Siegelman could testify, truthfully I presume, "I never was asked that, and I never gave that response."
The prosecution claims the Siegelman-Scrushy meeting involved a discussion of a something-for-something deal?
Siegelman could testify, truthfully I presume, "I wanted Richard to serve on the CON board because he had done so under three previous governors, and he was the most high-profile healthcare executive in our state. It would look bad not to have him on the board. Our discussion about the donation to the lottery campaign was a separate matter. One was not contingent on the other."
Prosecutors claim Scrushy badly wanted to serve on the CON board? Scrushy could back the testimony of former Alabama Power CEO Elmer Harris and say, "I'd been on the board a long time and was tired of being on it. I really didn't want to do it. I only agreed because our new governor asked me to do it."
Even with a corrupt judge and a goofy jury, it seems that kind of testimony would have resulted in an acquittal.
As for the current civil case, it continues in Birmingham this week. But from what I can tell, Scrushy acquitted himself pretty darn well on the stand.
That's not to say Scrushy will prevail in the case. It's a bench trial before Jefferson County Circuit Judge Allwin Horn, and I know from firsthand experience that Horn is a sorry excuse for a judge.
Horn already has ruled against Scrushy once, ordering him in 2006 to repay $47.8 million in bonuses, plus interest. My guess is that Horn already had determined how he was going to rule in the trial before testimony ever began.
I look for Horn to find in favor of the plaintiffs, in an amount that is roughly half of the $2.6 billion they are asking for. That sounds like a nice comfortable thing for the judge to do, and it should make the Birmingham legal community happy. If there is anything I've learned about Jefferson County judges, they want to keep the local lawyers happy.
Why did the Scrushy side agree to have Horn hear the case as a bench trial? My best guess is that they thought it would be easier to appeal under those circumstances than if a jury had heard the case.
Was Richard Scrushy really in the dark about the fraud going on at HealthSouth? Before I read his testimony from the current civil case, I found that pretty hard to believe. But now I'm not so sure. I think it's certainly possible that Scrushy was in the dark.
Either way, with Allwin Horn in charge, don't look for justice to be served. I imagine Scrushy's lawyers already are planning their appeal.
As for the criminal case in Montgomery, I think Scrushy's recent testimony shows that he and Siegelman easily could have beaten those flimsy charges if they had taken the stand.
The prosecution claims the Siegelman-Scrushy meeting involved a discussion of a something-for-something deal?
Siegelman could testify, truthfully I presume, "I wanted Richard to serve on the CON board because he had done so under three previous governors, and he was the most high-profile healthcare executive in our state. It would look bad not to have him on the board. Our discussion about the donation to the lottery campaign was a separate matter. One was not contingent on the other."
Prosecutors claim Scrushy badly wanted to serve on the CON board? Scrushy could back the testimony of former Alabama Power CEO Elmer Harris and say, "I'd been on the board a long time and was tired of being on it. I really didn't want to do it. I only agreed because our new governor asked me to do it."
Even with a corrupt judge and a goofy jury, it seems that kind of testimony would have resulted in an acquittal.
As for the current civil case, it continues in Birmingham this week. But from what I can tell, Scrushy acquitted himself pretty darn well on the stand.
That's not to say Scrushy will prevail in the case. It's a bench trial before Jefferson County Circuit Judge Allwin Horn, and I know from firsthand experience that Horn is a sorry excuse for a judge.
Horn already has ruled against Scrushy once, ordering him in 2006 to repay $47.8 million in bonuses, plus interest. My guess is that Horn already had determined how he was going to rule in the trial before testimony ever began.
I look for Horn to find in favor of the plaintiffs, in an amount that is roughly half of the $2.6 billion they are asking for. That sounds like a nice comfortable thing for the judge to do, and it should make the Birmingham legal community happy. If there is anything I've learned about Jefferson County judges, they want to keep the local lawyers happy.
Why did the Scrushy side agree to have Horn hear the case as a bench trial? My best guess is that they thought it would be easier to appeal under those circumstances than if a jury had heard the case.
Was Richard Scrushy really in the dark about the fraud going on at HealthSouth? Before I read his testimony from the current civil case, I found that pretty hard to believe. But now I'm not so sure. I think it's certainly possible that Scrushy was in the dark.
Either way, with Allwin Horn in charge, don't look for justice to be served. I imagine Scrushy's lawyers already are planning their appeal.
As for the criminal case in Montgomery, I think Scrushy's recent testimony shows that he and Siegelman easily could have beaten those flimsy charges if they had taken the stand.
1 | 2
