Political Illusions of the Cajun Mafia
This book examines “robust” political corruption in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. The book scrutinizes the transparency, schemes and co-conspirators involved in political corruption. It discusses how top elected officials use their power and public resources funded by local sales and property taxes to improperly target, retaliate and even maliciously prosecute the most ridiculous matters to further their personal agenda. The book examines in detail the types of public infringements involving corruption as well as the vast network of political connections to other various public schemes. The book is further evidence that political corruption in Louisiana is not only profound but more like organized crime controlled by mob bosses. Louisiana no longer will turn a “blind eye” and now demands zero tolerance for corruption and nepotism of elected officials.
This book examines “robust” political corruption in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. The book scrutinizes the transparency, schemes and co-conspirators involved in political corruption. It discusses how top elected officials use their power and public resources funded by local sales and property taxes to improperly target, retaliate and even maliciously prosecute the most ridiculous matters to further their personal agenda.
The book examines in detail the types of public infringements involving corruption as well as the vast network of political connections to other various public schemes. The book is further evidence that political corruption in Louisiana is not only profound but more like organized crime controlled by mob bosses.
Louisiana no longer will turn a “blind eye” and now demands zero tolerance for corruption and nepotism of elected officials.
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Get Social With Us!<br />
Most Popular<br />
Emailed Viewed Commented<br />
◾ GALLERY: Lake Charle ...<br />
◾ Proposed Work Camp M ...<br />
◾ Boudin Wars Means Ev ...<br />
◾ Target, Developing H ...<br />
◾ First African-Americ ...<br />
◾ Incumbents Getting F ...<br />
◾ Banks Cashes In For ...<br />
◾ Sowela Enrollment Up ...<br />
◾ 'Very Serious Sin' W ...<br />
◾ Calcasieu School Boa ...<br />
Woodrow Karey and Ronald Harris<br />
Judge tosses second-degree murder<br />
charge<br />
Print Page<br />
Email to a Friend<br />
Comments (6 )<br />
Recommend (0)<br />
Last Modified: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 6:38 PM<br />
By Johnathan Manning / American Press<br />
A judge in state district court on Tuesday threw out a second-degree murder indictment<br />
against a man who reportedly shot a pastor during a Friday night revival service in<br />
2013.<br />
Judge Clayton Davis’ decision does not remove <strong>the</strong> initial indictment <strong>of</strong> manslaughter<br />
against Woodrow Karey, 55, who is accused <strong>of</strong> shooting and killing Pastor Ronald<br />
Harris, 53, on Sept. 27, 2013, at Tabernacle <strong>of</strong> Praise Worship Center on Deshotel<br />
Lane. Karey immediately called law enforcement and admitted to <strong>the</strong> shooting, saying<br />
he had done so because Harris had raped his wife.<br />
When prosecutors first brought <strong>the</strong> case to a grand jury on Nov. 14, 2013, <strong>the</strong> panel<br />
had <strong>the</strong> option <strong>of</strong> charges <strong>of</strong> second-degree murder or manslaughter, but chose<br />
manslaughter. However, prosecutors brought <strong>the</strong> case back to a grand jury on June 26,<br />
resulting in <strong>the</strong> higher charge <strong>of</strong> second-degree murder.<br />
Karey’s defense attorneys, Todd Clemons and Adam Johnson, claim that <strong>the</strong>y turned<br />
over <strong>the</strong> names <strong>of</strong> witnesses to testify before <strong>the</strong> first grand jury under an agreement that <strong>the</strong> first grand jury would be <strong>the</strong> decider. They claim that<br />
prosecutors broke that agreement when <strong>the</strong>y brought <strong>the</strong> case back to ano<strong>the</strong>r grand jury.<br />
Prosecutors say that no such agreement was in place.<br />
Davis heard from four witnesses Tuesday morning — Calcasieu District Attorney John DeRosier, prosecutors Hugo Holland and Brett Sandifer<br />
and Clemons — and issued a written opinion at 5 p.m.<br />
Particularly relevant, Davis wrote, was information provided by Clemons to Sandifer about key evidence from witnesses “who could testify before<br />
<strong>the</strong> grand jury in what <strong>the</strong> court finds was a joint-effort to steer <strong>the</strong> grand jury towards a Manslaughter indictment.”<br />
“In this case, <strong>the</strong> defendant revealed information ‘not o<strong>the</strong>rwise available to <strong>the</strong> state,’ based on <strong>the</strong> implicit understanding that both sides would<br />
live with <strong>the</strong> result <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> initial grand jury — ei<strong>the</strong>r Manslaughter or Second Degree Murder,” Davis wrote. “Whe<strong>the</strong>r or not such information<br />
actually benefitted <strong>the</strong> state later in obtaining <strong>the</strong> later indictment is not <strong>the</strong> point. The point is that more information was made available by <strong>the</strong><br />
defendant than he was obligated to provide. This perceived benefit binds <strong>the</strong> state to what was at <strong>the</strong> time its desired result.”<br />
Clemons said that <strong>the</strong> agreement was never written down, but was an understanding “man-to-man.”<br />
“I’m glad Judge Davis had to <strong>the</strong> courage to do what was right,” Clemons said. “I think it’s obvious he agreed with our position that <strong>the</strong>re was an<br />
agreement in place with Mr. DeRosier. I think Mr. DeRosier was an honorable man and I think Mr. Holland was an honorable man, but for<br />
whatever reason, after <strong>the</strong> fact <strong>the</strong>y reneged on <strong>the</strong> agreement.”<br />
“A lot <strong>of</strong> people were praying for Woody during and for <strong>the</strong> hearing on <strong>the</strong> motion to quash,” Johnson said. “We are so happy with <strong>the</strong> result and<br />
thank God for Judge Davis’ ruling.”<br />
The District Attorney’s Office declined to comment on <strong>the</strong> ruling.<br />
The situation was a unique one in which <strong>the</strong> defense was willing to give up certain rights in order for <strong>the</strong>ir witnesses to testify before <strong>the</strong> grand<br />
jury, Clemons testified before Davis. Davis asked Clemons what prosecutors had to give up as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> agreement. Clemons said that<br />
prosecutors wanted assistance from <strong>the</strong> defense because <strong>of</strong> problems with <strong>the</strong> family.<br />
“I felt like (DeRosier) wanted <strong>the</strong> cover <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> grand jury to give <strong>the</strong> perception that this was a grand jury decision,” Clemons said. “He said, ‘If<br />
you’re concerned that we’re going to be pounding <strong>the</strong> table asking for second-degree murder, let me assure you that won’t happen.’ And, it didn’t<br />
happen.”<br />
Davis wrote that he believed testimony that Harris’ family was pushing for a second-degree murder indictment, “even though <strong>the</strong> circumstances <strong>of</strong><br />
this case, at least on <strong>the</strong> surface and based on what was known at <strong>the</strong> time, indicated that Manslaughter was <strong>the</strong> more appropriate charge.”
Change language