-G-N-A-T-I-E-V (1)
283:20
ignored (4)
336:10;339:15;
340:18;344: 6
illustrated (1)
28: 4
images (1)
87:24
immediate (1)
297: 6
immediately (4)
76: 6;134:15;
235:11;296:16
imminent (1)
340: 2
impartial (3)
211:17;219: 1;
260:11
imperative (1)
71:11
impersonation (2)
98:17;99: 1
implemented (2)
156:21;157: 8
implicated (1)
224: 9
implies (1)
157: 3
important (11)
22: 2;37: 9;59: 8,
9;68: 8;169: 7;
260:15;268: 3;
291:12;292: 3;
315:13
imposing (2)
41:25;54: 1
improper (12)
19:19;35: 3;
125:22;156:16;
295: 4,10,15;296:11;
313:17;314: 1;
316: 6, 9
improperly (1)
296:17
improprieties (1)
185:12
impropriety (21)
26:23;27: 2, 3, 9;
40:11;47: 8,10,23;
48:10;111:18;
115:18;119:24;
139:10;140:15,24;
142: 1,16,17;148: 6,
11;161: 4
inaccurate (1)
275:23
inactions (1)
319:12
inappropriate (3)
70:22;134:13;
326:11
inbox (1)
352: 4
in-chambers (5)
294: 9;295: 4,10,
20;326: 7
include (5)
27: 8;46: 5;82:18;
178:20;283: 7
included (1)
274:17
includes (2)
156:23,25
including (7)
58:15;97:15;
194:12;217:16;
220:12;231: 1;
331:18
inconsistent (1)
48: 4
incorrect (6)
129:19;273:16;
(504) 529-3355
(17) hashtag - incorrect

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
329:22;334:22,23;
335: 2
incorrectly (1)
254: 6
increase (2)
313:10;351:25
increasingly (1)
165: 7
incredibly (1)
357: 8
indeed (1)
291: 5
indefinite (2)
124:24;125: 1
indefinitely (3)
329:25;330:10;
336:21
independence (1)
218: 7
independent (5)
19:23,25;218:10;
327:20;328: 6
independently (3)
36:20,24;63: 9
indicated (6)
196: 5;202:20;
223:17;239: 4,17;
244:21
indicates (1)
203:18
indicating (2)
67:18;221: 1
indications (1)
251: 8
indict (1)
174:22
indictment (1)
255:22
indictments (1)
97:16
indispensable (1)
19:24
individual (1)
39:10
induced (1)
23:19
inducing (1)
23:16
inflame (1)
74:11
inflammatory (11)
18: 4;25:20;32: 3;
33: 2,20,20,22;34: 1,
2,23;80:15
influence (23)
20: 5,21;21: 2,12;
22: 1,25;24: 2;26: 7;
35:23;85: 8;94: 1, 7,
10;104: 7,22;155: 1,
6;185:23;218: 6;
245: 4;246: 6;
313:15;345:10
influencing (1)
18: 1
info (1)
101:22
informal (1)
169:14
information (62)
13:17;14:14;32: 3;
33: 4;36:19;40:16,
21;61:10;67:15;
68:23;69: 9;80:19;
87: 3, 4;91: 6,10;
92: 5;94: 4;98:12;
104: 4;127: 4, 9,10,
14,16;128: 3, 7;
135:16;136: 6, 8,10;
137:16,25;138: 7, 8,
16,21;140: 2, 7;
144:12;146: 2;
155: 3;176: 8;198: 6;
204:21;235:19;
241:15;244:19;
268: 5;279: 9;
302:15;304:24;
308:16;309: 4;
314: 5, 7;321:10,18,
24;324: 7;331: 3;
345: 4
informed (1)
277:24
ingenious (1)
340: 7
inherited (12)
171:12,24;172:15,
19,22;173:15;220: 7,
7, 9,11,15;289:12
initial (1)
159:23
initially (1)
274:22
initials (1)
361:14
initiate (3)
19:18;127:13;
243: 4
initiated (6)
58:18;66:18;
129:15;136:14;
169: 1;243: 6
initiating (2)
133:17;242:24
Injunctive (1)
171: 4
innocence (1)
29:20
innocently (1)
205: 9
input (1)
10:11
inquire (2)
199: 3;362: 9
insist (7)
76:12;77: 1;
101:21;187: 7,13;
325:18;328:18
instance (3)
42: 1;122:11;
174:24
instances (2)
165:20;327:23
instead (1)
251: 7
instigating (1)
203:21
instincts (1)
261:22
instruct (2)
62:10;303: 3
instructed (8)
25:15,17;192:21;
314:25;315: 3;
321: 3;327:16,17
instruction (2)
22:13;41:14
instructions (1)
344: 2
insufficient (2)
275:17;276:20
insulting (1)
218:16
integrity (6)
18:19,23;141:14,
20;218: 7,10
intend (4)
16: 4;35:13;
266: 3;321:22
intended (5)
17:25;20:20;
53:20,23;98:24
intent (9)
21:12,25;266: 6,
19;267:15;291: 8;
322: 5;323:12,12
intention (1)
21:21
interest (7)
77: 7;164:21;
226: 8;228:21;
313: 9;328:24;
356:18
interested (1)
155:24
interfere (1)
245: 7
interim (3)
142:15;160: 5;
161: 3
internet (64)
18: 6;23: 5;24: 2;
25:22;32: 1,23;
35:19;38: 9,10,21;
67:18;71:13;77:17;
78:19;79: 3,12,14,
25;80:20;81:22;
82:25;83: 5;84:20;
87:22;93: 2,22;97: 6,
13;102:12;104:17,
19,20,22;105: 4;
130: 3,24;143: 8;
146: 6;147:13,15,25;
151:11;152: 2;
165: 2, 4, 8,25;
179: 7,10;185:14;
205:24;244:21;
245: 4;246: 7;
299:23;308:23;
309: 5;310: 3,19;
311: 5;313: 3;
318:10;343:24;
346: 8
interpretation (3)
33: 7;230:22;
255:14
interpreting (1)
46:24
interrupt (2)
42:17;358:21
interrupted (2)
161: 6;268:22
interrupting (2)
41:18;42: 5
interview (2)
221:14;261:18
interviewed (3)
24:21;261:15,17
intimidate (16)
85: 8;87: 8;93:25;
94: 6,10;104:23;
143: 3;155: 6;
185:24;188: 7;
201:13;203:14,19;
211:14;218:25;
246: 6
intimidating (2)
203:23;261: 6
intimidation (3)
185: 8;211:19;
218:15
into (62)
10:22;12:16;19: 5;
26:18;45:12,15;
50:11;55:18;56: 3, 7,
16;57:17,21;69: 8;
87: 8;94:16,22;
97:12;99: 5;117:21;
124:21;138: 8;
141:13;158:14;
162:24;163: 2, 7;
178: 5;182: 6;184: 2;
186:12;188: 8;
194:18,22;195:18;
196:22;198:22;
200: 8;205:10;
211:16;214: 2, 6, 9;
215: 5;217:25;
222:12;224:16,25;
253:19;260:25;
261: 7,18;266: 8;
267:21;275:21;
276: 2;283:13;
290:11;324: 6;
333:14,23;353:16
intrafamily (17)
61: 5;62: 5;63: 6,
13;64: 5;65: 9;75:22;
89: 9;112:22;113:18;
124: 3, 5, 7,23;
273: 3;293:12;
297:12
introduce (7)
11: 7;18: 7;56: 6;
57:17;163: 2;179:14;
261:20
introduced (6)
56: 3,16;57:21;
132:22;163: 7;
261:13
introducing (1)
13:21
investigate (7)
147:17;178:19;
274:23;275:11;
283: 6;292:23;293: 7
investigated (1)
28:14
investigating (1)
187:11
investigation (5)
114:12;169: 1;
176:13;279:16;
280:15
investigative (1)
227:17
investigatory (4)
178:13;227:13,24;
283: 1
involve (2)
16:14;171: 2
involved (37)
15: 5;17:23;24:17,
18;52:12;57: 8;
78:23;82:14;85: 5,
11;88: 1;94: 1;
140: 2;142:25;
148:16;176: 6;
178:25;188:22;
189: 7;190:18;
191: 3;196:20;
216: 7,18;247:12;
248: 2;294:24;
306:19;308:15,18;
320:13;321:14;
324:24;325:22;
326:21,22;330:18
involvement (1)
175:22
involving (14)
52:11;85:18;
106: 4;107:13;
115:13,16;117: 3;
122:15;126:13;
129:10;137:21;
146: 1;151:16;347: 3
(504) 529-3355
(18) incorrectly - involving

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
ire (1)
200:18
ironic (1)
48:15
irrefutable (1)
213:17
irrelevant (4)
37:14;73: 5, 8;
99:21
issue (59)
10:15;15: 8,10;
26: 2;27:25;30:11,
25;31:14;34: 8;
35:25;37: 9,16;38: 8,
15;42: 5;44: 9;45: 7;
46:18;48:18;52:15,
19;53: 5;62:21;
71:25;73:20,21;
74: 9;78:18;105: 2;
123: 6,12;124:15,17,
20,23,24;125: 1;
126: 1, 5,10;146:11;
157:15;169:11;
176: 3;178:24;
179:12;181: 2;
196: 2;204:19;
244:14;254:12;
311:10;313:10;
314:19;326: 6;
329:17;337:14;
339:23;340:18
issued (17)
123:19;124:10;
205:20;207:15;
213:20;253: 5;
281:14,24;294:16;
296: 6,17;309:19;
311:17,19;313:17,
22;340:16
issues (41)
12: 4;16:17;18: 8,
10;26: 9;27:20;
29:10;31:13;32: 7, 8;
34:17;35:11;42:12;
46: 3;52:21,23;
54:24;55:12;58: 3;
77:10;80: 8;109:11,
13;129:24;131: 9;
135: 3;144:22;
151:16;156: 9,25;
169: 3;178:25;
180:24;233: 3;
235:10;266:16;
314: 1;329: 5, 9,15;
357: 5
issuing (1)
215: 1
J
Jackson (3)
52:13;185:16;
204:22
jail (3)
151:10;152: 1;
182:13
Jane (1)
10: 4
January (14)
60:14;93:15;
94:21;107:21;
120:23;128: 9;
151:22;170:10;
171:13,24;173: 1,23;
289: 4;293:10
JDC (8)
76:15;89:24;
91:18;104:11;154: 6,
16;155: 3;310: 6
jeopardized (1)
87:17
jeopardy (1)
131: 3
Jerry (1)
52:13
Jim (5)
206: 5;226:11;
227: 7;250:25;
255:20
JJ (1)
254: 1
job (10)
102:24;103:17;
156:14;211: 2;
259: 9;260: 4,16;
261: 5;335:14;347: 7
jobs (3)
101:22;326: 5;
355:17
John (5)
28:13;208: 3;
243:19;274:21;
277:21
Johnson (6)
206: 6;226:16,19;
227: 7;250:25;
255:20
join (1)
14:12
Joined (1)
268:15
joint (1)
60: 4
journal (4)
195:10;197: 4;
296:18;336: 8
journals (2)
195:17;296:19
Joyce (10)
31:25;58:19;66: 2,
7;136:21;205:16;
265:19,20;268: 9;
269:15
Jude (1)
108:20
Judge (519)
16:20,23,25;17:14;
18:19;19:11,15,20,
21;20:15,21;21: 2, 5,
11;22: 1, 7,12,23;
23: 9,23,23;24: 7, 8;
25: 7, 7, 9,11,11;
26: 7,13,17;27: 1, 4,
11,12;32: 3, 4;34: 4,
5, 6, 7,14,15;35: 7,
10;39:15,22,24;
40: 2, 3,13,16,18,19,
20,25;41: 3, 4, 5,11,
12;46:24;47: 4, 7,11,
21;48: 9,14;51: 3;
58: 7,20;59:14;
60:10,16;61: 3, 5,13;
62:13;63: 3, 4,10;
64: 8;65:16,21;67: 5;
68:10,22,24;69: 2, 8,
19,24;70: 1, 2,16;
71: 3, 5;72:14;73:14,
16;75:19;76:25;
77: 9,19;78: 3, 6,23;
81: 2, 7,19;82:10,17,
24;83:22,24;84:12,
19;85:10,14;86:25;
87: 7;88: 6,19,20,25;
89: 7,11,23;90: 6,14;
91: 5, 8,12,16,18;
92:16,22;93: 9,17,
23;94:14;95:10,17,
19;96:19;97: 5;
98:18;100: 8,17,17,
20;101:18,21,21;
102:16,19,19;103: 3,
20;104: 5,10,16,23;
105: 5, 9;106:21,23;
107: 4,17,19,19;
108: 1,18;109:19;
110: 2, 6,14;111: 4,
6,15,19,23;112:10;
113:18;114: 8,14,21;
115:10,19;116: 1,19,
25;118: 4, 7;119:16,
20,25;120: 2,12;
121:25;122:21,25;
125:21;127:13;
128: 4, 8,14;129: 7,
8,16,17,24;130: 5, 7,
7,11;131: 6,17;
132: 6,11;133: 5,15,
22;134:16;135: 5, 7,
14,24;137:23;138: 3;
139:22;141: 6;
142: 9;143: 1,12,16;
144: 8,10,23;148: 8;
150: 6;152:15;
153: 6, 9,14;154: 6,
18,20,22,24;155: 9,
23,25;156: 8,14;
158: 2;159:13,20;
162: 8,19;163:25;
164: 4, 8,11;165:18;
166: 2,15,17;168:21;
169: 7,25;170: 1, 3,
5, 6, 8,23;171:10;
172: 2, 3,24;173:18;
174:14;175:17,23;
176:17;177: 3, 5,10,
16;179:25;180: 6;
181: 8,13,18;184:20;
185: 2, 2,16;186: 1,
16,23;187:15,20;
188: 2;189: 1,19,24;
190: 8;191: 1,15;
192:20;193: 5, 8,15;
194: 2, 5, 8,17;
195: 3,10,12;196:24;
197: 5,12;198: 6,20;
199:15;200:17;
201: 2, 6,24;202:13;
203: 9;204: 5,17;
205:17;206:19;
207:12,22;208:19;
209: 1, 3, 3,10,10,17,
20;210: 2,12,22,22;
211: 5,23;212:10,16,
22;213: 7,13,16,25;
214:12,20;215:11,
23;216: 7,13;217: 9,
13,17;218: 3, 8,13;
219:16;220: 9,11;
221: 6, 7;222:15;
223: 9;224:19;
225: 7,16,21;226: 2,
12;227: 8, 9,10;
232: 6;233:11,14;
234: 7,16;235: 1,24;
236:24;237:21;
238:13,20,23;239: 9,
16,24;240: 9;241:12,
24;242: 7,21;243: 4;
245:22;246:12;
247: 5;248:13,17,19,
20,21,25;254:14,17,
18;258:25;259:10;
263:22;264: 2;
265: 4;270:17;
272:22;281:13,24;
288:25;289: 6,12;
293:25;294: 9,16;
296:17,20;297:16;
298:12,15,20;299: 7,
24,25;300: 3, 4;
302: 6, 7;303:18;
304:16,23;305: 1;
306: 5, 6;308:10;
309: 2, 2,19;310: 6,
11;311: 5,17;313:12,
16;314:13;315:25;
316:22;317:10,10;
318: 3,14;321: 4;
325: 5,11;326: 5;
327: 1, 8,13;328:12,
16,17;329: 6, 8;
330:22;331:11,14;
333:24;334: 3,18;
335:21;336: 8,10,14;
338: 4;339: 3,14,15;
341: 6, 6;345: 9, 9;
348: 8, 8;349: 2,21;
350: 7;352:13,13;
353:13,14,17;
354:12,16,23;355: 6;
356:10,12
Judges (28)
17: 2, 5,15;18:17,
23;19: 2;20: 5, 7;
23: 8;24: 3;25:18;
35: 7,14,22;38: 2,22;
60:22,24;69:21;
75: 7;85: 7;91:14;
97:17;155: 3;235:16;
319:12;345:10;
354: 3
Judge's (38)
21:12;22:25;23: 6;
26: 8;37:25;39: 8;
47:13;75: 3,10;
80:17;85: 5;87: 5;
95: 1;142:25;152:10;
161:13;164:17;
198: 2;217:11;
220:10;260:17;
301: 8;302:16;
303: 3;313:15;
315: 1, 5;321: 9,15;
322: 7;342: 3;343: 2,
14;344: 3,23;345: 4,
17;354:18
Judges' (1)
18: 1
judgeship (1)
170: 7
judgment (25)
24:25;144: 5;
173:13;176:18;
177: 1, 8;178: 4;
179: 4;193:18;
232:18,18;264: 3,10,
16,22;282:15;
283:12,16,24;
288:21;299: 7, 8;
352:23;353: 5,10
judgments (2)
149: 2;174:10
Judicial (30)
14:19;19:22;
26:14,25;40: 9,12;
59:15;60:11;88:25;
106:23;108:20;
109:25;127:12;
132:15;152:25;
153:15;201:13;
203:14,19;232: 3,11;
233: 7,10;235:15;
243:20,23;260:22;
293:13;297: 5;
335:21
(504) 529-3355
(19) ire - Judicial

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
judiciary (2)
19:24;239:11
July (37)
213:21;214:23,24;
215: 1;249: 3,12,13,
14,14,15,16,19,22;
250:13;252: 4, 6, 9,
10,21;253:12;
255:12;256: 7,11,22;
257:24;258: 2;
294: 8,13;295: 3;
296: 6;309:19,23;
312: 1, 2;315:24;
316: 3;317:13
jump (1)
151:19
June (17)
52:14;111: 5;
115: 1,25;116: 6;
119:14;121:10,14;
140:18;142:12;
181:22;182: 4;
223: 9;224: 2;
281:13,24;289:17
jurisdiction (43)
54: 5;62:24;63:22;
64: 1, 2, 4,22;123:16,
19;124:10,14;
164:16;186:25;
187: 6;204:18;
233:18,22;235: 3;
237: 3;244:16,17,25;
297: 8,18;299: 7;
314:10;325:13,18;
329:15,17,19,21,24;
336:16,20,25;
337:13;338: 9,13;
339: 1,22;340: 1,17
jurisdictional (2)
235: 9;337: 2
jurisdictions (1)
165: 5
jury (3)
53:21,24;54:12
justice (29)
19:25;26: 5,11;
81:23;100:19,21;
105:15;170: 6;
184:19;190: 6,15;
212: 4;216: 5;
322:13,17,19,23;
323: 2,19,20;324: 1,
4;344: 4,13;347: 2;
357:17,23,25;358: 5
justified (1)
46:23
juvenile (4)
164: 8,11,13,14
K
KALMBACH (2)
11:17,18
keep (4)
75:15;147:24;
176: 7;256:18
keeping (2)
205:12;210:15
Keister (16)
109:24,24;110:15,
18;112:24;114: 5;
116: 9;119: 3;121: 1,
11;135:23;136: 1;
140:12,23;142: 2;
160: 1
K-E-I-S-T-E-R (1)
109:25
Kern (1)
57: 6
key (1)
18:10
kid (1)
184:10
kids (18)
14:22;15: 5, 8;
29: 3;83: 4;123: 3;
221:21,23;222:24;
228:14;231: 1;
233: 1;254:11;
257: 5;258:20;
262: 2,25;319:23
kind (25)
12:13;16: 3,11;
30: 9;43: 2;59: 5;
66:15;70: 7;84:17;
85:15;110: 7;169:10;
175: 3;199:20;
248:15;258:18;
259: 9;260:16;
271:11;311:13;
312:24;327:10;
358: 1,17;359:10
kinds (3)
170:25;173: 2;
205:25
knew (22)
71: 6,13;84:20,23;
85: 2, 9;130:22;
132:12;135:10,11;
147:10;149:17,20;
185:13;235:17;
242: 8;248: 8;
271:11;288:16,20;
325: 3, 4
knowing (2)
103:16;218:14
knowingly (7)
23:16;32:15;
33:13;34:20;39:18;
126:19,21
knowledge (18)
65: 8;68:10;95:23,
25;96:21;128:15;
130:21;175: 9;
192: 2, 8,17;199: 1;
210: 2, 7;274:25;
280: 4;290:17;
357:20
known (3)
140: 1;189:11;
288:12
knows (5)
77:22;96:15;
143:12;225: 8;360: 7
L
LA (1)
181:12
lack (3)
29:16;202: 4;
299: 6
lady (7)
43:11,21;183: 2;
184: 2, 3, 4;200:14
lag (1)
174:24
Lamar (1)
200: 4
land (2)
171: 4;343: 4
language (9)
20:13;116:25;
256:10;325:23;
326: 1;330:19,22;
344:25;356: 2
large (1)
186:21
last (24)
43:11;61: 2;79: 7;
80:18;96:20;104: 9;
106:21;119:15;
121: 7;147: 9;
186:21;189:25;
191: 5;201: 7;
204:12;251: 4;
261:12;265:18;
308: 7;325:10;
356:23;359: 3, 6,24
lastly (3)
26:20;54:11;
278:18
later (17)
56:20,22;73:12;
80:21;85:24;87: 4;
101:13,15;106:13;
177:15;179:10;
191:25;217: 1;
256: 3;302: 2;
332:13;340:15
latest (1)
161:10
Law (121)
14:19;20: 6;21: 3,
7;29:23;34: 9;36: 6;
37: 9;38: 1, 4, 6,12;
39: 6;41:21;45:14;
60: 2, 5, 7, 8;74: 5;
89: 4;90:21;102:22;
107: 2;108:25;
117: 8;125:25;
126:21;155:10,24;
156:15;164: 7,13,19;
165:19;170:21;
171: 8;173:25;
178:22;192: 4,17,21,
23;199: 6;203:18;
204: 2, 9;205: 8;
206: 7;207: 5;
210:25;218:17;
221: 4;232: 2,11;
233: 7, 7;241:20,21;
242: 1;243: 8;
244:22;245:13,18;
249: 8,24;251: 2;
253:22;259:17;
263:14;269: 7, 8, 9,
12,16,20,24;270: 2,
8,11;271:11;282: 4;
283: 9;295:14,14;
315: 7, 8,16,17,21,
22;330: 2, 2;336: 2,
22;338: 5,15;339: 4,
20,21;340:24;341: 3,
4, 9,10,12,13;342: 9,
13,20,22,23,25;
343: 5,15,16,17;
344: 5;345:11;
354:19;355:25
lawful (2)
47:11;338:20
lawfully (1)
47:24
lawyer (22)
17:12;20:20;21: 4,
17;22:21;23:12,15,
19;58:23;84:13;
96:10;107:12;206: 5;
234: 2;238:25;
246:10;256:12,22;
263: 3,12,13;332: 3
lawyers (16)
20: 4, 6;200:22;
215: 4, 5;223: 8,10,
17;224: 3;225:25;
226: 1;234: 1;239: 8,
21;251:16;256:15
lawyer's (2)
204:22;256: 1
lax (1)
67: 3
lay (1)
54:11
layers (2)
99:17,17
LC3 (1)
100:19
lead (2)
32:18;262: 6
Leading (1)
69: 6
learn (3)
69: 2;182:11;
247:25
learned (7)
179: 5;183: 7, 8;
185:20;199:24;
203:20;223: 4
learning (2)
38:17;200:13
learns (2)
41:10,12
least (17)
13: 7;43:10;
114: 9;143:24;
169: 2;193:12;
270: 4;275:10,15;
276:18;279: 4;
288: 1;293: 7;308: 2;
311: 3;345:20;346: 3
leave (3)
245:13;287: 3;
363: 2
Lee (1)
20:11
left (6)
65:18;250: 2, 9;
251:25;287:17;
347:19
legal (14)
19:12;22: 8;32: 7;
48:20;53: 9;54: 2;
157:10;213:11;
315:17;316:21;
317: 2;323: 9,10;
343:11
legally (2)
32:11;316:25
legislatively (1)
60:20
legislature (1)
60:25
legitimate (1)
338:19
Lemoine (1)
47:12
lend (1)
302:13
length (1)
158:13
lengthy (1)
28: 6
Lens (2)
349:19,21
less (1)
53:25
lessened (1)
53:17
lets (1)
147:14
letter (27)
51: 8;65:24;70:19,
24;72: 1, 3, 8,16;
134:10;136:17;
137: 1,11;138:19;
(504) 529-3355
(20) judiciary - letter

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
139:22;140:20;
141: 2;159:23;
201: 3;202:23;
243:22;305:24;
306:13;327:25;
339:20;341: 4;
342:15;343:16
letters (2)
137:24;144:11
letting (1)
243: 9
Lexus (1)
228:24
license (1)
245:19
licensed (3)
17:21;272: 6;
295:11
life (3)
131:10;248:21;
260: 8
lift (1)
64: 4
liked (3)
98:13,21,23
likelihood (1)
352: 1
likely (1)
181:15
likes (5)
96:22;97: 7,21;
145: 7,15
likewise (1)
56:22
liking (1)
346:21
limit (1)
262:10
limited (3)
125: 2;215:16;
230: 1
line (27)
42:11;69:17,22;
75:18;92: 1;121: 7;
128:14,19,20,23,24;
129: 1;171: 4;
218:19;236:24;
238:12;240:15,17;
241: 5,11,16;242:20;
247: 4;285:20;
286: 5;301:17;
311:12
lines (2)
187: 5;244:24
link (18)
85:24,25;96: 5, 8,
21;106:12,14,18;
191:24;192: 1;
320:11;344:15;
349:24;350: 9;
352:14;354: 5,20;
355: 7
linked (13)
24:19;79: 1;88: 2;
95: 6,20;96: 8;98:22;
99: 8;227:25;319:18;
320: 8;348: 4;352:19
linking (2)
194: 3;197:13
links (15)
78:20;79: 3;86: 1,
4,21;87:25;88: 8,19;
90: 3;97:21;192: 2;
193: 6;216:23;
217: 3;352:15
list (2)
321: 9;345: 3
listed (8)
25: 8;68: 8;69:22;
71: 7, 7;82:15;91:11;
304:20
listen (17)
37:25;38: 3;39: 3,
5;74: 4;85:22;89:20;
106:11,16,19;155: 9;
156:15;191:23;
216:24;258:20;
259:16;350: 8
listened (2)
222:23;228: 2
lists (16)
91:16,16,17;
105:16;108:23;
154: 1, 8;179:21;
190: 7,16;195: 5;
198: 6;212: 5;216: 6;
304:23;352:11
litem (26)
28:13;173: 5;
187: 8;215:14;
226:17,24;227:10,
19;263:13;274:23;
275: 4, 8,15;276: 6,
19;277: 7,22;282: 9;
292:23;293: 4;
294:10;314: 6;
316: 5;325:19;
326:13,16
litems (2)
173: 5;295:21
Litem's (2)
278: 6;326: 3
literally (9)
84:16;132:21;
134: 5, 6;172: 4, 7;
197:10;238: 1;
244:22
litigants (2)
105: 3;145: 5
litigate (1)
202: 4
litigating (3)
30: 4,11;41: 2
litigation (6)
35:24;37:13;
117:13;155: 2;
274:16;303: 7
little (19)
14:13;40:18;
42:11;73:11;76:13;
80:20;102:25;
103:15;113: 5;
181:14;211: 3;
268:18,20;274:13;
322:21;324:12;
337: 5;339: 6;355:23
live (2)
12: 6;181:10
lived (4)
187: 2;200: 2,14;
325:15
lives (1)
344: 9
living (1)
75: 5
lobby (1)
94:25
lobbying (2)
77:17;85: 6
local (4)
230:19,20;295:16,
17
located (1)
234:11
Locker (1)
170:16
lodged (1)
240: 4
long (10)
78:22;143: 4,22;
148: 4;170: 3;270: 1,
9;285:23;288: 9;
343:20
longer (7)
143:15;150: 4;
268:21;273:10,14;
359: 9,19
look (55)
71:17;76: 9,24;
80: 8,10,20;85:14;
87:10;93:10;101:17;
109:20;110:20;
116: 1;119: 4;121: 6;
150:20,25;153: 5;
155:23;158: 9;
159:23;161:12;
171:14,15;173: 9;
177: 7, 7;189:19;
197:14;209:13;
214:17;216: 8;
219: 8, 9,10;229: 3;
231:10;250:11;
256: 6;258: 1;
271:20;302: 1, 2;
315: 5, 6,20;318:24;
344: 7;345:11;
348:14,17;350: 3;
355: 6;356:19,20
looked (37)
10:23;72:22;
80:18;84: 3;114: 6;
116: 8;117:18,20;
120: 5;121: 2, 7;
122:12;183: 1;
188:16;198:15;
199:17;213: 3;
241:20;242: 1;
249:23;264: 2;
279:21;280:25;
281: 3;283:11;
292:25;300:14;
301:13,15;303:16;
304: 5;309:22;
315:19;324:18;
337:21;346: 3,11
looking (31)
26:25;66:21;
75:20;76: 2;110: 2;
112:23;143:17,17;
147: 6;149:20;
171:17;176:20;
179:17;181: 9;
182:24;189: 1;
191: 8,16;223: 5;
224: 4;277:16;
301:17,22;307:17,
18;308: 1;317: 5;
320:25;322:14;
325:23;339: 5
looks (10)
76:19;110:24;
113:10;174:21;
227: 7;258: 1;308: 1,
4, 5;353:25
lose (2)
199:23;287: 4
losing (1)
33:24
lost (2)
213: 2;274: 1
lot (24)
35:11;37: 9;51: 7;
66:20;78:15;92:19,
20;135: 2;144:18,19;
150:10;151:23;
155: 4;160:17;
166:11;173:10;
226:22;227:20,24;
245:14;271:25;
313: 9;357:18;
358:17
lots (2)
183:11;261:23
loud (4)
111:10;115: 5;
119:17;178: 5
Louisiana (99)
16:16,25;17:18,23;
19:10,21;20:12;
21:22;22: 6;25:12,
13;26:15;41:21;
52:10;57: 6;59:17,
25;66: 8;69:19;70: 1,
21;76:16;77: 3,24;
89: 2;91:19;92: 5;
100:12,16;101:24;
102: 2, 3;104:12,15;
106:25;108:22;
109:14,14;110:11;
131:20;133: 1;
141:16;164:19;
165:19;187: 1, 2, 7;
201: 4;208:22;
209: 2;234: 2;
235:12;238:25;
239: 8,21;242:18;
244:23;245:25;
256: 1;269:17;
272:13;273: 4;
288: 2, 6;293:14,19;
295: 6;297: 6,22;
298: 1, 5;303: 7;
314:10;316:19;
317: 1, 8, 9;318: 8,
18;322:14,17;
325:14,15,18;
328:21;329:12;
331: 4;335:23;
336:15;337: 7;
341:19;342:10;
344:17;345:22;
346: 4;347:13;
355:19;356:15;
357:15
love (1)
291: 8
loves (2)
195: 7;336: 5
loving (1)
262:15
LSU (3)
60: 2, 7, 8
lunch (4)
167: 1, 9,15;
168:12
Lynn (1)
52:13
Lyons (8)
179:21;184: 4;
189:21;198:17,18;
303:17,20,23
M
ma'am (7)
142: 7;221: 2;
240:19,25;249: 7, 9;
258:23
machine (2)
70:10;327: 9
Madam (5)
11:24;43: 9;
158: 9;201:24;266: 1
maiden (1)
268:11
(504) 529-3355
(21) letters - maiden

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
mail (4)
207: 6, 8;244:12;
245:12
main (3)
78:16;169:20;
183:21
maintain (2)
52:17;289:22
major (1)
213: 2
majority (1)
99: 5
makes (4)
22:14;88: 4;97: 4;
292: 2
making (8)
19:17;22:10;
39:18;145:17;190: 9;
218:22;278:12;
321:14
malicious (1)
218:23
malign (1)
261: 4
manage (1)
326: 6
management (1)
57: 4
mandatory (1)
143:19
Mandeville (2)
268:12;328: 8
manila (1)
223: 6
manner (2)
188: 8;266: 6
MANNING (146)
11: 8, 9,21,23;
16: 2;28: 1,17;29:17;
30:22;31: 6,23;
41:16;43: 4, 8,18;
46: 6;49:11;52: 5;
55: 3, 8;56:12;57: 9,
14;58: 2,11,16;59: 4;
67: 1;68:13,18,21;
69: 7;73:10;74:10;
75:19;78: 2;80: 5;
81: 1;83: 7,12,16,21;
85:13;86: 8,12,19;
88:15,17;90: 2, 5,19;
94:13;95:18;96: 9;
99:22;100: 5, 7;
101: 1,11,16;103:19;
104: 2;107:10,18,25;
108:13,17;112: 7, 9,
15,18,25;113: 4, 9,
15,17;117:17;
118:15,23;122: 9,20;
123:21;124: 2;
136:18;138:19;
140:20;144:12;
146:16,23;151:13;
152: 3, 8;157:20;
158:24;159:10,19;
160:24;161:25;
162: 6;163: 4,22;
166:18;167: 6,16;
168:20;171:21;
172: 1;185: 1;
192:10,19;193: 4;
194: 1;201:23;
202:25;203: 8;
209:19;219:15;
252: 6,13,19;253: 2;
263:21;264: 1;
265: 3,17,22,25;
267: 3,10;275:25;
276:10,16;291: 7;
292: 1, 7,12,19;
339: 8;353: 8;
359:14,18,23;360: 5,
17,24;361:24
many (15)
16:14;29:10;
31:18,18;69:20;
75: 9,12,12;87:11,
11;108:16;110:16;
123:23;126:13;
202: 1
map (2)
200: 6;255:17
March (10)
137:12;138:19;
139: 8;140:11,20;
141: 2,24;175: 1;
285:11;311: 9
Marie (1)
250:16
Marion (10)
186:10;194:10;
208: 7,10;209:12;
213: 8;217:14;
270:18,25;331:15
mark (1)
163: 1
marked (5)
56: 1,14;57:19;
163: 6;195:24
married (4)
70: 7;183: 8,11;
200: 1
marrying (1)
170:21
Master's (2)
60: 3, 4
material (2)
80:13;229: 9
materials (1)
65: 3
matte (1)
329:19
matter (76)
20:16;28: 9;45:14;
51:12;53:14;63: 6,
17,20,21;64: 4,11,12,
22;65: 1,10,11;66: 9;
84: 4;109:24;111:18;
112:20;113:19;
114:22;115: 4, 7,18;
119:24;120: 3, 4,25;
121: 9;123:15,19;
124:10,13;151:15;
171: 9;173: 9,20;
174:14;175:19,19;
180:20;181: 3;
186:25;192:25;
194:18;233:20;
234: 3;238: 2;
244:17;251: 6;
266:22;270:23;
273:24;275:24;
282: 2, 3;284:18;
285:15;289:13;
294: 1;297:17,18;
325:13;329:14,21,
23;336:16,24;338: 9,
13,25;339:22;
342:19;345:23
matters (22)
41:22;45:13,17;
61:18;62:20,25;
65:14;75:15,25;
82:25;84: 1;91: 2;
112: 4;121:16;
147:10;173: 4,14;
176: 1, 2,11;303: 9;
337: 6
Maurer (26)
28:10;61: 6,14,22;
62: 2;63:11;69:17;
81:12,13;112:21;
116: 9;121: 1;
122:14;123: 1,25;
189:11;270:24;
273: 1, 2;289:14;
293:11,19,22;
297:21;299: 3,21
M-A-U-R-E-R (1)
61: 6
Maurer's (1)
15: 8
may (58)
10:13,14;11:12;
13:14;18:22;30:24;
31: 9;33:14;34:22;
51:23;52:17;54: 7;
55:13,21;66:11;
73: 6;74:21;101: 8;
110:24;111:15;
113: 1;114: 4;
115:10;119:21;
127:15;133: 9;
135:22;136: 2;
140:13,21;141:24;
142:18;146: 7;
163:25;172: 4,20;
176: 8;195:17;
201:10;203:12;
215: 6;220:18;
221: 2, 5, 9;222: 2;
228:23;261: 1;
265:10;266: 4;
272:19;285: 5;
320:18;324: 6;
330: 6;351:21,25;
362:17
maybe (31)
12:12,25;29:10;
38:15,16;62:13;
68:19;72:19,21;
79: 1;94: 2;114:15;
132:20;149:12;
165:12;174: 8;
175: 5;261:12;
281: 6;286:12;
292:24;307:13;
318:12;333: 2, 5;
334:24;337:11;
345:25;347:17;
355:23;361:14
McCool (196)
11:14,15,16;17: 9,
16,18;18: 3,16;19: 1,
15;20: 2;22:21;23: 4,
21;24: 1, 4;25: 5,23;
26:16;27:10;28:19;
30:20;32: 1;34: 8;
35: 9;37:23;39:23;
40: 1, 5,17,23;41: 2,
8,10;46:22;48:16;
51:20;58:20;62: 4;
64: 9,23;66: 3, 7,13,
19;69:11;70:19;
72: 4;73:13;74: 3;
80:21;81: 9;83: 9;
88: 1;95: 1,15,21;
96: 6,19;97: 7,20;
98: 2,12;99: 7;
100:22;102: 1;
105:19;107:22;
108: 2;110: 5;114: 1,
9;116:15,20;117: 4;
118: 2,10;120: 9,21;
121:20;122:15,17;
125:13;126: 6, 9,11,
13,15;127: 3,22;
128:18,25;129:17,
21;131:21;132: 3, 8;
133: 8,18,25;134: 9,
19;135:21;136: 7,21,
25;137: 8,13,18,22;
138:24;139: 1,12;
140:22;141: 9;
142:24;143:14;
144: 3,17,24;147:21;
148: 1, 6,17,25;
149:25;150:23;
151: 2;153: 5;
158:21;159:12;
160: 8;189: 5;
201:10;202:21;
203:11,21;205:17;
206: 6,25;207: 9,15;
208: 6;211:21;
212: 7,12,17,24;
215: 6;216:10,17;
218:19;225: 7;
240:11;241:13;
242:24;243: 5,14;
244:12,17,21;
245:18;248: 7;
252:10;260:24;
265:19,20,23;266: 7,
13;267:11;268: 2,10;
269:16;273: 6;
275: 1;281:15;
284: 3;292:20;
298: 9;299:12;
302:11;303:12;
304:25;308:14;
309:25;311: 8;
319: 9;330:18;
334:25;335:16;
341: 5;343:13;
350:22;355:14;
358:18
McCool's (18)
19: 3;22: 4;25: 3;
26:21;31: 1;50: 6;
67:22,24;69:17,21;
79: 3;138:21;139:10;
146:15;147: 7;
241:22;266: 5;360: 9
mean (36)
36:18;54:21;
72:23;75: 2;79:21;
94:11;106:17;
139:17;158: 1;
160:13;161:14;
174: 2;184:13;
220: 8;229: 1;
242:23;243:22;
275:23;286:14;
288:22;290: 5,24;
291:20;305:25;
311:22;318:19;
321:16;330:15;
342: 1,21;346: 7,14,
16;347:12,19;352: 6
meaning (1)
296:10
means (15)
20: 5;21: 2;26:10;
36:11,14;83:20;
157:25;175:14;
221:15;230:18;
253:21,24;316:11;
330:16;342:17
meant (5)
206: 3,11;230:13;
299:16;318:16
meantime (1)
160:10
Meanwhile (2)
289:16;299:20
(504) 529-3355
(22) mail - Meanwhile

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
measures (1)
12: 5
meat (1)
31:24
mechanism (2)
242:12,13
media (13)
18: 6;23: 5;24: 2;
25:16;32: 2,24;
35:20;104:21;146: 2,
10;299:23;308:24;
343:25
mediation (1)
157: 2
medical (2)
165:16;278:24
meet (3)
168:22;191: 2;
271: 3
meeting (2)
294: 9,16
meetings (2)
295:10,20
meets (1)
33:14
member (2)
58:24,24
members (2)
54: 1;92:25
memo (10)
19: 4, 7;20:10;
22: 4;26:22;38:19;
47:10;228:21;
299:14;332: 4
memoranda (1)
10:20
memorandum (5)
42:14;50:18;
266: 9,24;291: 4
memory (6)
230: 8;286:14;
309:17;318:20;
327:20;328: 6
memos (2)
16:10,10
mental (3)
117:11;161:24;
162: 2
mention (7)
10: 7,19;14:24;
90: 1;160:18;190:10;
351:15
mentioned (12)
12:25;47: 4;97:16;
100:25;109: 7;
147:15;160:22;
199:12;266: 2;
351:22;360:21;
361: 2
mentions (2)
14:22;95:13
merit (5)
28:15;29:16;
30:17;275:16,17
message (1)
352: 3
met (5)
58:14;71: 4;82: 2;
271: 7;308:21
Mexico (1)
151:25
Michael (25)
28: 9,11;61:24;
82: 3;171: 9;174:16;
175:11;177:19;
181: 5;250:15;
254: 2;255:21;
264: 3;270:23;
274: 9,12,18;289:13,
19,20;293:16;
298:17,21;309:21;
316: 1
Michelle (2)
71:21;91:22
middle (3)
76:24;335:20;
349:15
might (17)
33: 8, 9;60: 6;
62:13;105: 2;138:10;
146:11;165:11;
176: 1, 9;190:10;
203:25;205:10;
226: 2;271:22;
310:22,23
Mike's (1)
254:20
miles (1)
170:18
military (1)
268:16
mind (5)
43:19;80:22;85: 7;
104:23;343: 2
mine (3)
236:18;247:13;
248: 3
minor (55)
12:24;24:12,17,18,
20;28:12;61:23;
64:17,19;82: 2,20;
85:19;89: 3;105:16;
106: 5;107: 1;
108:24;174:17;
176: 6;178: 9;190: 7,
17;191: 2, 4,20;
194:13;195: 5;
197: 4;212: 5, 7,12;
213:18;216: 6,17;
228:22;251:20;
274:10,18;278:14,
24;282: 3,22;293:15;
296:14;331: 9,19;
336: 1, 5;344: 4, 9;
352:12,16;361:19,
21,23
minors (9)
13: 4, 5;14: 7;
24:10;82:14;85:20;
151:16;190:11;
362: 5
minor's (1)
360:22
minus (1)
359: 2
minute (6)
20:22;88:23;
169: 5;219:20;
344:19;359:24
minutes (7)
132:20,21;168: 1,
4;257:11;265:13;
360: 2
misconduct (8)
23:14;27:22;
33:11;41:25;80:10,
11;107:12;108: 3
mishandled (1)
347: 4
misinterpret (1)
49:14
mislead (1)
33:17
misleading (18)
25: 6,21;32: 2;
33: 1, 4, 5, 8, 9,12,16,
17;34:23;39:14;
338:21;339: 7,11,13;
342: 6
misrepresentation (11)
90: 7,22;107: 5,14;
108: 7;109: 4;197: 1,
9;209:25;210: 1;
338:22
misrepresentations (1)
99: 8
misrepresentative (1)
339: 7
missing (1)
236:18
Mississippi (124)
14:18;16:15,20;
17:20;19:11,16,20;
22: 7,11;24:24;25: 3;
28: 9;34: 7, 9,10,13;
36: 2, 5,12;37:10;
40: 4;41:21;42:15;
58:21;62:22;63: 2,
24;64: 1;85: 2;
100:13;123:10,12;
125: 6;129:10;
166: 2;169:25;
170: 7,19,20;171: 1;
194:10;201:14;
203:16;204:13;
208:22;209:10,12;
213: 9;217:14;
221:13;228:23,24;
229: 5;232: 1, 2,11,
16;233: 7;242: 6, 9,
14;243:23;245: 7,19,
24;263: 9;270:18;
271: 1,10,13,15;
272: 3, 6;280: 3, 8;
283:21;284: 4,22;
285:21;287: 3, 8,11,
19,22;288: 1, 4,13;
289: 5, 9,18;290:15;
292:22;294: 2,11;
295:12,15;298:12;
299: 6;303: 8;312: 6;
314: 4,23;316:20,24;
317:15;318: 8;
324:15;326: 2, 4,10;
331: 3,16;332:16;
336:18;337: 7;
338:17,24;345:22;
346: 5;352:23;
354:13,14,17;357:15
Mississippi's (2)
14:20;337:13
misstatements (1)
126:21
misstates (1)
125:25
Mitchell (1)
91:19
mode (1)
134:23
model (2)
20:18;21:21
modification (1)
250:23
modifying (2)
262: 9;313:19
molested (6)
181:15;194:15;
212:13;289:24;
311:21;331:21
mom (4)
152: 1;254:13,13,
24
moment (1)
42:18
momentarily (1)
148:12
Monday (4)
102:20;210:23;
230: 8;254:23
monitored (1)
87:12
monitoring (1)
150:15
months (4)
87:11;149: 8;
255:21;313:24
more (24)
13:12,14;54: 7,24;
59: 8;67: 3;101:22;
125:11;145:10;
158:19;160:17;
162:10;169: 7,14;
219: 5;278:24;
281: 6;292: 2;
293:20;301:21;
309:12;320:25;
344:12,15
Morgan (3)
226:22;227: 2, 5
morning (10)
10: 3;11:12,21;
58:12,13;122:25;
164: 5;202: 1;
235:25;359: 1
most (11)
37:17;72:21;
102:24;174: 5;
181:17;199:22;
211: 2;260: 1;285: 7;
286:18;361:18
mostly (2)
17: 4;171: 5
mother (17)
24:21;88:10;
151:10;183: 7;
189:16,17;195:21;
196: 4;218:17;
254: 2;255:18;
257: 4, 5;261:22;
281: 8;286:16;327: 6
motion (57)
14: 9;31:10;39:24;
41:11;47: 4;75:24;
109:23;110: 4,23;
112:20;113:22,25;
114: 5;116: 2,13,16,
20;117: 1,25;120:13,
17,20,24;121:19;
126:10;135:22;
140:12;141: 5,10;
148: 6;160: 7, 8,14;
161: 1,16;172:25;
173: 7;177:18,20;
181: 3;224:20;
258:12;262:10;
263: 4;264: 6;
272:17;276: 4;
277: 5, 6,17,20;
279:17;280:15;
289:17;295: 5;
298:10,16
motions (12)
26:12,16;27:11;
39:15;46:18,21;
47: 6;109:21;112: 3;
117:18;161: 9;
182:12
motive (1)
35:11
mouth (1)
252: 7
mouthing (1)
40: 4
move (12)
106: 1;110:22;
(504) 529-3355
(23) measures - move

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
115:23;159:24;
170:14;175: 8;
281:12;287: 1;
291:16;315:24;
318:22;319: 8
moved (1)
287: 5
mover (1)
119:22
mover's (1)
141:14
moving (1)
80:22
MPA (1)
60: 4
much (24)
10:11;50:25;62: 7,
10;84: 9;96:17;
142:20;149:19;
163:17;166:21;
169:15;195:10;
225:25;243: 1;
263:20;265: 8,13;
274: 1;280: 3;
334:13;336: 8;
339:10;359: 9,19
multi-part (1)
107: 8
multiple (2)
26:12;39:15
must (2)
112:23;344: 7
myself (15)
93:23;110:17;
111: 3;114:23;
129:25;135:13;
140: 6, 8;191: 6;
204: 2;208:18;
209:20;243: 8;
248:23;260: 3
N
name (39)
10: 3;59:12,14;
67:25;69:21;70: 7;
81: 7;87:23;88: 2,24;
91:16;95: 6;98:10,
11;99: 8;132:18,20;
134:11,11;147:15;
154: 1;169:18;
183: 3;189: 4;195: 5;
231: 1;239:25;
240: 9;241:19,22,25;
247:12;248: 3;
268: 5,11;281: 8;
320:20;323: 1;327: 9
named (2)
130:22;248:12
names (36)
12:23;13: 4,16;
14: 7,17,22,25,25;
15: 4, 5;24:16;36: 4;
58:25;82:15,16,18,
20,22;89: 4;105:16;
108:24;190: 7,13,14,
16,17;212: 5;213:17;
216: 6;232:14;
233: 2;352:11;
360:22;361: 9,16;
362: 5
name's (1)
268: 9
naming (1)
353: 4
Nanine (18)
11:16;32: 1;58:19;
66: 2, 7;81: 9;
105:19;136:21;
151: 2;189: 5;
205:16;212: 7;
216:10;265:19,20;
268: 9;269:15;
302:11
narrative (1)
68:19
narrow (1)
38:25
narrowed (1)
54:25
National (1)
132:14
nature (5)
137:17;171: 6;
242:19;248: 6;282: 1
near (1)
200: 2
necessary (1)
267: 7
need (33)
21:17,23,25;29:11;
33:18;35:13;42:18;
53:17;55: 1;119: 3;
145: 6;150: 2, 3;
158:15;160: 6;
197:16;202:17;
205: 2;214:22;
242: 7;246: 8;
254:24;267: 1,14;
277: 4;285: 9;
292:15;294: 6;
332: 2, 7;347: 6;
355:20;356:19
needed (5)
127: 7;150: 7;
200: 9;227:17;
261:21
needs (7)
42: 6;72:13;
185:17;206:21;
254:15;292: 9;
337:21
negative (5)
30:19;40:20;
137:13,17;252: 5
Neither (5)
178:16;283: 3;
330: 9,11;333:21
Nelson (10)
10: 6;43:22,23;
58:25;155:14;
163:20,24;164: 3;
166:13;361:20
nevertheless (1)
338: 5
new (12)
60:23;151:25;
184:11;185: 8;
255:19;257: 6;
261:13,20;268:13;
292:22;293:11;
351: 8
Next (33)
16: 3;25:14;33: 1,
19;35:18;85:21;
88: 6,12,18;106:10;
114:15;191:22;
194: 2;207:12;
211: 7,23;212: 6;
213: 5,13;217: 6;
251:18,19,20;276: 2;
281:19;297:14;
312: 9;317:17;
337:25;340:16;
350: 2;355: 1,10
night (3)
79: 7;80:18;96:20
Nine (1)
268:10
nobody (2)
256: 3;337:12
nol- (1)
254: 7
NOLA (1)
349:19
nol-prossed (3)
175:14;254: 5;
255:22
none (1)
144:15
nonetheless (1)
127: 1
non-profit (4)
100:21;322:23;
323: 5, 8
noone (1)
92:15
nor (9)
153: 1;178:16;
209:20;244:11;
272: 2;283: 3;
330:11;333:21;
334: 1
normally (5)
72: 6;176: 7,13;
226:18;247:24
North (1)
59:16
northern (1)
59:22
note (5)
31:10;53:22;81: 3,
4;247: 4
noted (1)
20:18
notes (25)
53:15;172:20;
174: 1;180:25;
215: 3,12,17;220:18,
20,21,22;249: 3,21,
22;252: 4;253: 9,12,
20,22;255:13;256: 5,
11,17,18,22
notice (7)
31:14;138:11;
206:25;245:12;
282: 7;313:20;
347:16
noticed (8)
206: 4, 6, 7,13,14;
207: 2;277:23;362: 9
notices (1)
206:10
November (2)
35:10;145: 1
nowhere (2)
314: 9,11
number (25)
13: 4, 5;32:21;
41: 2;48: 5;49:18;
69:22;74:13;76:14,
19;101:25;151: 1;
154:10,13;156:21;
162:14;198: 7, 9;
240:23;241:14,22;
250:14;270:24;
283: 2;343:18
numbered (4)
81: 4;268: 1;
305:19,21
numbers (11)
25: 9,10;76:19,20;
91:25;92: 1, 2;
210:16;321:22;
337:10;348:24
numerous (1)
199:13
nutshell (1)
16:12
O
obey (1)
343:16
object (12)
30:23;50:24,25;
68: 2;107:16;152: 4;
157:21;184:13;
201:17;259: 8,15;
353: 1
objected (5)
41:19;50:14;
86:14;117:10;161:23
objecting (1)
67:10
objection (44)
41:17;49:22,24,25;
50:10;52:16;53: 2;
55: 4;56:13;66:25;
68: 3;69: 6,13;72:25;
77:21;78: 4,10;
79:10;83: 2;84: 8;
86: 6;89:22;90:10;
94: 9;95:12;97: 2,25;
99:12;103:13;107: 8;
117: 7;118:18;
122: 4;146:17;
151:14;157:21;
158:25;160:22;
161:19;163: 5;
192: 7;193:21;
275:20;276:15
objections (4)
52: 3;55:21;57:11;
169:12
objects (1)
53: 3
obligation (4)
147:16,22;181:16;
260: 1
observed (1)
53:15
observing (2)
43:17,23
obtained (1)
296:12
obvious (1)
164:20
obviously (8)
98:24;134:11;
140: 1;151: 4;
160:15;245: 6;
262: 3;317: 9
occasionally (1)
285: 5
occasions (1)
149: 6
occur (1)
27:23
occurred (2)
108: 7;325: 1
October (11)
60:13;65:21;
136:18;137: 2, 9;
139: 7;172: 8;
207:20;235:17;
269:17;288:25
ODC (117)
12:25;14:21;19: 9;
22: 5;27:18;28:17;
29: 3,15;31:22;32: 9;
37:19;46:19;48:21;
49: 7,17;50:11,17;
55: 5,19;56: 2,10;
57: 1;65:18,20;
(504) 529-3355
(24) moved - ODC

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
69:24;71:16;73:15;
81:21;93:10;100: 8;
105: 9;109:19;
110:25;116: 1;
118:24;120:11,13;
136:17;137:12;
138: 8, 8,16,18,18;
139: 6,23;140: 2, 7,
21;141: 1,17;149:13;
151: 6;159: 4,23;
160: 7;161: 2;
176:23,25;179:16;
186: 2;190: 1, 1;
197:20;200:25;
202:19;205:15;
207:13;208:19;
210:14;211:23;
214:20;215:23;
252:14;253: 3;
263:23;270:21;
276: 3;277: 4,16;
280:22,23,24;
281:12,15,16,20,21;
282:14;285:18;
291:10;298: 6, 8;
299:10;301:13;
302:10,23;303:13,
13;305:12,20;306: 2,
24;308: 7;311:11;
318:25;319: 4;
322:11;324:13;
327:25;328:12;
330:22;335: 7,13;
348:17,18;357:11
ODC's (11)
20: 9;28: 4;30:16;
46: 9;49:22,25;50: 7;
51:20;58: 5;114:12;
140:14
Off (24)
42:23;44: 3,13,20,
22;46: 4;80:22;
81:21;111: 7;117: 8;
169: 2;184:22;
190: 4;209: 1;
217:21;238: 9;
285: 6;295: 3;302: 1;
311:22;326: 6;
340:12;362:11;
363: 5
offended (1)
155:11
offense (2)
202:22;204: 1
offensive (7)
39: 7;156: 2;
225: 5,10,18;259:18;
291:24
offer (12)
49:16;50:11;55: 5;
56: 6;57:17;89:12;
163: 2;194:18;
224:16,22;225:12;
291: 9
offered (16)
26:18;51:11;
90:17;155:18;
194:21;195:18;
196:12;214: 2, 5, 9;
217:25;228: 7;
333:14,22;334: 2;
353:16
offering (3)
164:24;182: 6;
225:14
Office (71)
11:10,19;36:15;
38: 2;58:17;59:16;
60:14;65:22;66: 2;
67:17;69:15;70:12;
72: 7;75:18;92: 2;
93:14;103:21;104: 4;
125:14;126:22;
127:21,23;128: 2,17,
20;131:20;136: 5,13;
137:16,24;152:25;
153: 9;162:14,17,21;
165: 2;168:25;
176:21;180: 7,14;
183: 2;185: 6,16;
186: 7,10,16;187:17;
198:24;201: 4;
204:14;206: 8;
208: 9;234:11;
242:10;244: 4, 8;
245:17,23;247:25;
250: 2;268:11;
270:15;284:24;
285:13;306: 3;
309: 6,16;314: 8;
324:15;328:12,14
officer (3)
201:13;203:15,19
officers (1)
157: 1
offices (1)
92:15
official (2)
257:11;291: 9
often (4)
25:21;146:14;
147: 6;347: 5
old (2)
245: 6;349: 3
oldest (1)
260: 5
omit (2)
89: 4;190: 9
once (14)
40: 6;58:14;91:12;
168:23;173:17;
194:10;206:22;
217:14;226:24;
331:16;346:14;
347:12,18;358: 8
One (132)
12: 9;13: 4;17:11;
18: 2,11;20:11;
27:25;31:15;32:11;
42:12,17;60:19;
61:17;64:10;69:22;
70:18;71:16,19;
72:10,15;75: 4, 9;
76:16;79: 2;80: 7;
81:14;87:23;97:22;
98:19,20;101:25;
109: 7;110: 9;
112:23;119: 3;
121: 7;123: 9;
132:24;134:12,13;
136:14;140: 2,17;
142: 2;151: 1;
153:17,19;158:19;
159:21;161: 8;
162:10;163:10;
164:15;165: 1,22;
167:11;171: 7,10;
172:14;176:15,20;
183:10;187: 9;
188:13;195: 5;
196:17,24;201:18;
206: 5,12;213: 2,11;
219: 3;223:17;
226: 1;228: 4,20;
231: 9;232: 6;234: 7;
238:14;241:24;
246: 7;247: 9,20;
251:17,18,19,20,23;
252:10,11;256: 4;
258:24;261:10;
263:22;266: 6;
275: 5;280:25;
281:15;284:20;
285: 1;289:11,23;
296: 6;301:15;
305:12,18;308:12;
309:10;311: 3;
313:13;320:17,19,
23;326:17;328: 2;
329:13;330: 7;
337: 6,20;338:24;
339:12;340:23,24;
343:20;349:16;
350:12;355:14,21;
357:14;360:21
ones (4)
161:10;206:12;
300:13;308: 2
one's (2)
320:22,23
ongoing (1)
97:19
online (77)
24: 5, 5,15;25:16,
18;51:15;84: 5;
93:19,20;94:24;
100:11;105:11;
141: 8;144:13;
147:11;205:14;
206: 7;208:20;
211:24;216:16;
217: 6;233: 5, 6;
235:20;237:23;
238:10,16,22;
299:22;300: 3,10;
301: 2, 7,11;302:11;
303: 1,10;304: 5,16,
20,23;307: 1, 1,16;
310: 2,18;311: 4;
313: 3;318:11;
319: 3,10,15;321:11,
25;322:12;331: 2, 7,
8;332:10;335:16;
336:14;343: 1, 9;
344: 1;345: 5, 8;
347:21,22;348: 1;
349:24;350: 9;
354: 6,21;355: 7;
356:11,22;357:22
only (30)
10:10;21:14;
23:11;47:19;52:16;
60:19;98:20;103:14;
144:25;158:12;
163:10;165:25;
185:13;195:25;
196:16;199:25;
202:13;235: 6;
239: 5,18;251: 6,17;
276:13;280: 5;
284:10,12;299: 9;
334:11;342: 8;
356:18
onto (2)
284:24;320: 8
open (3)
224: 1;314:13;
363: 2
opened (1)
252: 7
opening (5)
12:10,12,17;46:17;
66:15
openly (1)
97:20
operate (1)
257: 9
opinion (8)
52:22;87:17;
151:21;199: 4;
203:20;304:17;
326: 9;330: 1
opinions (1)
141:19
opponent (1)
144:25
opportunity (2)
16: 8;173:19
oppose (3)
277:25;278: 5;
279: 5
opposed (6)
156:22;157: 8,11,
25;176: 1;218:22
opposing (2)
149:18,19
opposition (1)
330: 4
opted (2)
66:18;175:15
options (1)
347:13
order (117)
13: 3;14: 2, 5;
15:13,15;24:23;
41:24;47: 7;104:16;
105: 1;110:19;
111: 2, 4;114:16,25;
115:24;118:25;
119:10,13,18;121: 8;
122:11;123: 6,12;
124:17;125: 4;
140:16,18;142:12;
145:23;159:25;
161:13;172:22;
173: 1, 8,12;174:25;
181:25;193: 8,17;
205:15,20;206: 3;
207: 3,13,14,18,23;
208: 1;213:19;
214:14;215: 1, 6,10;
222:22;223:11;
224: 4;225: 2;228: 9,
12,18;229:11;
243:12,24;244: 1, 3,
14;255: 2,16,23,24,
25;256: 5,14;257:19,
23;258: 2;264: 7;
276: 4;277: 2, 5,13,
16;279: 5,10,13;
280:21;281: 3,14,25;
282: 6;283: 2;
288:12;291:15;
294:17;295:25;
296: 1, 5,16;309:20;
310: 1;311: 6,18,18,
19;313:19,22;314: 1;
316: 3, 8;317:13;
318: 3,15;335:15;
339:18;340:16;
353: 6
ordered (10)
182:14;194:12;
209:14;255: 1;
278: 9,20;289:23;
298:23;316: 4;
331:18
orders (22)
27:17;46:24;
116: 7;117:20,23;
118: 6;146: 1,12;
149: 1;162: 2;173: 3,
3,10,11;174:10;
226:15;233: 2;
280: 4;281:11;
(504) 529-3355
(25) ODC's - orders

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
282:17;283:17;
312:20
organization (4)
100:22;322:24;
323: 6, 8
Organize (1)
75: 8
organized (2)
323: 3, 4
original (4)
54: 5;70: 9;251:24,
24
originally (3)
50:14;112: 1;
113:20
Orleans (3)
268:12,13;328: 8
others (21)
17:24;19:18;
22:19;23: 7,16,18,
20;25:23;35:21;
73:13;80:13;159: 5;
183: 1,23;217:19;
301: 8;307:13;
308:21;321:15;
324: 6;345: 8
otherwise (2)
122:16;342: 7
ours (4)
49: 7, 8;60:20;
242: 3
ourselves (1)
30:12
out (65)
10:14;14:15;
15:24;26:20,24;
27: 7;44: 1, 6;45: 1;
54:22;66: 4;71:12;
72:16;80:16;93: 2, 3,
6;104:21;111:10,16;
115: 3, 5,16;119:17,
22;131: 8;143: 3,25;
144:20;147:17;
165:13,20;166: 9;
178: 5;188:15;
200: 6;206: 8;210: 4;
215:17;218:15;
235:25;240:24;
247:23;253:24;
256:15;257:23;
263: 6;268:15,17;
291:15;292: 9;
312:25;324:10;
326: 3;332:18;
346:13,14,14;
347:13;350:14;
353: 1;357: 1;
359:25;360: 3;
361:16
outcome (3)
294: 1;317: 5;
338:17
outline (1)
18: 9
outrage (4)
25:19,19;38:11,18
outside (4)
117:22;122:11;
159: 5;260:22
outstanding (2)
182:12;254:17
over (23)
11:22;16:21;17: 6;
38:21;62:15;129: 9;
165:13;173:18;
179: 6;208: 7,11;
231:14;244:20;
252:12;269: 1, 2;
273:13;281:11;
287:21;336:20,25;
337:13;349: 4
overnight (2)
254:11;294:18
overseas (1)
268:25
overturn (1)
316:22
overturned (4)
65:12;91: 2;
158: 4;210: 9
overturning (1)
317: 7
overwhelming (1)
209: 8
owes (2)
19:12;22: 8
own (11)
14:20;35:15;36: 8;
79: 4;115:15;169:16;
219:12;231: 2;
256: 5;286:24;362: 5
owns (1)
300:22
P
pace (1)
324:12
PACER (1)
57: 4
page (108)
19: 7;26:20;28: 5;
31:22;75: 4;81: 2, 4,
6;85:14;88:16;91: 6,
12,15;93:11,18;
96: 6, 7,23;98:13,14;
99: 3, 3;101:19;
104:10;105:18;
106: 1,22;108:18;
110: 6;113: 8,10;
114:18;128:13;
146:15;150:25;
177: 6;182:11;
186:20;189: 3, 9,19;
191:16;197:15,20;
198: 3, 5;201: 6;
205:17;210:13,16;
212:22,23;216: 8,14;
236: 9,23;238:12;
239: 2;240:15;
241: 5,11,16;242:20;
247: 1, 3;252:14,20;
253: 3;264:15;
282:18,18;283:23;
285:19;286: 4;
298: 8;302: 4,12;
303: 2;305:18;
311:10,11,11;319: 1;
323:22,23;335:19;
348:19,19,24,25;
349:13,16;350: 3, 3,
4;352: 8, 9;353:12,
19,20;354: 8,10;
355: 1, 1, 2,10,10,14
pages (6)
31:16,19;79: 4;
236:18;300:21;
305:21
panel (6)
28: 2,25;29:13;
35:13;38: 7;358:23
paper (6)
36:22,24;37: 3;
251:25;253:20;
286:25
parade (1)
273:17
paragraph (39)
50:17;66:15;
76:12,24;85:16,20,
21;88:12,18;91: 7;
93:18;101:20;
102:15;104: 9;
106: 3,10,21;110: 7;
116:19;121:19;
186:21,21;191:18,
22;194: 2;201: 7;
202:19;209: 7;
210:19;212:10,16;
213: 6,14;216:15;
217: 7;252:21;
325:11;328:15;
332:15
paragraphs (1)
195: 4
paraphrase (1)
94:25
paraphrasing (1)
217: 7
parent (1)
145:25
parental (8)
77: 8;177:19;
181: 6;254:12;
289:21;298:11,17;
329: 1
parenting (3)
156:25;237:15;
258: 3
parents (6)
15: 6;83: 4;
165:17;262: 8,16;
263: 7
parent's (1)
165: 9
Parham (4)
180:13;237:14;
303:17;304:18
Parish (13)
60:19,22,22;76:15;
89: 1;91:18;104:11;
106:24;108:21;
110: 1;165: 4;
293:14;335:22
parishes (1)
60:21
part (38)
29:14;30:11;
51:25;59:22;86:23,
23;99: 7;111:24,25;
112: 6,10;114: 9;
133:23,24;134: 7;
138: 6;164:10,10;
211:20;275: 9,10;
281:25;282:16;
290:14;291: 1;
293: 7;304: 3;
305:24;312:12;
313: 2;332:14,21,21,
25;333: 3, 7;349:16;
357:25
parte (6)
20:19;21:20;
22:11;37:17;318:14;
340:22
participate (1)
298:23
participated (3)
97:20;110:10;
141:15
participating (2)
201:12;203:13
participation (2)
114:11;141:18
participatory (1)
38:10
particular (14)
38:24;39:21;
45:13;52: 1;55:12;
101:18;176:21;
277:13;285:10;
303:24;305:15;
313: 9;346:24;354: 9
particularly (5)
31:14;53:24;
54:24;147:22;164:21
parties (27)
16:15;61:20;
87:13;141:13,21;
164:23;176: 7;
178: 8,16;182: 6;
185:13;196:20;
206: 5;215:14;
253: 7;264: 7,13,23;
277:23;278:15;
282: 8,21;283: 3,12;
291: 6;298:23;
362:24
part-time (1)
170: 7
party (8)
21:18;22:17;25: 2;
119:22;167:11;
254:21;353: 2, 4
pass (2)
42:12;236:21
passed (2)
60:24;172: 7
Passing (1)
172: 3
passionate (1)
355:24
past (7)
127:10;137: 3;
165:10;187: 3;
194:16;325:15;
331:22
patently (1)
314:15
paternal (2)
215:18;254: 9
patience (2)
44:25;120:13
patient (3)
10:16;122:21;
220: 6
Patricia (2)
287: 7,18
pay (7)
254:14,15;289:19,
23;298:18;316: 4;
347:17
paying (1)
181:11
payments (1)
298:22
Pearl (1)
235:10
pedaling (1)
48: 1
pejorative (1)
75:10
pendency (2)
21: 5,11
pending (57)
16:18;23: 1, 6,25;
24: 7;25:13;28: 8;
34:21;35:24;37:13;
63: 1,24;75:25;76: 4,
15;77: 2,10,14,16;
82:24;83:25;99:10;
102: 5, 8,13;103: 9;
105:23;125: 5;
152:24;153: 8;
156: 5;172:14;
(504) 529-3355
(26) organization - pending

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
173: 8;174: 4;175: 2;
187:18;199:10;
233:19,21;234: 3;
254:13;294: 1, 2;
299:24;301: 9;
303: 9;309: 1;313: 6;
314:18,22;328:20;
329: 5, 7;336:17;
338:17,24;345:16
Pennsylvania (1)
359: 1
people (67)
15: 3, 6;17:10;
36:18,19;38:11,16;
39: 1, 8;51:17,17,23;
68: 9;71:14;74: 3;
83: 4;88: 1;92:21,21;
93:23;94:24;95: 6,
16;97:14,17;98:20;
104:21;134:17;
143: 2;144:13;
146:13;147:12;
154:19;156: 7;
157:16;164:24;
166:10;169: 5;
171:16;183:12;
188:23,25;199: 1,13;
200: 5;203:25;
204: 3,23;205: 9;
211: 5;222: 9;224: 6,
8;229: 7,11;259:23;
260:12;271:25;
303: 3, 3;315: 1, 4;
321: 3,22;323:14;
347:16;351: 1
per (4)
41:14;66: 5,16;
136:19
perceived (2)
71: 9;72:13
percent (3)
171: 2;269:25;
270: 4
percentage (1)
269:23
perfected (1)
208:12
perfectly (3)
46:23;73:19;
156:12
Performance (2)
243:20,24
Perhaps (3)
46: 5;161: 6;
313:10
period (2)
172:10;323:21
permissible (5)
238:24;239: 5, 6,
18,19
permission (3)
49: 3;99:24;
261:19
person (11)
32:18;75: 5;
106:16;184: 6,24;
189:21;203:21;
231: 6,16;245:21;
282: 5
personal (19)
73:18,24;78: 6,10,
15;79: 4;84: 3;85: 6;
141:19;192: 8,16;
199:19;203:20;
207: 7;244: 5,11;
273: 7;307: 1;339: 9
personally (13)
66:12;73:23;
78:22;82: 2;86: 3,20;
92: 9;104: 5;185: 7;
191: 2;223:18;
248:17;261:21
persons (4)
188: 9;199: 7;
278:11,22
petition (154)
24: 5;25:18;67:19,
23;69:14,16,18,23,
25;70: 3,17;71:12;
72: 4;73: 7;75: 1,20,
23;76: 8;78: 8,18;
79: 2;81: 3, 3, 8,11,
24;84: 2,18,18;
89:10;93:21;95: 5;
102:17;128: 5;
130: 2,22;132:12;
134:12;136:23;
154:14;186: 5, 7,18,
21;187:16;188: 4,17;
189: 2, 4;190:23;
199:16;201:11;
203:13;204:13;
210:20;221:10,16;
222: 6;223: 7;
233:23;235:21;
237:25;238:15,22;
272:16;277:25;
278: 6;279: 6;
293:12;295: 8;
297:11;299:22;
301:19;302: 5,13,18,
22;303:25;304: 5,15;
305: 1,14,17,24,25;
306: 7,13,14,16,20,
21,24;307: 3, 8, 9,16,
21,23;308: 4;309: 4;
310: 3, 5,18;311: 2,
4;312:15;313: 3;
314:12,25;318:14,
17;319: 3,10,16;
320:18,21,22;321: 4;
322: 1,12,16;323: 1;
324: 7,14,24;325:24;
327: 1,15;330:22;
331: 2, 8;332:21,22;
333: 1, 4, 7;334: 7;
335:17;336:25;
340: 1;343:10;
344: 1, 3;345: 8;
346:17;347:21;
348: 1;349:25;
350:10;354: 6,21;
355: 6, 8;357: 7
petitioner (3)
81:14,17;277:21
petitions (17)
14:23;51:15,18;
93:19;99:15;188:24;
205:14;222: 9;
228: 1;238:10;
247:13;248: 2;
302:18;304:20;
318:11;330:25;
345: 5
phase (1)
311:15
Phillips (14)
183: 3, 6,17;
189:17;195:22;
199:24;200:14;
206:12;278:10,21;
281: 7;305: 8;
324:23;327: 7
phone (22)
23: 9;41: 4;71:14;
74:13;91:25;144:10;
154: 9,13;184:18,19,
21,22,23;185: 5;
198: 7;200:10;
237:19;238:14;
243:15,18,22;319:22
phones (1)
168:16
phonetically (4)
57: 7, 8;208: 4;
268:10
photo (2)
98: 9,17
photograph (1)
37: 4
photographs (2)
24:18;37: 8
physically (1)
350:12
physician (1)
229:21
Picayune (1)
350:20
pick (5)
213: 5,15;324:12;
362:14,20
picked (1)
221:22
picking (2)
21:16;23: 8
picks (1)
187: 5
picture (4)
79: 8,14;82:23;
212: 6
pictured (1)
191: 9
pictures (3)
79:22,25;83: 5
piece (3)
36:22,23;37: 3
place (16)
28:18;30: 3;80:12;
90: 7;92:15;146: 2,
11;177:21;182: 5;
203:25;264:10;
289: 7;311:13,20,21;
314: 2
placed (5)
77:17;78:19;
98:10;136:16;160:17
places (4)
143: 8;199:21;
217: 3;308: 6
plan (2)
17:17;18: 6
playing (1)
320: 3
pleading (4)
124:22;125:22;
126:19;143: 9
pleadings (9)
10:23;14: 6;57: 3;
127: 3;160:23;
174: 9;231:12;
282: 2;286: 7
please (23)
11: 3,12;31: 9;
59:11;101:19;
102:17;103: 9;
111: 7,10;115: 5;
169:17;181:18;
203:17;210:20;
267:11;302: 5,12;
308: 8;315: 4,20;
341: 7;349: 4;356:19
pleasure (1)
168:22
pled (1)
99:20
pm (3)
128: 9;179:23;
363: 7
PO (1)
169:21
point (75)
17: 2, 4;26:24;
40:10;41: 1,18;42: 7;
45:19;48: 3;50:21;
52: 7;63: 9;68:22;
84:15,23;88: 5;
89:14;94:22;97: 5;
101: 9;125: 8;130: 4,
20;134: 4,20;135: 1;
137:20;140:14;
141:22;143: 1, 6,11,
11,12,13,14,18,21,
22;148:12,24;
149:11,17,20,25;
150: 5, 9;157:22;
160:14;174: 8;
183:21;188:13;
192:24;195:25;
199: 5;204: 8;
207:22;218:23,25;
221: 6;224:15;
226:17;275:11;
279: 4;285:10;
287:10;296:12;
311:17,25;326:25;
345:20,23;346: 4;
351: 7;357: 1
pointed (1)
353: 1
pointing (1)
178: 3
points (1)
47: 1
police (1)
314: 7
policy (1)
313: 7
pops (1)
180:15
portion (1)
197:17
portions (2)
285:24,25
portrait (3)
82: 6, 8,14
posed (1)
13:19
position (31)
14:16;29: 2;30:16;
46: 1,10;47:24;
48:19;50: 6,15;
51:20;53:16;56:25;
101: 8;108: 5;
134:21;144: 8;
153: 4, 8,12;167:12,
13;170:13;176: 2;
202:21;204: 1;
229: 5,10,14,16;
244:15;261: 7
positive (1)
129:20
possession (1)
69: 8
possibility (3)
111:14;115:10;
119:20
possible (2)
71: 9;334:11
possibly (5)
12:23;72:14;95: 7;
125:11;138:11
post (4)
51:17;83: 4;
254:13;357:22
posted (15)
(504) 529-3355
(27) Pennsylvania - posted

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
24: 5;82:25;83: 9;
84: 1, 5;102:12;
105:18;151:10;
216:10;300: 2,25;
306:25;331: 7;
352:19;358: 7
posting (7)
37: 8;83:13;
217:17;303:10;
308:15,23;354: 9
postings (5)
51:16;179:10;
321:11;346: 2;351: 8
potential (3)
80:10;83:23;
159: 8
potentially (4)
43:13;83:23;85: 3;
87: 2
power (3)
54: 3;104:13;
227:20
powers (1)
227:24
practice (9)
171: 5;176:10;
244:22;269:16,21,
23;270:11;271:14;
295:12
practiced (4)
204: 2;218:17;
222:15;271:12
practicing (4)
34: 9;135: 4;
243: 7;245:18
pray (1)
30: 7
preamble (1)
183:10
precious (3)
102:25;103:15;
211: 3
preclude (1)
164:24
predators (1)
184: 7
preference (1)
167: 7
pre-hearing (14)
16: 9;19: 4;20:10;
22: 4;26:21;31:21;
50:18;266: 9,24;
290:25;291: 2, 4;
299:14;332: 4
prejudice (12)
27:13;41: 8;47: 1,
3,14,20;48:18;
118: 1,10;120: 9;
122:17;144: 2
prejudiced (6)
39:25;40: 7;48: 2;
141:11;142:13;
144:16
prejudicial (3)
26: 4, 6;74: 8
preliminarily (1)
66: 4
preliminary (3)
58: 3;62:19;89:15
pre-marked (1)
195:23
prematurely (2)
213:20;253: 6
premise (1)
30: 2
premises (1)
32:12
prepare (1)
237: 9
prepared (4)
11: 2;264:15,21;
283:24
prepares (1)
249:25
preparing (3)
288: 5;306:15,19
pre-prints (1)
251: 3
Presbyterian (1)
260: 6
prescribed (1)
39:11
prescription (1)
21:19
presence (1)
10:14
present (7)
16: 5;27:19;
215: 5;257:20;
261:20;313:21;
340:10
presented (4)
141: 7;161:15;
277:10;340: 2
presently (1)
60:10
preserve (1)
166: 1
presiding (15)
16:21,21;17: 5;
61: 4;63:10;78: 6;
89:11;103: 3;105:21;
129: 9;171:10;
185: 2;187:20;
188: 2;191: 1
presume (1)
162:20
pretermit (1)
42:10
pre-trial (4)
31:10;182: 2;
238: 6;358:24
pretty (3)
260: 4;274: 1;
325: 8
prevent (5)
105: 2;279:18;
280:17;312: 6;
317:15
prevented (1)
153: 3
prevents (1)
229: 7
Previously (4)
49:17;61: 4;
101:25;297:12
primarily (6)
18: 5;26: 2;53:20,
23;269:20;270: 2
primary (2)
23:22;208: 9
print-out (1)
298: 6
prior (11)
39:22,23;41:19;
149: 7;168:23;
172: 2;185:24;
240:18;254:16;
313:20;326:24
private (3)
75:15;164:22,23
privy (2)
226: 2;236: 7
pro (5)
17:22;245:20;
272: 9;299: 4;316:20
probable (1)
175:15
probably (27)
37:15;76:21;
84:14;105: 5;113: 5;
121: 4;147: 9;164: 9;
165: 5;169:15;
222:16;243: 1;
253:24;260: 9;
271:20;286:15;
288: 7, 8,19;309: 7;
321:12;325: 8;
334:11;345: 3;
354:25;358: 9,10
probate (1)
171: 3
probative (4)
51:24;54:15;
94:11;99:19
problem (12)
38:16;51:13;
158:10;244: 1;
260:23,24;261: 2, 3,
9;291:11;292: 8;
333:11
problems (3)
13:20;32:21;39:20
procedurally (1)
313:14
Procedure (10)
47:16;111:22;
115:22;125:18;
126:18;247: 9,11,17,
18;339:17
procedures (2)
132: 7;295:17
proceed (5)
175:16;204:20;
234:15;243: 7;254: 3
proceeding (36)
20:16;61: 5,19,19;
62: 6,22;63:10;
67:21,21;76:22;
80: 4;84:22;85: 1;
104:24;115:11,15;
118: 2;125: 3;
127:15;129:12;
150:17;157:14;
164:16;165:10;
166: 4, 6, 9;169:15;
264:19;273:23;
315:17;329:24;
330: 3;338: 6,10;
340:20
proceedings (98)
13:24;16:13,14;
17: 3, 6,14,18,20,22;
20: 8;22:17;24: 7, 9,
13,14,16;26:14;
28: 8,11;29:23;
30:13;32: 7;39:17;
50:12;53:11,17;
54: 6, 8;58: 7,18;
62: 3,18;63: 1,23;
64: 8,23;66:14;67: 4;
75:21;77: 2;84:24;
94:17;105:23;
109:22;111:16;
114:10;119:21;
125: 6;129: 9;
132:25;151:17;
165: 9;169: 1,14;
175: 6,18,18;187:12;
190:11;196: 3;
245: 8;272: 4,10,13;
273: 4,15;283:21;
284: 4;286: 1;
287:12,19,23;288: 2,
6,14;289:18;291:25;
293:19;294: 1,11;
295:18;299:17;
328:19;331: 4, 4;
334:17;336:15,17;
337: 1;338:18,24;
352:24;353: 4;
354:13,14,17;363: 2,
4
process (35)
10:17,24;46: 3;
48: 6;74: 9;99:20;
111:20;115:20;
117:12;127: 6;
133: 7,17;156:23;
157: 9;162: 2;
207:25;208: 5,12;
213:21;214:25;
224:19;244: 5, 6,11;
245:11;251: 4;
253: 6;312:20;
314:16;316:10,22;
317: 3;320:13;
354:20;358: 1
processes (2)
161:24;343:15
product (1)
10:17
profession (1)
54: 2
Professional (13)
23:11,14;32:13;
33:22;35: 1;59:12;
105: 6;107:12,23;
138:13;169:18;
268: 6, 7
proffer (6)
45:20,24;46: 5;
56:21,23;57:24
Program (2)
60: 3;269: 3
prohibit (1)
18:15
prohibited (6)
20: 5;21: 3;22:15;
26:10;37:22;193: 8
prohibits (5)
20: 4, 6,14;37: 1, 7
Project (3)
232: 3,12;233: 8
prolong (1)
158: 6
promote (6)
23: 5;306:20;
320:18;331: 8;
347: 7, 8
promoted (8)
37:21;98:14;
302:19,20;346: 8, 9,
17;348: 1
promotes (1)
96:22
promoting (4)
331: 2;346:16,23;
347: 2
prompt (1)
262:21
prompted (2)
243:12;295: 5
pronouncing (1)
273: 2
propensity (1)
260:10
proper (12)
26:23;47:11;83: 2;
87:19;125:24;132: 7;
187:10;203:16;
247:10,18;260:18;
317: 2
properly (3)
195:21;208:13;
(504) 529-3355
(28) posting - properly

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
232:19
proponent (1)
341:13
proposed (1)
267: 5
proposition (4)
19:10;22: 6;37:20;
260:15
propriety (1)
125:24
Prosecute (5)
95:10;96:18;
98:18;205: 1, 5
prosecution (2)
97:15;205: 4
prossed (1)
254: 7
protect (39)
13: 9;38: 1, 4;
39: 6;74: 3;89: 3,25;
100:13;102:22;
104:12,14,16;107: 1;
108:23;155:10;
179:25;181:17;
190:13;208:22;
210:25;226: 8;
258:19;259:17,24;
260: 1,12;269:11;
282: 3;312:10,15;
315: 8;317:19,25;
335:24;336: 1;
343:11;349:22;
354: 3;357:15
protected (1)
14: 8
protecting (6)
123: 6,13;124:17;
260: 4, 8;317:20
protection (2)
155:25;318:10
protective (3)
14: 2;15:13,15
protest (1)
75: 7
prove (8)
17:17;18: 8;27:21;
48:21;50:20;51:11;
202: 6;203: 3
proven (1)
29:25
provide (7)
12: 1;74:12;94: 4;
127:15;136:10;
180: 6;310: 7
provided (16)
38: 7;49:19;
103:20;104: 4;
137: 6;267:18;
284:17,21;290: 3;
321:24;344: 1;
349:23;350: 8;
354: 5,20;355: 7
provides (2)
216:23;302:15
providing (3)
136: 6;137:25;
140: 2
proving (1)
32: 9
provisions (7)
53:11,18;111:21;
115:21;125:17,20;
237: 2
proximity (1)
174: 6
public (16)
12:22;14:15;18: 5;
36: 8;37:24;60: 4;
74:12;85: 6;93: 1, 7;
166: 9;184:19,20,23;
232: 4;322: 2
publicly (1)
14:17
publish (1)
232:21
published (1)
24:16
pull (2)
180:25;208: 8
pulled (3)
228: 4;237: 8;
238:22
punishment (1)
48:16
purported (6)
189: 2;193:12;
276:14;296:13;
331:10;332: 8
purportedly (5)
67:24;68: 5,12;
69:14;93:19
purports (1)
75: 4
purpose (16)
17:25;53:22;
103:11,14,14,18;
125:24,25;129:16;
131: 1;154:19;
155: 1;164: 6;203: 4;
324: 9,10
purposes (7)
37:14;82:13;88: 6;
178:22;195:25;
196:13;283: 9
pursuant (7)
73:17;207: 5;
227:13;235: 2;
244:11;277: 2;
339:16
push (1)
30: 9
pushed (1)
355:25
put (21)
38: 2;44:11;63:14;
92:15;104:20;
132:19;142: 3;
144:18;146: 6;
150: 6, 7;153:13;
174: 1;188:14;
225:17;237:19;
261: 8;287: 1;
321:17,21;339:11
puts (2)
143: 8;160:13
putting (3)
87:21;151:24;
335:14
Q
Q&A (2)
319:23,25
Quaid (1)
53:14
qualifications (1)
158:11
qualified (5)
293: 5, 9;323: 5, 7;
326:15
quality (1)
191: 8
quarter (1)
167: 5
quarters (2)
59: 5;169:10
quick (2)
219:21;263:25
quicker (1)
266: 6
quickly (2)
264: 2;310:10
quite (7)
12: 2;36: 1;87:20;
129:25;134:22;
137: 7;158:13
quote (9)
19: 8,13;209:16;
211: 4;213: 6,24;
329: 2;332:11;
349:23
quoting (6)
19:23;91:13;
187: 5;209: 7;
210:19;213:15
R
raise (2)
41:17;42: 3
raised (6)
28:16;42: 4, 6;
43: 9;176: 5;196: 2
rally (1)
75: 8
random (2)
111:20;115:20
rather (7)
23: 8;68:15;70: 4;
144:21;146: 5;
290:20;294: 4
Raven (131)
23:22;25: 2;28:10,
11;61:14,23;63:11,
11;64: 7,11;65:10;
69:17;70: 6;75:24;
81:12,13;82: 3;
85:18,23;89: 8,11;
102: 1;105:22;
106: 4,12;129:10;
171: 9;174:15;
177:18;183: 8,20,24;
189:11,11;191:19,
23;194:17,21;
195:22;196:18;
199: 4;200:14;
216:18,25;221:12,
16;224:15;232:12;
244:23;250:14;
254:13;255: 3,19;
256:12,22;257: 4;
264: 4,20,21;270:24;
271: 3;272: 3,12;
273: 7,11,13;274: 9,
17;276:21;278: 5,10,
21;279: 5,12,18;
280:17;281: 6;
283:15,20,25;
284:20;285: 3, 8;
287:11,15,22;
288:17;289:14,17;
293:11,15;295: 1;
296: 5,12;297:21;
298:10;299: 3,21;
304:12;306:18;
307:13;308:21;
310: 2;311: 1;
313:20,25;314: 2, 5;
316: 4, 4, 7,24;
319:21;322:24;
323:13,22,22;324: 6,
22;326:14;327: 6,12,
17;329:10;332:17;
333:21;334: 1;
352:16;357:19,21;
358: 7
Raven's (11)
189:17;194:11;
213:10;217:15;
273: 1;281: 8;284: 6;
297: 4;302:18;
327: 9;332:16
Re (4)
20:11,17;112:21;
221:24
reached (6)
143:14;149:23;
252:12;264: 8,14;
283:14
reaction (3)
103: 2;186:17;
211:11
reactions (1)
152:12
read (43)
10:20;16: 8;75: 1;
91: 7;101:23;104: 3,
9;108: 6;111:10;
115: 5,12,15,24;
117:21;118: 6, 8;
119:17;131:13,15;
155:22;178: 5, 5;
197:13;211: 5,12;
221: 8,11;230: 7, 8;
236: 6;267:21;
278:16;279: 2;
285:23;295:14,14,
16,24;317:11;
330:19;332: 7;
333:18;344:16
reader (1)
192: 3
readily (1)
36: 7
reading (11)
52:22;106:17;
141: 8,17;144:13;
165: 8,25;240:22;
249: 2;252: 2;319: 1
reads (1)
31:25
ready (5)
58: 4;67: 5;
168:14;262: 2;
265:16
real (3)
12:21;219:21;
347:20
realize (2)
134:15;325: 6
realized (1)
362:24
really (18)
29: 4;30:10;31:16;
38:14;91: 9;200: 7,
7;219:13;225: 8;
271:25;280: 3,13;
285:23;291:16;
346:15;358:13;
359:12;360:10
re-appointed (1)
173: 6
reason (15)
67:10;72: 9;
114: 9;140: 5, 8;
165: 1,11;211:20;
279: 8;288:11;
304: 3;337:18,18;
338:20;357:10
reasonable (1)
32:18
reasonableness (1)
157:16
reasonably (1)
46:23
(504) 529-3355
(29) proponent - reasonably

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
reasons (17)
27: 4, 7;46:21;
48:20;110: 8;111:11,
12;115: 4;119:17;
120: 2, 4;161:15,21;
164:20;311: 4;
316:14;338:16
recall (35)
66:17;72:19;
77:12;123: 5, 8, 9,10;
132: 9;145:17;
148:20;172:18;
174:14,15;175: 4;
177:24;179: 7,12,13,
13;181: 2;190:16;
195:16;196:12,15;
197:11;215: 1;
225:13,19;237: 5,12;
243: 7;285:11;
301:17;320:15,19
recalled (1)
195:20
receive (6)
70:22;92: 9;
134: 8;183:23;
199: 1,15
received (15)
19: 2;66:22;67: 7,
15,23;70:11,25;
75:20;128: 6;134: 6;
183:16;198:21;
244:20;270:16;
328:14
receiving (1)
70:17
recent (1)
49:12
recently (4)
17: 1;50: 4;97:23;
98: 8
recess (9)
44: 9;45: 2;
166:25;168:12;
220: 1;265:14;
359: 7;362:19;363: 1
recitation (1)
232:14
reckless (1)
18:20
recognize (6)
91:25;180:10;
186: 2;191: 9;201: 2;
358:11
recollection (3)
65: 4;183:14;
286:13
recommendation (1)
215:13
reconvene (2)
362: 2,20
record (121)
11: 7;12:22;17:19;
18:24;19: 5;22:16;
24:24;42:23;44: 3, 5,
11,13,18,20,22,24;
45: 5,18,19;46: 4, 8;
54:14;55:19;56: 4,
17;57: 4,21;59:13;
62: 9;64:10;78: 5;
81: 6;84:21;94: 5;
96:11;105:22;
117:21;127:16;
148:18,20;158:10;
163: 8;165:13,19;
166: 1;169:19;
173:20,22;174: 9;
175:17;178: 6,11;
182: 7;186:13;
199:12;210:15;
220:16;223: 3,25;
224:24;225:15,17;
229: 6;259: 5;
262:20,25;263:11,
11;266: 8,18,22;
267:21;268: 4;
276:18;279:23;
280: 2, 9;281: 2;
282:24;283:15;
284: 7,11,16,17,21,
22;285: 2,21;286: 3,
9,20;288: 1, 5,13,17,
21;290: 7,15;291: 2;
292:24;295: 1, 4;
298: 4;299:11;
311:22,24;318:23;
325: 2, 7;326: 7, 8;
334:17;340: 9,11,12;
360:23;361: 7,12;
362:11,18;363: 5
recording (4)
78:20;79: 1;
221:25;263:15
recordings (62)
24:20,25;88: 9,20;
89:12,20;90: 1, 3,14,
18;178: 7,18,20,22;
179: 1, 3,14;193: 7,
9,16;194: 3, 6,12,18,
22;197:14;212:18;
214: 2;216:24;
217:10,16,24;222: 4,
4;223: 8,23,24;
228:10,14;229:21;
282:20;283: 5, 7, 9;
319:18,21;320: 1, 6,
8;331: 9,12,18;
333:13,22;334: 2,19;
339: 2;348: 4;
349:24;350: 9;
352:16;353:16
records (14)
37:12;53: 4;99:16;
164: 5,13,15;165: 1,
15,16,20,21;222:20;
232: 7;237:13
recourse (1)
342:23
recusal (20)
26:24;27: 7;41: 9;
46:18,20,24;87: 9;
110: 9;111:12;
114:25;116: 8;
119:18;120: 3, 4;
121: 1, 8,16;126: 9;
138: 5;159:25
recusals (1)
149:24
recuse (40)
26:13;39:15,24;
41:11;48: 7,13;
109:21,23;110:14,
17,23;112:20;
113:22;114:10,21,
23;116: 2,17;120:14,
17,24;121:20;
135:22;139: 9;
140: 5, 8,12;141: 4,
5,10,22;143:13;
144: 3,22;148: 7, 7;
150: 3;160: 6;
161:10,14
recused (16)
17: 2;40: 9;62:17;
63: 2, 5;86:25;87: 5;
111: 3;126:12;
137:21;140: 4;
148: 5,19;149:10;
191: 5;210: 4
recuses (5)
48: 4;111:14;
115: 7, 9;119:19
recusing (10)
27: 5,14;39:23;
47: 5;115: 4;116:22;
117: 3;119: 1,10;
121:22
redact (7)
13: 3,12;15: 9;
82:20;190:12;
361:11;362: 4
redacted (20)
13:18;14: 8;41:14,
20;42: 3;81:23,24;
100:13,14;208:23,
23;314: 8;331:17;
335:25;347:11,11;
354: 4, 4;357:16,16
redacting (2)
15: 1,21
redaction's (1)
15:16
reduce (1)
215: 9
reduction (1)
298:22
re-elected (1)
170: 8
re-election (2)
170:12;259: 6
re-established (1)
315:25
re-establishing (1)
309:20
refer (7)
31:20;128:13;
176:17;186: 5;
204: 9;205:23;297: 1
reference (11)
85:19;105:10;
156:15,18;222: 3;
245:16;249:11;
256:21;278: 3;
304: 9;326:12
referenced (8)
63: 8;85:21;
111:16;115:11;
190:15;202:23;
270:20;348: 7
references (8)
14:23;41:20;
45:12,17;88:24;
106: 8;141:12;
216:21
referencing (3)
76:17;94:23;
191:19
referred (14)
111:19;115: 8,18;
119:25;126:22;
148: 8;150: 5;
173:14;176:11;
249:19;286:16;
296:23;331: 8;
361:18
referring (19)
27:12;111: 2;
145: 9;153:18;
177: 1;184: 3;201: 9;
203:11;214:24;
222:10;239:16;
258:21;280:21;
281:21;295:25;
305:13;317:19;
354:23;356:16
refers (7)
212:24;252:20,21;
258: 3;282:14,17;
328:15
reflect (2)
268: 4;280: 8
reflected (2)
228: 6;231: 2
refresh (2)
230: 7;286:12
refuse (4)
90: 4;187: 6;
217: 8;325:17
refused (30)
48:12;88:22;
89:20;90:15,17,20;
104:12;107:20;
181:13;182:18;
194: 7,11;195:11;
197: 2, 6;217:12,15;
310: 6;330:16;
331:13,16;334:18;
336: 9,24;338:14;
339:21;340:13,23;
352:13;353:14
refuses (3)
48: 7;209:12;
339: 3
refusing (6)
89: 2,24;106:25;
108:22;335:23;
340:17
regard (2)
29: 2;313:12
regarding (9)
49:25;66: 2;
117:11;127:22;
196:16;231:20;
235: 9;298:25;
313:19
regards (3)
179:11;195:17;
303:24
regular (1)
207: 8
regularly (1)
147:13
re-hearing (1)
52:14
reiterate (1)
201:25
relabeled (1)
112: 1
related (11)
16:14;23:24;
178: 9;242: 8;
244:20;252: 8;
282:22;299:24;
300: 8;301:16;337: 9
relates (2)
34:14;332:15
relating (2)
214:13;228:11
relations (1)
171: 3
relationship (1)
289:22
relationships (3)
47:16,17,18
released (1)
166:19
relevance (14)
50: 1,15;52: 4;
57: 1;74:15;80: 3;
146:17;151:14,17;
152: 4, 9;157:22;
275:20;276:14
relevant (25)
28:23;50:22;51: 4;
73:20;79:16,21;
80: 6,16;83: 6,17;
(504) 529-3355
(30) reasons - relevant

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
84: 8;86: 7;94:19;
97: 8;117:16;146:25;
150:16;157:13,14;
158:15,25;159: 6;
275:22;276: 1;357: 8
relief (12)
171: 5;276: 5;
277: 6,17,20;279:18;
280:16;297: 4;
316:23,25;340:19,22
relinquish (2)
187: 6;325:17
relinquishing (1)
204:18
remain (5)
28: 8;94:23;
143:16;164:23;
285:11
remained (1)
147:10
remaining (1)
148:25
remains (4)
93:20;284:25;
286:25;287: 5
remedy (1)
341: 9
remember (18)
22: 2;64:13;
130:14,18;131: 4;
132:23;150:12;
183:12;225:15;
234:16;237:17,18;
238:11;256: 3;
269: 5;274: 7;
309:11;358:13
remembered (1)
238: 5
remind (1)
184: 1
reminded (1)
168:15
remorse (1)
337:22
remove (2)
187: 7;325:19
removed (4)
93:21;96:21;99: 2,
2
rendered (1)
228:22
Reno (2)
132:15;235:16
renounce (2)
186:24;325:13
re-offer (1)
196:20
repeated (3)
217:18,19;335: 4
repeatedly (3)
29:22;213:23;
338: 4
repetitive (1)
115: 3
rephrase (1)
146:19
replace (2)
187: 9;289: 6
report (3)
98:25;194:15;
331:21
Reportedly (2)
198:17;294:16
REPORTER (7)
43:20;59:10;
103:23;169: 9;
257:16;361:10;
362:16
reporting (1)
320: 2
reports (3)
182:13,13;227:17
re-posted (1)
301:20
represent (14)
21:18;58:16;
100:20;150: 1;
168:24;236:25;
256:12;264:18;
272:12,25;273:14,
19;280: 2;309:13
representation (2)
55: 1;209:17
representations (1)
31:18
represented (17)
62: 2;64: 7;215: 8,
15;255: 3, 9,21;
257: 2;266:23;
272: 3,25;283:20;
287:11,14,17;
293:21,21
representing (3)
21:24;35: 8;101: 6
represents (5)
62: 1;66: 9;254: 2;
255:18;293:18
reprimanding (1)
260:20
reputation (1)
259:20
request (13)
14: 9;15:14;
127:17,23;128: 1;
178:14;181:25;
182: 1;205: 4;243: 6;
282: 7;283: 2;340:19
requested (3)
109:23;128: 3;
135:15
requests (2)
29: 8;138: 7
require (4)
87: 4, 9;138:10;
315: 9
required (7)
48:13;50:20;
70:21;143: 1;144: 3;
184:20;341: 3
requires (6)
89: 5;90:21;
107: 2;108:25;
138:15;336: 2
re-read (1)
203:10
res (1)
51:25
rescind (2)
207:23;244: 3
rescinded (4)
208: 1, 2,13;
244:13
reserves (1)
55:20
residence (1)
185: 6
resolution (2)
125: 6;360:13
resolved (2)
204:19;231: 8
respectfully (1)
359: 7
respective (3)
17: 6;300: 4;362: 4
respectively (3)
56: 3,16;57:21
respond (6)
97:17;152:18,21,
22,22;344:14
responded (1)
96:23
respondent (39)
11:14;17:10;19: 8;
31:25;35:19;39:13;
49:20;53: 3;111:25;
137: 6;163: 1;
167:21;265:19;
269:15;270:10,16;
293:18;297: 3,20;
299:21;300: 2;
331: 7;333:12;
343:22,24;345: 2, 7;
349: 2,18,23;350: 6,
8;353:22;354: 3, 5,
17;355: 3, 7,16
Respondent's (7)
52:24;56: 8,15;
112: 2,10;266: 9;
291: 4
responding (3)
114:16;138: 7,16
response (26)
49:22;52: 8;70:17;
82:23;83: 3, 5,19,20;
103: 9,10;127:16,23;
128: 1;140: 9;
152:20;202:14,19;
205:13;211:11;
242:23;315:11;
322: 2, 4, 5, 6;356:24
responses (3)
13: 1;59: 7;169: 8
responsibility (3)
15:21;95:15;
138:14
responsible (3)
96: 7;231: 6;
332:14
rest (2)
207: 7;344: 9
restrictions (1)
254: 4
restroom (1)
219:20
result (6)
40:18;55:14;
58:18;172: 2;213:19;
248:15
resulted (3)
38:23;80:11;
169: 4
results (1)
165:17
retains (1)
54: 3
retired (1)
172:10
return (2)
221:23;251:19
returned (2)
72: 3;327:14
retweeted (2)
349:11;353:23
reveals (1)
212:17
reverse (2)
311: 6;313:15
reversed (2)
151:23;312:21
Review (10)
38: 6,12;85:17;
173:19,22,24;174: 5,
12;285:22;298:25
reviewed (4)
195:19;287:25;
288: 4,17
reviewing (1)
294:25
reviews (1)
174: 5
Richard (1)
11:13
right (131)
22:22;29:18;
30:15;42: 6, 8;58:21;
59: 1;61: 7,15;62: 1;
65:19;68:25;81:19,
25;83:11;87:23;
102: 4,15;103:21;
110:21;111:23;
112: 6;114:14;
116: 9,16;121: 2;
126:13;135:18;
137: 9,18;139: 4;
140:25;144:25;
147: 8;151:12;
152: 2;154:10,23;
169: 6;176:20;
181:19;185:10;
189:24;190:23;
191: 5,15;194: 2, 3;
197:22;201: 1;
205: 8;210:12,18;
212: 1;214:20;
216:13;225: 5;
227:15;233:24;
238: 8;240: 1;241: 6;
247:15,18;248:16;
249:18;250:25;
259:24;264:11;
273: 6;274:21;
275:12;281: 1;
287:25;290:10;
302:10;303:12;
304: 5,13,19,21;
306:10;308:19;
309:22;312:13,14;
314:20;315: 1;
316: 2,17;317: 2, 6,
23;318: 1, 5,11;
319:22,24;321:19;
322: 2, 9,19,20;
323:19;324: 8;
327: 8;328: 4;
329:23;331: 1;
335:15;336:23;
337: 3,12;338: 5;
341:16,23;342:11;
347:19,25;348: 8,12;
351: 1,18;352: 8;
353:24;354: 8,15;
355:14;356: 6;
358: 3;359: 2
rights (12)
13: 6;77: 8;
177:20;181: 6;
229:11;254:12;
260:12;289:21;
298:11,17;313:25;
329: 1
risk (1)
200:17
risking (2)
355:18;356:14
River (1)
235:11
RJMV (1)
228:21
RM (1)
104:14
road (3)
29:11;200: 2;
255:17
Robert (1)
10: 6
(504) 529-3355
(31) relief - Robert

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
role (2)
54:12;83:13
roles (1)
295:20
rolling (1)
351: 7
Ron (2)
350:19;351:13
room (8)
43: 1,11;45: 1;
59:17;145: 5;157:10;
224:21;228: 3
Rouge (2)
60:19;310:14
Rule (25)
14: 1;18:17,21;
20:13;21:19,21;
22:15;23:10;25:25;
26: 1, 5;53:13;73:21;
80: 7;107:11;108: 2;
124: 9;126: 1, 5;
169:12;207: 2, 5;
244:11;245:10;
251:19
ruled (4)
87: 1;123:18;
230:10;232:17
rules (33)
20: 2, 2,18;21: 1,
7;23:10,13,15,20;
26: 2;27:21;32:13;
33: 3,15,21;34:12,
25;35: 5,17;38:13;
48:22;53:23,25;
67: 2;107:23;230:19,
20;231:20;245:10,
20;295:16;339:19;
343: 6
ruling (10)
26: 8;64:25;67:19;
153: 7;230:13;
232:15;316: 8;
330:12;338: 4;342: 3
rulings (16)
21:13;23:24;25: 7;
64:21;65: 9,12;91: 2;
102: 2;112: 3;158: 2;
192:24;196:25;
210: 9;286: 8;
316:17;348:10
run (7)
134:24;157:10;
218:24;219: 3;
245: 2;259: 3, 5
running (4)
35: 9;68: 3;
144:24;145: 2
rush (1)
267:15
rushing (1)
267:16
Russell (11)
120:14,14;122:10,
13,14;148: 2, 4,15,
15,20,22
Russia (1)
236: 3
S
sad (1)
88: 5
safe (5)
102:25;103:16;
195: 9;211: 3;336: 7
safety (12)
71:10;73:19,24;
78:16;85: 6;129:24;
130: 8;131: 3;135: 2;
199:19;200:13;
237:24
sake (3)
75:16,16;267:15
same (31)
15: 3, 6;16:15;
39:18;46: 7;48: 6;
78:20;98:19;109: 6;
114: 5;128: 5;
133:19;154:13;
161:15;182:11;
184: 2,24;197:15;
210:13;217:20;
228: 6;234:18;
246:21;247:12;
278:13,25;279:20;
280:18;297:23;
308: 4;310:11
sanctioned (2)
126: 3;356: 3
sanctions (3)
126:11;355:19;
356:15
sandwich (1)
168: 1
sat (3)
223: 9;237: 8,16
satanic (1)
97:18
Saturday (2)
254:22,22
Save (3)
150:12,19;302: 3
saving (1)
47:25
saw (21)
69:15;72: 9,20;
73: 2,16,23;74:19,
25;93: 7;174:18;
182:25;185:12;
188:23;191: 4;
249:20;252: 6, 8;
261:10,12;262:14;
273:16
saying (21)
30:21;34: 2;39: 2;
80: 2;95:14;134:10;
142:12;144:15;
147:18;157:19;
160:12;183: 3;
185:18;197:12;
221:16;225:16,19;
252:10;260:25;
292:13;317:13
scan (4)
91: 9;212:11;
285: 7;286:19
scanned (2)
285: 2;286:11
scary (1)
334:25
scathing (1)
326: 9
scenes (1)
41:13
scheduled (2)
211: 7;298:12
School (15)
59:23;60: 2, 8, 8;
151:25;156: 8;
170:16,17,20;245: 6;
268:14;269: 3, 7, 8,
12
Schools (1)
259:11
scope (1)
160:23
Se (3)
192:21;299: 4;
316:20
seal (9)
24:10;45:21;
165:19;176:10;
193:17;280:21;
281:14,25;288:13
sealed (48)
24: 9;35:23,25;
36: 3,11,22,25;37: 4,
6,13;62: 9;64:11,12;
67:20;84:20,25;
85: 2;104:24;164: 5,
13,19;165: 1,20;
166: 3, 3, 8;175:19;
176: 1, 7,14;188:12;
206:11;208:10;
223: 3, 5,25;229: 6,
10,14,15,19,20,21;
230:18;231:20;
244: 8;282: 4;331: 3
sealing (3)
24:24;173: 3,12
seals (1)
165:18
search (1)
361: 9
seated (1)
58:21
second (52)
10:19;34:15;
36:10;40:12;42:17;
51:14;60:17;81: 2;
85:13,25,25;88:16;
93:11,18;101:19;
102:15;105:18;
106:13;110: 7;
116:19;117: 9;
121:18;132:24;
137:11;138: 6;
189: 3;191:16,25;
197:20;201: 6,18;
205:17;209: 7;
210:12,19;212:22;
216: 8;217: 1;232: 6;
237:25;250: 7;
252:14;253: 3;
302: 4,12;303: 2;
320:24;335:19;
338: 9,11;348:18;
354: 9
secondary (1)
51: 1
secondly (1)
71: 3
secretary (4)
67:16;71:23;
72:17;92:17
section (6)
32:13;53:13;
73:21;80: 7;178: 6,
15
Sections (4)
177: 8;178: 3;
264:22;282:17
secure (1)
245:11
security (1)
78:17
seeing (1)
87:16
seek (3)
21: 2;316:23,24
seeking (15)
20: 4;26: 6;30: 3;
61:22;63:12;110: 8;
113:22;114:10;
116:17;120:17;
126:10;279:18;
280:16;339:17;
343:10
seems (1)
30: 8
self- (1)
139: 8
self-recuse (1)
47:12
self-report (1)
221:21
send (15)
70:24;72: 8;84:17,
18;127: 8,10;128: 3;
134:10;137: 5;
138: 7,19;140: 6;
188:19;207: 5;
246:17
sending (10)
40:20;41: 6;138: 8,
16;139: 3;144:12;
188:11,12;213:21;
245:11
Senior (2)
231:16;268:22
sense (6)
31: 3;200:12;
288:22;291:14;
323: 9,10
sensibilities (1)
74:11
sensitive (1)
287:21
sent (29)
48:14;70:19;
77:15,18,23;134:11;
137: 9;138:18;
139:23;140:20;
149: 1;186: 7, 9,10;
187:17;188: 4;
189:22;198:17,18;
209:14;246: 2;
247: 2;305: 1, 4, 6;
306: 7;328: 2,12,13
sentence (6)
32:21,23;35:18;
39:13,21;201: 7
separate (3)
127: 8;267:25;
337:10
September (4)
254:21;270:14;
282:14,15
series (2)
213: 1;300: 7
serious (2)
134:25;138:10
seriously (2)
10:24;31:13
serve (2)
172:10;289: 7
served (8)
170: 3, 5,11;
175: 6;245:12;
268:16,24;269: 2
service (4)
12: 1;207: 7;
208: 5;244: 6
Services (5)
176:12;185:15;
224: 7;260: 7;273:22
serving (2)
173:18;326:17
session (2)
319:23;320: 1
set (21)
12:13;31:23;
32:25;77: 4;148:14;
149: 8;182: 4;
215:17;224:20;
(504) 529-3355
(32) role - set

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
251: 9,14,17;254:24;
258:12;264: 6;
297:13;299:22;
328:22;330: 3, 5, 5
sets (2)
48: 8;326: 3
setting (2)
157:24;245: 8
settings (1)
149: 7
settlement (1)
251:20
Seven (1)
360: 2
several (12)
18: 9;47: 1;117: 7;
121:23;125: 7;
173: 5, 6;187: 5;
195: 4;267: 6;
288:23;356:21
sexual (41)
13: 8;24:11,22;
28:20;29:15;30: 5,
18;64:14;88:10;
106: 7;123:13;
165:23;175:12;
187:11;193:10;
197: 5;202: 5, 9;
216:19;221:24;
222:25;223:24;
232:25;254: 1;
261:16;262: 5,18;
264:25;275:12,18;
276:21;278:13;
279: 1,21;280:19;
292:23;293: 8;
296:13;298:25;
319:14;347: 4
sexually (8)
28:12;79: 7;
123: 3;174:16;
212:13;258:10;
274:18;317:22
SG (1)
326: 1
shall (14)
27: 1;111:18;
115: 7,18;178: 9,11,
17;282: 4,22,24;
283: 4;330: 3, 5;
339:15
shared (1)
320: 5
sharing (2)
37: 2;346:22
Shawn (1)
98:10
Sheep (11)
95: 4;105:10,12;
109: 6;215:24;
300:14,15;301:15,
18;302:23;307: 1
Sheepless (1)
95: 4
sheet (2)
249:25;253:18
Sheriff (2)
221:12,20
Sheriff's (1)
314: 8
Shirley (5)
206: 4;250:16;
254: 2;255: 1,21
shit (2)
354:18,19
shock (2)
134: 6;135: 2
shocked (1)
104:24
short (7)
89:17;129:22;
130:20;132:10,14;
167:17;203: 9
shorthand (1)
221:11
shortly (2)
325: 5;327: 3
shotgun (1)
291:14
show (24)
14:16;15: 2;24: 3;
51: 4;70: 8, 9;77: 6;
108:12;126: 1, 5;
153:20;157: 6;
180:16;205:15,20;
206:10,21;207: 1,10;
219: 7;222:20;
249:17;328:23;
352: 4
showed (4)
98:23;207: 8, 9;
253:15
showing (5)
224:24;253:21;
255:16;257: 1;
260:19
shown (2)
206:16;258:22
shows (1)
326:20
shut (5)
172: 4, 7;205:24;
206: 1;362:21
siblings (1)
260: 5
sic (1)
107:21
sick (1)
75:11
side (2)
33:24;224:21
sides (2)
85: 4;149:19
sign (14)
25:17;81:24;
102:17;149: 2;
190:22;210:20;
257:18;302: 5,13;
321: 3;322:15;
344: 2;353: 2;355: 6
signatories (2)
201:11;203:12
signatory (1)
69:22
signature (14)
65:24;75: 4;81: 8,
10;93:11;177: 4, 6;
189: 9,15,20;205:18;
207:17;264:15;
282:18
signatures (3)
69:20;189: 2;
343:25
signed (12)
27:17;125:22;
142:12;172:24;
215:22;223:12;
256:14;257:22;
258: 2;282:16;
290: 8;304: 4
signing (1)
151: 1
silenced (1)
168:17
similar (5)
41:22;278:13,25;
279:20;280:18
Simon (2)
71:21;91:22
simple (3)
19: 1;89:17;
242:14
simply (16)
18:16;19:15;29: 6;
37: 3;39:11;40: 8;
49:15;88:22;90:15;
148:12;194: 7;
217:11;269:15;
291:11;331:13;
339: 1
simultaneously (1)
148:18
sister (2)
184:17;213:18
sit (5)
16:20;47:13;
210: 7;218:20;
237:18
site (28)
81:22;95: 2;96:18,
22,22,24,24;97: 6,14,
21,22;98: 1, 8,10,13,
15,19,21;99: 2;
109: 9;146: 2;
300:15,17;302:24;
307: 9,23;320:21,22
sites (12)
88: 2;93:21;95: 9,
20;98:23;99: 4, 6,15;
205:25;306:20;
307:21;319:10
sitting (2)
184:17;253:23
situation (5)
38:25;39: 1;
135: 5;199:21;
323:14
situations (2)
15: 7;87: 9
six (5)
218:18;223: 6;
255:20;260: 3, 5
skip (1)
355:11
skipped (1)
281:10
Skye (1)
250:15
Slidell (4)
255:19;257: 6;
322:13,17
slows (1)
266:20
small (3)
59:20;65:17;
170:17
Smallwood (9)
28:14;274:22;
275:16;276: 6,19;
277: 7,22;279:17;
280:15
smart (1)
325: 8
smidgen (1)
38:20
Smith (2)
287: 7,19
So2d (1)
53:14
social (14)
18: 6;23: 5;24: 2;
25:16;32: 1,24;
35:20;146: 2,10;
156:24;269: 6;
299:23;308:24;
343:25
society (1)
19:25
soft (1)
48: 1
solicit (2)
35:20;343:25
solicitation (1)
345: 8
solicited (5)
17:24;22:19;23: 7;
40:14;74: 3
soliciting (4)
19:18;22:10;
73:13;80:13
solution (1)
213:16
Somebody (22)
33: 7, 8,25;34: 1;
36:14;73: 3, 5;74: 5;
87:21;96: 5;98: 1;
155: 8,22;156:13;
199:22;224:15;
243:15;253:24;
261: 4;271:20;
273:12;350:17
somebody's (2)
147:18;199:23
somehow (3)
39: 7;140: 1;
151:11
someone (17)
15:14;69:10;
96:10;172:11;
185:23;196: 2;
204:15;240:22;
257:17;293: 3;
296:23;304:25;
326:25;344:13;
349:10;350:20;
351:12
something' (1)
242:23
sometimes (7)
86:23;115:14;
164:14,21;165:16;
166: 4;286:17
somewhere (11)
37: 5;74: 6;
111:24;132:18;
151:25;172: 9;
173:23;196: 1;
252:11;287: 2;
349:15
sorely (1)
233:25
sorry (32)
43:21;88:14;
105:22;113:16;
115: 8;119: 6;
121:14;124:25;
132: 3;138:18;
150:19;167:22,25;
184:23;197:18;
203: 9;253: 1;
273:16;274: 7,12;
280:24;281:16,20;
290:21;329:22;
333: 2;334:23;
335: 9,25;345:25;
361: 4;362:14
sort (13)
30:19;33:10;
47:18;48:15,15;
127: 2;138:20;
147:17;202:22;
244:16;268:19;
300:20;327:24
sorts (1)
33: 6
(504) 529-3355
(33) sets - sorts

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
sought (7)
18: 3;126: 9;
148:17;289:20;
316:16,19,24
sounds (2)
327:12;357:18
source (3)
73: 9;79:15,19
south (2)
170:18;221:12
Southeastern (1)
59:24
Southern (1)
170:19
spare (1)
359: 5
spawned (1)
38: 9
speak (6)
62:11,15;125: 4;
156: 8;236: 1;260:20
speaking (2)
135: 6;145:24
speaks (3)
152: 9;299:11;
319: 6
specially (1)
157: 2
specific (19)
66:21;68:14;
99:14,15,15;103: 5;
115: 4;130:10,13;
145:10;156:16,18;
183:13;226:15;
229:20;231:20;
302: 7, 8;345:13
specifically (17)
19:17;53: 2;
131: 4;179:10;
198:23;214:15;
225: 2;238: 4;
247:15;256:17;
258: 9;259:25;
262:18;279:13;
319: 4;325:25;
358:12
speculate (1)
225:21
speculating (1)
225:16
speculation (4)
68: 6;78:10;
103:13,18
speech (1)
18:14
speed (3)
77: 5;182: 3;
328:22
speeds (1)
266:20
spelled (6)
57: 7, 8;208: 3;
254: 6, 6;268:10
spite (1)
209: 8
spoke (3)
12:17;82:16;
132:20
spoken (5)
131: 6;204:17;
235:24;273:11,13
Sponsored (3)
100:18;357:17,22
spouse (1)
146: 3
St (11)
60:22;76:15;89: 1;
91:18;104:11;
106:24;108:21;
110: 1;165: 3;
293:13;335:22
stacks (1)
237:11
staff (16)
25:10;66:23;67: 7,
15,16;68:10;87:12;
91:20;92:18;93: 4;
156:24;183:22;
198:25,25;303:18;
327:14
staff's (1)
92: 2
stamp (6)
81: 6;114:18;
210:16;348:19,24,25
stamped (1)
81: 5
Stamps (3)
52:11,13,19
S-T-A-M-P-S (1)
52:12
stand (3)
129: 4;150: 8;
195:22
standard (5)
33: 5;70:19;
149:24;294:19;
296: 2
standards (2)
105: 7, 7
standing (1)
167:11
standpoint (2)
73:19;195:15
Stanford (1)
38: 6
start (9)
12:14;15: 1;52: 9;
211: 6;215:20;
308:23;315:18;
319: 1;323:13
started (16)
10: 8;168:15;
169:17;172:16;
183: 2, 4;251: 3;
252: 7;268: 2;269: 4;
310: 3,18;322:13,16;
323: 1;360: 9
starting (5)
102:20;144: 9;
210:23;322:25;
358:23
starts (3)
106: 3;191:18;
216:17
state (28)
49:16;60:18;
62:21;63: 1,24;66: 7;
72: 5;85: 2;103:14;
140:22;164: 7,19;
167: 7;174:22;
175:15;185:22;
187: 3;201:14;
203:15,18;218:19;
233:21;244:23;
246: 2, 7;269:17;
299: 5;362:18
stated (7)
20:12;111:11;
133:11;279:10;
281:25;309:14;
338: 3
statement (50)
12:10,12,17;28: 4;
29: 1;31:21;41:14;
46:17;90:23;94:14,
15;107: 4;108: 5,12;
118: 3,16;122: 1;
137:14;142: 3;
145: 4,17;195: 1,12;
197: 1;203:17;
214:18,19;217:22;
225: 9,13;275:14;
285:12,18;295:19;
309:14;311: 9;
318:25;332:24,25;
333: 3, 6;334:10,20,
23;335: 1, 3, 4;
349: 9,10;350:25
statements (22)
18: 4;19:17;22:10;
25: 6,22;26:17;
39:14,19;46:20,22;
51: 9;80:15;89: 7;
110: 8;126:20;
137:13;141:12;
192:14;202:11;
203:23;229:22;
292:14
states (21)
16:19;17: 7;19: 8,
22;26:22;57: 5;
70:24;84:25;102: 7;
110:10;116:20;
121:20;181: 9;
195: 4;210:19;
282:19;283: 2,12;
331:10;339:14;
343: 3
State's (1)
41:24
stating (3)
69:14;282:16;
349:21
status (2)
62: 5;172:18
statute (2)
13: 6;226: 6
statutes (1)
227:13
stay (23)
64: 5;77: 1;87: 7;
105: 1;109:12;
123:20;124:10,11,
15,24;125: 1, 2, 5;
143: 1,23;149: 4, 5;
197:17;328:18;
329:14,16;338:11,20
stayed (12)
62:25;63: 6;76: 1,
6;293:25;297:12;
329:25;336:14,21;
338: 6, 9,23
stayed/pending (1)
16:19
staying (1)
64:23
stays (1)
208:10
stems (1)
32:22
step (2)
25:14;44: 1
stepfather (2)
77: 6;328:23
steps (2)
48:17;190:12
still (55)
16:18;23:25;52: 6;
63:24;75:25;76: 3, 4;
78:23;79: 8,14;
80:16,19;86:22;
88:14;93: 8;95: 1, 5;
97:13;102: 8,13;
104:25;109: 8;
121:13;129: 4;
134:21;143:23;
152:24;164:18;
187:18,20;195: 7;
199:10;254:12;
270:12,13;273:12;
280:19;282:10;
284:12,13;286:25;
291:23;293: 1;
303: 9;314:18,21,22;
317: 4;331:24;
336: 5;345:16;
346: 3, 8,12;356: 8
stipulate (5)
55:22;100:24;
281: 1;283:14;332: 5
stipulated (13)
53: 5;56: 9;83: 8;
100:20;101: 2, 6, 7;
177:17;267: 9,23;
290: 6;291:13;
299:13
stipulating (2)
15: 4;49: 6
stipulation (68)
62: 8;101:10;
267:21,22;269:14;
270:10,14,21;271: 5;
274:15,15,21;276: 2;
279:14,24;280:14,
20;281:10,13,18,22;
282:10,13;288:24;
289: 3,11,16;292:20;
293: 2,10,18,24;
294: 5, 8,15;297: 2,
11,16,20,25;298: 9,
15,20;299: 3,12,20;
300: 2;321: 2;322: 9;
331: 1, 6,23;332: 8,
19;333:12;336:13;
343:18;344:22;
345: 2, 7;349: 1,17;
350: 5;353:21,22;
354:11;355: 2,15
stipulations (21)
29: 9;61:11;
177:15;266:10,13,
15,18,24;267: 1, 5,
19;275: 2;288:24;
290: 3,25;291: 3, 5;
292: 4;300: 9;
333:19;349:17
stock (1)
269: 3
stomach (1)
87:21
stop (14)
20:21;88:23;93: 4;
109: 2;195: 8;
204:24;206:23;
211:22;219: 6, 7;
336: 6,10;344:18;
360:16
stopped (4)
93: 1;119: 7;
196: 3;252:12
stopping (1)
144:14
Storm (1)
268:23
Strasburg (1)
359: 1
strategy (1)
86:24
Street (6)
59:16;93: 5;
146: 5;169:20;
268:12;328: 8
stricken (3)
45:19;360:22;
(504) 529-3355
(34) sought - stricken

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
361: 7
strict (2)
53:18;54: 9
strictly (1)
41:23
strike (2)
139: 7;335:25
stroke (1)
172: 4
strong (1)
356: 8
strongly (1)
327: 5
struggle (2)
37:16;291:24
struggling (1)
38: 8
stuff (13)
38:20;41: 6;
138:25;141: 7;
144: 9,13;151:10;
152: 1;200:11;
206: 9;237:22;
242:18;351: 7
stunned (2)
75:17;104:25
stupid (2)
167:24;355:12
subject (32)
13:23;21:18;33: 7;
53: 1,11;56:20,22;
57:24;63:21;64: 3,
22;73: 7;76:14;
123:15,18;124: 9,13;
129:12;179:24;
244:17;297:17;
329:14,19,20,23;
336:16,20,24;338: 8,
13,25;339:22
subjecting (3)
278:23;279:19;
280:17
subjective (2)
33:23;35: 2
submission (1)
112: 3
submit (2)
15:14;151: 5
submitted (2)
10:21;344:17
subsequent (4)
50: 3;196:18;
217:17;232:16
subsequently (3)
27:10;49:19;
298:16
substance (3)
138: 4;342: 2,18
substantive (2)
21: 7;26: 9
substitute (1)
361:14
succinctly (1)
31:23
sudden (1)
160: 7
suddenly (4)
48:12;140:15,23;
141:25
suffering (1)
213:19
sufficient (1)
168:11
suggest (7)
131:18;197: 2;
234:11;300:13;
318:23;342: 7;
348:13
suggested (2)
69: 9;234: 8
suggesting (1)
202: 6
suggests (1)
102: 7
summaries (1)
230: 8
summary (1)
28: 5
summer (2)
269: 2, 2
Sunday (3)
179:22;215:19;
254:23
supervise (1)
215:18
supervised (2)
215:21;294:18
supervising (1)
254:20
supplemental (8)
16:10;19: 3;22: 4;
26:21;38:19;42:13;
47: 9;228:20
support (9)
28:22,23;212:19;
250:24;276:20;
289:20,24;298:18,22
supporters (1)
151: 1
supports (2)
151: 4;184: 7
suppose (1)
360:18
supposed (9)
171:14;214:11;
248: 8;278:19;
287:15;326: 4, 5;
340:24;354:18
Supreme (55)
20:12,17;25:12,13;
31:11;36:12;37:10;
41:24;52:10;53:12;
65: 7;69:19;70: 1;
77:13,15,18,23,24;
92: 5;100:16;101:24;
102: 3, 6;104:15;
109:15;130:23;
135:11;172: 5, 8;
181:12;209: 2;
228:22;229:10,13,
16;230:21;298: 1, 5,
7;304: 9;310:23,25;
313: 6, 7, 8;326:10;
329:12;330:12;
342:10;344:17;
346:19;347:12,15;
355:19;356:15
sure (49)
29: 1;43:14;44: 7;
52: 6;71: 6;76:23;
78:24;83:15;102:24;
103:15;120:12;
121: 5;124:20;
126:14;135:10;
148:23;153:21;
165: 5;168:16;
176:20;182:10;
195:20;211: 2;
219:23;222:17;
255:25;257: 8;
287:20;289: 2,10;
290: 1,20;301: 3,21;
308:18;311:13;
321:16;322: 8;
326:12;338: 1;
345:14;348:16;
356:25;357:18,24;
358: 8;360:21;
361: 6;362: 7
surprising (1)
327:10
Susan (1)
11:18
Susan's (1)
168:15
suspect (1)
327: 5
suspicions (1)
305: 6
sworn (11)
58:10;59:11;
168:19;265:21;
285:12,17;309:14;
311: 8;318:25;
334: 9;350:25
synopsis (3)
220:23,25;249: 5
system (11)
159: 6;219:11;
231: 9,10,23;251: 2,
12;343:11;347: 3, 6,
9
T
table (1)
65:17
tabs (1)
65:19
tactics (1)
166: 5
talk (18)
29: 6;33: 3;63: 9;
131:18;146: 5;
158: 6;169: 3;178: 2;
179: 9;214:22;
254:25;261: 1,23,24;
262:12;267:12;
340:12;356:21
talked (14)
49:14;71: 4,19;
135: 8;137:22;
204:15;230:14;
235:18;238:13;
244:10;296:20;
311: 9;347:22;358: 9
talking (28)
13:21;15: 2;17: 4;
33:17;37: 2, 7;85:18;
104: 6;121:10;
123:22,25;141: 1;
158:10;162: 1;
171: 8,16;191:19;
198:20;214:15;
238:20;249:17;
252: 7;256:20;
262: 1, 9;307:17;
330:21;360: 2
talks (5)
197: 3;212:12;
232:25;233: 1;
264:23
Tammany (11)
60:22;76:15;89: 1;
91:18;104:12;
106:25;108:22;
110: 1;165: 3;
293:14;335:23
tape (1)
222: 1
tapes (13)
178: 7;179: 6;
222:24,24;223: 2, 3;
224:17,25;225: 5,10,
12;264:24;282:20
Target (2)
100:16;209: 2
TD (1)
151:21
teaching (1)
257:15
team (1)
10:12
tears (1)
219:12
technicality (1)
213:12
tedious (2)
291:16,20
telephone (6)
25: 9;40:19;92: 9;
129:15;135:24;
321:21
telephoned (1)
129: 8
telling (4)
224:19;260:21;
341:11;344: 3
tells (2)
171: 1;211: 5
temporary (18)
63:12;65:11;
172:22;173: 1, 3, 8;
255: 2,23;264: 7;
276: 5;277: 5,17,20;
279:17;280:16;
294:17;295:25;
297: 7
tend (2)
141:13;270: 3
tender (2)
122:23;219:18
tenth (1)
81:10
Teresa (1)
52:13
term (4)
170:11,12;235:16;
269: 4
terminate (6)
177:19;181: 5;
289:20;298:11,16;
313:25
terminated (1)
273:22
terminating (2)
77: 8;329: 1
termination (1)
254:12
terms (3)
34:19;47:16;52: 4
terrible (1)
71: 8
terribly (2)
270: 9;277:14
terrific (1)
57:13
test (1)
165:16
testified (8)
58:10;73:15;
80:18;146:20;
168:19;214: 1;
265:21;286: 5
testify (6)
16:24;67: 6;73:22;
161:24;167:22;
193: 1
testifying (4)
79: 5,18,24;80:22
testimony (31)
12: 6;16: 5;17:15;
18: 7,25;20:24;
26:19;27:18;31: 1;
52: 9;55:13;71:24;
(504) 529-3355
(35) strict - testimony

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
73:18;80:17;85:22;
101: 3;117:10;
133: 4,15;159: 9;
164: 4;196: 1;
234:25;266: 5;
281: 4;284: 9;
285:20;306: 5;
312:18;356: 9;
360:10
thankfully (1)
269: 1
Thanks (4)
44:25;164: 4;
219:25;220: 5
That'll (1)
168:10
theirs (1)
207: 8
therapeutic (6)
156:22;157: 8,11,
24;178:21;283: 8
Thereafter (4)
67:22;76: 7;
170: 8;254:20
thereby (2)
77: 7;328:25
therefore (2)
28:21;340: 6
thereto (2)
222: 9;223: 7
Thibodaux (1)
351:13
Thibodeaux (1)
350:19
thick (1)
223: 6
thing' (1)
259:24
thinking (2)
304: 8;356:16
third (9)
39:13;85:16;
106: 2;141:13;
191:17;212:16;
216:14;252:21;
328:15
Thirty (2)
168: 4;170:17
Thomas (23)
170: 8;172: 3;
175:23;177:10;
206:19;209:20;
214:12;220:10,11;
221: 7;222:15;
223: 9;224:19;
225:17,22;226:11,
12;227: 9;250:15;
281:14,24;288:25;
289: 7
Thomas's (3)
177: 4;193: 8;
226: 2
though (13)
19:14;26:24;89: 4;
90:20;104:13;107: 2;
108:25;137:22;
162:23;226:21;
246:23;336: 1;
340:21
thought (14)
30: 9;60: 6;71:10;
131: 2;134: 8;161: 5,
7;185:21;245:18;
250: 8;281:16;
290: 5, 5;358: 1
thoughts (7)
78: 7,11,15,16;
185: 4;188: 3;286:14
thousands (2)
84:16;165:21
threat (1)
72:13
threaten (1)
188: 7
threatened (1)
218: 6
threatening (2)
72:22;74:25
threats (2)
71: 9;87:13
three (12)
16:13;39:20;47: 7;
59:25;127:10;164: 9,
9;187: 3;268:21;
325:16;337: 6,10
threw (2)
54:22;151: 9
throughout (2)
32: 6;84:25
throwing (1)
152: 1
Thursday (3)
105:13;216: 2;
310:12
thus (2)
21:20;45:18
tied (1)
74: 7
till (1)
132: 4
times (8)
10:12;25:21;
97:16;140: 7;168:23;
302: 8;350:20;
356:21
Times-Picayune (1)
351:14
timing (6)
77:12;78: 7;
185: 5;187:15;
188: 3;211:11
titling (1)
272:19
tizzy (1)
206:18
today (61)
10: 5;11: 3;12: 8,
22;16: 6,20,25;
22:21;27:19;30: 4;
41:19;43:13;45:23;
50: 6,10,15;58:15;
72:19;106:17;
113:20;152:13;
158: 6;165: 1;
168:23;190:11;
210: 8;234:25;
253:23;254: 3;
269:21;270:12,13,
21;274: 9;279:23;
280:20;281: 5, 8;
282:11;283:15;
284: 9;290:12;
293: 2;299:18,19;
300:14;303:19;
306:14;307:17;
309:16;319: 7;
326:20,25;332: 9;
333:17;334:17;
337:17;346:12;
356:21;359: 3;
362:25
together (6)
21: 9;113: 3;
196:21;274:10,12;
323:16
told (43)
71:15;91:21;
127: 8;129:23;
130: 9,12;131: 5;
132: 9,12,24;137: 3;
169: 7;183:10;
184:17;188:13;
197: 8,10;199: 5;
200: 5;204:16,21;
221: 3;224: 4;
234:20;235: 8,14;
238: 4,15;239:10,14;
241:12;242:21;
246:17;247: 9,20,22;
259:19;266: 2;
271:14,19;279:12;
288:17;299: 9
tomorrow (1)
358:25
tone (2)
12:13;356: 7
Tony (2)
208: 3;243:19
took (39)
25:14;45: 2;60:14;
65: 5;98:25;105: 8;
107:17;128: 8;
131: 7,13;171:13,25;
172:25;177:21;
181:23;185: 7;
188: 6;203:23;
205:13;219:13;
230:24;231:15;
234:16;235:22;
244: 9;268:20;
269: 5;273:25;
310: 5, 7,13;311:21;
314: 3, 5, 6;318:19;
319:22;329:10;
341:19
top (9)
69:16;70: 5;85:16;
190: 6;209: 4;
212:23;229: 2;
353:19;355: 2
topic (1)
68:20
topics (2)
18:10;158:14
totality (1)
54:16
totally (1)
33:23
touch (3)
142:21,23;321: 1
touched (2)
30:25;78: 3
Towards (3)
212:23;335:19;
339: 9
town (2)
59:20;170:17
TP (1)
350:19
track (1)
147:24
tragedy (1)
347:20
train (1)
161: 7
trained (1)
157: 2
training (4)
187:10;268:25;
269: 6;271:18
transcript (9)
14: 5;195:20;
285:17,19,24;
311:11;318:25;
319: 2;333:18
transmitted (1)
87:15
transpired (7)
107: 5;109: 4;
160: 4;195:13,16;
224: 3;237:17
travel (2)
200: 3,15
traveled (1)
268:19
trial (16)
104:17,20;111:20;
115:19;251: 7, 9,11,
15,18,20,22;253:23;
254:16;271:20,21;
314:23
trials (2)
53:21,24
tried (5)
89:16;219: 2;
271:12,23;314: 9
trier (2)
53:16;54:12
triers (1)
54: 5
trolling (1)
97: 5
trouble (2)
59: 6;205:11
true (19)
27:15;82: 8;90:18;
127:25;161: 1;
176: 8;270: 1,12,13;
284: 5;285: 1;
309:25;332: 6;
333:17,20,25;334: 5,
21,22
truth (4)
51:11;202: 4, 4;
332: 8
truthful (4)
332:24,25;333: 3,
6
try (13)
11: 4;23: 2;
182:15;204: 3;
205: 6;237:18;
243: 8;260:10;
267:16,20,23;
324:11;343: 1
trying (23)
18:14,15;82:17;
92:11;143: 3;160:13;
173:21;202: 3, 6,24;
203: 2;204:19,23;
244:22;263: 5;
291:16;313:25;
315:13,14,15,15;
332: 3;347:15
turn (52)
24: 1;65:20;69:24;
71:16;81: 2,19;
85:13;91:15;93: 9;
100: 8;101:19;
105: 9,17;109:19;
110:25;112:19;
118:24;120:11;
176:23;177: 5;
179:16;186: 1;
189:19,24;198: 3, 5;
200:18;205:14;
207:12;208:19;
210:12;211:23;
212:22;214:20;
215:11,23;216: 8;
263:23;277: 4;
286: 4;303:13;
305:12;308: 7;
324:11,13;335:10;
348:18,24;349:13;
(504) 529-3355
(36) thankfully - turn

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
350: 2;352: 8;357:11
turned (3)
184:22;318:10;
349: 3
turns (1)
87:20
tweet (10)
349: 7;350: 4;
351: 5,19,23;352: 1,
10;353:20;354:24;
355:12
tweeted (11)
348: 8;349: 2,19;
350: 6;351: 9;
352:10;353:24;
354: 3,17;355: 4,16
tweeting (3)
346:22;348:15;
350:14
twelve (1)
167: 5
twice (4)
58:14;147: 9;
251:11;261:12
Twitter (14)
185:17;189: 8;
200:11;347:23;
348: 2, 5,21;350:17,
25;351: 2, 4,10,17;
352:20
Twitters (1)
192: 5
two (65)
12:24;13: 5;15: 8,
19;16:12;17: 5;
20:25;30:25;35: 7;
47: 4;60:21,22,23;
64:19;70:18;76:13,
20;87:24;94:22;
98:20;105:16;
116:23;117:20;
132:10,20;142:17;
149:12,12;150:25;
156:21;170:21;
180:19;190: 7,16;
191: 9;212: 5;216: 6;
222: 3, 4;251:23;
252:20;255:19;
257: 5;258:10;
274:10,13;289:24;
293:15;301:16;
307:19,20,21;308: 2;
310: 1;312: 4;
317:12;318:15,21;
332:13;337: 1, 1, 7;
352:12,15,16
type (10)
14: 2;37:21;60:15;
87:11;92:24;100:11;
165:10,14;170:24;
238:25
typical (1)
327:24
typing (1)
350:14
U
UCCJA (1)
64: 1
UCCJEA (1)
340: 1
ugly (3)
225: 4,11,18
ultimate (1)
54: 3
Ultimately (4)
62:25;65: 7;240: 5,
23
unauthenticated (1)
53: 4
unaware (1)
41: 3
under (21)
13: 5;20: 1, 2,18;
22:15;24: 9;28: 5;
31:22;33:15;34:11;
45:21,24;54: 4;
165:18;207: 2;
233:17;251: 4;
297: 7;341:10,15;
342:23
undergo (1)
298:24
underlying (9)
13:24;17: 3;28: 6,
20;106: 3;169: 4;
270:22;284:17;
342:18
undermining (1)
145:25
underneath (1)
190:25
undersigned (8)
76:12,25;110:11;
141:16,21;186:24;
325:12;328:17
understood (2)
252: 3;334:24
undo (2)
314:14;315:14
unethical (1)
107:22
unfortunately (1)
35: 6
Unh-unh (1)
252: 5
Uniform (4)
233:17;235: 2;
237: 3;297: 7
unique (1)
53:15
United (3)
57: 4;84:25;343: 3
University (2)
59:25;170:18
unlawful (4)
77: 1;295:10;
296:11;328:18
Unlawfully (4)
294: 3, 7;329:25;
338: 7
unless (7)
40:14;41:23;
47:14;51:21;229: 3;
275:22;330: 4
Unlike (1)
54:11
UNO (1)
268:20
unopposed (1)
170:10
unprofessional (1)
23:12
unredact (1)
15: 2
unrelated (3)
26:14;39:16;
151:15
unrestricted (2)
294:19;296: 2
unsolicited (3)
40:21;136: 6, 9
unsuccessful (2)
317: 7;318: 9
unsupervised (7)
209:14;254:21;
309:21;311:20;
313:23;316: 1;318: 4
untrue (2)
137:14;335: 3
unusual (1)
31:15
unwillingness (1)
157:18
up (76)
11: 4;12:15;14: 1;
21:16;23: 2, 9;44:10;
50:24;52:19;55:13;
62:17;74:14;97:13;
109: 8,13;119: 7;
128:15;130: 6;
144:18;153:14;
159:20;165:16;
170:11;175: 9;
178:24;179: 5, 7;
180:15,16;182: 3;
187: 5;192:24;
199: 7;200:15;
205: 3,10;206:10,16,
21;207: 8, 9,10;
213: 5,15;221:23;
223: 6,11;228: 4;
230:23;234: 4;
236:21;238:22;
240: 5;241:20;
242: 1;243: 3;
245:13;259: 6;
260:19;262: 7;
263:22;266:20;
268:13;299:22;
304:12;308:22;
310:14;314:13,23;
324:12;334: 4, 6, 9;
341: 7;352: 4;355:24
upcoming (1)
315:19
uploaded (3)
284:24;286:22;
309: 5
upon (8)
30:25;96: 7;99:17;
142:24;282: 1;
292:15;340: 4;363: 3
upset (1)
233:25
upsetting (1)
24:11
upstate (1)
184:11
use (6)
156:24;157: 1;
166: 4;226:15,15,22
used (16)
17:10;25:23;32: 1,
23;35:19;47: 7;
98:17,19;221:11;
299:22;307:13,13;
320:17;323: 1;
343:24;347:21
using (1)
116:25
usually (2)
92:17;167:11
utilizing (1)
261: 7
V
vacated (1)
243:24
vacating (1)
243:12
validated (1)
349: 4
value (3)
10:11;54:15;74: 8
vanish (1)
148:12
various (4)
52:25;99: 6,18;
228: 1
verbally (1)
206: 3
verbatim (2)
21:22;230: 2
version (1)
332:17
versus (15)
28:10;57: 7;
109:24;116: 2,14;
120:14;123: 1,25;
151:21;171: 9;
250:15;264: 4;
270:24;289:14;
326: 1
vetted (1)
92:17
via (3)
70:17;245: 4;
246: 7
vice (2)
245:20;272: 9
victims (3)
13: 6, 8;269:10
Victoria (2)
150:13,19
video (15)
178: 7,18;212:19;
214: 5, 8;221:25;
222: 1, 4,24;223: 2,
23;224:17;264:24;
282:20;283: 5
videos (2)
179: 1;214:13
view (1)
199:16
violate (3)
23:13,13,15
violated (5)
21:14,14;25:25;
27:21;108: 2
violates (1)
185:21
violating (2)
20: 3;23:20
violation (8)
99:20;134:16;
146:11;179: 3;
193:17;336:21;
338: 5;339: 4
violations (4)
35: 5,16;48:22;
138:13
violative (1)
80:12
violence (1)
269:10
Virginia (1)
10: 5
vis-a-vis (1)
229:11
visit (1)
317:21
visitation (26)
28: 7;180:25;
209:15;213:22;
215:15,19;221:21;
250:24;254: 5, 9,18;
262: 9,10;263: 4;
294:18,18,20;296: 2,
3;309:21;311:20;
313:19,20,23;316: 1;
318: 4
visited (1)
(504) 529-3355
(37) turned - visited

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
142:24
visiting (1)
262:13
visits (3)
194:13;254: 9;
331:19
vital (1)
147:24
voice (5)
10:10;25:19;
199: 3;302:13;322: 6
voiced (1)
304:17
voluntarily (15)
27: 5;110:17;
111: 3,13;114:23;
115: 6, 9;116:21;
119: 1,10,19;121:21;
143:20;160: 6;320: 2
voluntary (3)
116: 8;121: 1,16
volunteer (1)
147:12
volunteering (1)
12: 1
vote (1)
181:10
voters (1)
259: 8
vulnerable (2)
181:17;260: 1
W
Wait (2)
132: 4;139:13
waiting (2)
60: 7;174:21
walk (3)
266:12;269:13;
359:24
walking (1)
290:12
Wanda (15)
183: 3, 6,17;
189:17;206:12;
278:10,21;281: 7;
305: 8,10;314: 4, 5;
324:22;327: 7,11
wants (7)
46: 6;195: 7;
233: 6;254: 8,10,13;
336: 6
war (1)
268:25
warranted (1)
124:17
was/is (1)
326: 2
Washington (2)
60:21;165: 3
waste (1)
55:15
watch (1)
259:12
watched (1)
103: 7
watching (5)
102:23;211: 1;
258:19;259: 9;
260:19
way (50)
16: 5;30:21;36:17;
38:14;45:24;48:11,
15,21;62: 8;73: 3, 8;
81:20;123: 9;131:19,
25;137: 1;140:19;
142:19;143:20;
157:11,12;158:22;
166:10;175: 7;
183:17;189:25;
197:21;200:16,19;
205: 6;216: 8;219: 1;
235: 6;239: 6,18;
257:10;260:18;
263: 6;266:17;
297: 1;305:21;
310:15;314:16;
322: 1;325: 9;
335:10;337:22;
340: 7;347: 9;352: 9
ways (3)
18: 2;117:14;
213:14
website (34)
14:19,21;36: 6, 9;
150:13,15,19,21,24;
151: 5;153:13;
154: 1,16,23;155: 4;
190: 5;192: 5;231: 2,
6;307:12;308:12,17;
320:17;321: 3;
322:10,12;323:17,
21;331: 2, 6;335: 5,
13,16;346:12
websites (10)
95: 9,13,16;
154:14;155: 4;
228: 1;300:21;
307:20;320: 9,17
week (1)
147: 9
weekend (3)
254:19;294:20;
296: 3
weeks (8)
33:16;107:18;
231:17;273:17;
310: 1;312: 4;
317:12;318:15
Weep (1)
342:24
wee-wee's (1)
320: 3
weigh (1)
54:15
weight (4)
74:22;84: 9, 9;
192:25
weren't (6)
144:15;266:16;
269: 1;294:24;
312: 8;317:17
whatnot (3)
205:14;306:14;
320: 9
what's (25)
51: 1;80: 3;111: 4;
126:14;136: 1;
140:25;146:21;
147: 7,17;157: 9;
162:18;164: 6;
167: 1;185:10;
205: 8;241:18;
250: 5;251:13;
255:14;311:23;
319: 2, 5;339: 2,10,
11
whatsoever (2)
37: 1;256:23
whenever (1)
80:21
whereas (1)
165:10
wherein (1)
232:17
wherever (2)
171:19;253:25
white (2)
252: 1;253:20
whole (11)
38:19;97: 4;
157:15;220: 7, 8,15;
230:25;232:24;
260: 8;275:21;
305:17
who's (5)
15:20;33: 5;
206: 4;255:19;
332:13
whose (2)
81: 7;183: 3
wife (5)
52:13;81:16;
145: 7, 7,14
Wiggins (1)
170:17
willingness (1)
157:17
Wilson (1)
199: 6
win (1)
199:22
wish (1)
62:11
withdraw (7)
57:10;77: 1;
101:13;158:18;
273:21;276:14;
328:18
within (11)
76: 7;254:15;
310: 1;312: 4;
317:12;318:15;
330: 3, 6;340:23;
344:14;347: 2
without (20)
65: 3;66:20;76: 2;
92:16;97:12;141:18;
143:23;213:20;
214:25;218:14;
244:24;245: 8,19,19;
253: 6;261: 7;
262:20;313:20;
321:18;339:24
withstanding (1)
336:13
witness (52)
12: 6;35: 8;43:13;
52: 9;58: 5, 6;67:14;
74:23;78:14;79:11;
84:11;90:11;94:20;
96:16;97:11;98: 7;
99:25;101:14;
103:25;108:11,15;
111:15;113:13;
115:11;118:13,21;
119:21;122: 7,23;
152:17,19;158: 8;
161:20;163:18;
166:22;171:23;
177:16;184:15;
192:12;193:24;
214:11;219:18;
252:15,23;253: 4;
265: 9,18;291:18;
292: 5,10,17;361: 3
witnesses (3)
11: 2;13: 7;35:14
Witt-Stamps (1)
52:14
woman (1)
92:10
won (1)
213: 1
word (4)
33:19;267:21;
307: 5;310:15
words (3)
33: 1;353:24;
361:11
work (11)
10:22;15:24;
167:10;199:20;
243: 2;257:12;
260: 6;269: 6;
314:16;318:18;
323:16
worked (1)
271: 8
workers (1)
156:24
working (4)
100: 9;178:16;
283: 3;311: 1
works (1)
313:14
world (2)
37: 6;105: 5
worry (1)
135: 2
wound (1)
355:24
wow (1)
155:22
wrap (2)
23: 2;362: 2
writ (35)
25:12;31:11,12;
77:13;101:23;102: 5;
109:13;274: 6;
298: 4, 7;310:14;
312:19;313: 6,11;
316:22;317: 3, 9;
318:19;329:11;
340: 9;341:17,18,19,
22;342: 2,10;344:16,
20;355:22;356: 1, 3,
5,13;357: 2, 3
write (6)
161:16;245:16;
255:24;302:22;
330:24;358:10
writer (1)
350:16
writes (1)
27: 7
writing (5)
27: 6;137:23;
221: 4;241:21;
358:12
writs (18)
64:25;65: 5;
109:17;273:25;
274: 1;297:21;
298: 2;310: 8, 9;
316:16;318: 7;
330:14;342:16;
345:20;346: 5,20;
347:12,18
writ's (1)
274: 4
writted (2)
102: 1;158: 3
written (3)
136:11;221: 9;
334: 8
wrong (5)
112:23;254: 7;
305:23;318:12;
337:20
wrote (11)
51:20,22;94:21;
115: 3;136:18;
137: 2;144:11;
(504) 529-3355
(38) visiting - wrote

13-DB-059
HEARING
February 27, 2014
314: 9;356: 6;
357:12;358:10
Y
y/o (1)
349: 3
year (14)
60: 5, 7;174: 4;
181:23;191: 5;
249:13;268:22;
273:13,24;289:23;
312: 3;326:16;
349: 3;350:24
years (33)
60: 1;61: 2;84:12,
14;88:21;90:15;
94:22;97:19;125: 7,
9;127:10;130:19;
133:12;135: 4;
148:21;149:13;
164: 9, 9;183: 9;
187: 3;194: 7;204: 2;
217:11;218:17;
259:21;268:17,21;
289:24;318:21;
325:16;331:13;
332:13;350:24
yellow (3)
249: 8;251:25;
253:20
yesterday (10)
12:18;19: 2;28: 1;
49:15;50: 4;146:21;
213: 2, 9;214:18;
266: 3
York (1)
184:11
young (1)
75:14
Z
Zone (11)
95: 4;105:10,12;
109: 7;215:25;
300:14,15;301:16,
18;302:24;307: 2
(504) 529-3355
(39) y/o - Zone

2014-02-27 Transcript of Hearing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014-02-27 Transcript of Hearing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

You might also like