Sunday, July 26, 2009

Latest Filings in Pickering v Creekmore Byrd

The litigation in Leisha Pickering's lawsuit against Elizabeth Creekmore Byrd continued last week. Mrs. Pickering's attorneys, Oliver Diaz and Chuck McRae, have requested subpoenas for witnesses for deposition testimony. The two names recognizable to me are Charles W. Pickering, Sr., the former U.S. District Judge and U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, and Steve Seale, former Mississippi State Senator, former chief legal advisor to Senator Trent Lott, and Jackson lawyer; according to his LinkedIn page, his clients include Cellular South. As we have noted before, Ms. Creekmore Byrd is on the Board of Directors of Cellular South.

It is rather early in the lawsuit to take depositions; I would consider this a pretty aggressive strategy on the part of the Plaintiff in the case. Recall that the Complaint alleges that:

The Defendants, John and Jane Does 1-7, are named as defendants herein because they may have aided Creekmore-Byrd in her affair and to entice and tortuously interfere with the contract between Leisha Jane Pickering and Charles Willis Pickering, Jr.

It could be that these depositions are meant to identify these "John and Jane Does." But that is complete guesswork on my part.

Next week may bring even more interesting news. Stay tuned.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Agressive strategy" is what is needed to bring this case out into the sunshine. As a Taxpayer I resent every penny Chip received as salary as a US Rep. while slip sliding around with Byrd and building his nest with Cellular.

Anonymous said...

Good for Mrs. Pickering and her lawyers and their "aggressive strategy" to get the facts out. Not only has Chip Pickering lied to his wife and family, he has lied to the citizens of MS pretending to be this fine, Christian, family man all while having a seven year affair with Beth Byrd and as the other poster said "building his nest with Cellular."

Anonymous said...

Expose Pickering for the C street frolics yes, yes, and use a federal subpoena for the diary Cynthia Brewer is helping him conceal, but more important, DOJ needs to look at the use of his Telecom Committee seat to steer 156 Million to his paramour Creekmore's company, Cellular South. God only knows (n/p/i) how many "family values" pimps have gamed the fed and state gov't for free money during the reigns of Bush and Barbour. Their "God and country" donors have lucrative businesses scattered all over Madison County, which they periodically carve up for fun and profit. Cynthia Brewer, a joke of a chancery judge,is simply another puppet, a minor league politico looking for political favors from people like Barbour, the Pickerings and Barbour's private lawyers who appoint judges to vacancies in Mississippi. Despite the demise of Pickering the lesser, and his pious father Charles (former head of the S'thern Baptist Convention who bagged a federal judgeship from Lott but thankfully still couldn't make it on the 5th Circuit even after Bush gave him a recess appointment), we still have to deal with Stacey Pickering, a Baptist seminary grad who of all things got elected Ms state auditor. These family values politicos are prone to morph "family values" into "family legacies" when it comes to tapping the public office trough.

Jim Craig said...

Anon@6:23: I don't see any way to get a Federal subpoena issued in this case.

Anonymous said...

You're right, in the twin state cases, there's no obvious way to prompt a fed subpoena. I said this b/c I'm hoping the feds will take a hard look at this little hypocrite, and use their extensive array of powers to capture and preserve this evidentiary diary.

Anonymous said...

Chipper is a scum bag. He was having babies with Leisha while he was shagging Creekmore-Byrd. THEN he has the audacity to say he wants to keep everything hush-hush for the sake of his children. Kick his ass Leisha.

Anonymous said...

Forthrightly and well spoken anon. Not many are willing to look very deep but there's a clinical flaw, a true con-artist aspect in people like the Pickerings, the Sanfords, et al. Following a carefully scripted formula, they're just smart enough to see how piety and pimped-up patriotism are magical ligands in the heads of native agrarians, who without fail, vote with "religiosity." The idea is get elected, whatever it takes. After that, anything goes and depending on the relative somnolence of your district - its local press or lack thereof - you may never get found out.

Anonymous said...

No doubt in my mind that certain members of the Mississippi press corps had wind of the affair well before it became public. Same for Musgrove's romp with Robin Costa. Instead of advancing the ball for the collective good of our state the press punts. Despite the seriousness of his indiscretion I'll give Musgrove a small modicum of credit for quickly and quietly exiting his marriage.

Anonymous said...

No doubt they knew and the public needs to know who these masquerading journalists are.

Anonymous said...

Let's face it everyone. Two people don't have a seven year affair without many people knowing about it. Mrs. Pickering probably has a many people she could call to testify who know about the affair. The longer the affair went on the more careless they both became. Think about it. He probably had turned off that cell phone several hundred times before he went in his home or was around his family. However, the one time he didn't, the mistress called, his wife heard the phone ring, and immediately knew it was not his "regular" phone ringing. Then you can bet she listened to his lover's messages Chip had left on his phone, and blam.....in a moment he was caught--the careless, journal writing fool.

Anonymous said...

The word around NE jackson is that the only thing correct in the lawsuit is that Ms. Byrd and Chip dated in college. There has been no rekindling of the relationship and that Ms. Byrd will be filing a counter suit against Ms. Pickering demanding a retraction. Stay tuned.........

Jim Craig said...

Anon@1:44: I don't quite understand what a counterclaim for a retraction looks like.

There could be a fight over whether the Complaint is false and defamatory. Usually, statements in pleadings are "privileged," that is, protected against libel suits. But there is an exception for "malice," which in the law of defamation means either knowledge that the statement was false or gross negligence of whether it was true or not.

However, in any counterclaim like that, one would think Mr. Pickering's diary would be relevant.