Jackson Free Press

Jackson Mayor Frank Melton's assurance that he would be covering court costs in his April 2007 felony trial did not apply to his co-defendants, judging by a Nov. 30 letter submitted to the Hinds County Circuit Clerk's office. Former Hinds County District Attorney Ed Peters submitted a motion for allocation of attorney's fees to the clerk's office and city attorneys, demanding payments of $15,000 apiece for attorneys Robert Shuler Smith and Winston Thompson for their representation of Melton's bodyguards Michael Recio and Marcus Wright.

Wright and Recio, along with Melton, faced trial in April for multiple felony counts relating to the demolition of a duplex at 1305 Ridgeway Street last year. A Hinds County jury acquitted all three men at the end of a weeklong trial. The FBI is now believed to be investigating the incident.

Melton told The Clarion-Ledger in April that he would spare city taxpayers the court costs for his trial.

"No, I would not make the request. I don't anticipate that. I've already paid for it," Melton told The Clarion-Ledger as quoted in the April article, "Taxpayers won't foot the bill for legal fees."

Fees for his bodyguards, however, are still awaiting attention from the city's legal department.

Ward 7 Councilwoman Margaret Barrett-Simon said she would withhold comment until after consulting with city attorneys, but added that all the legal costs riding in with Melton were beginning to wear on both the council and the city.

"The taxpayers of the city are very concerned about all these legal fees, and we will pay it only if we have to," said Barrett-Simon, who had not been briefed by city attorneys of Peters' demand on Wednesday.

The city is facing several civil lawsuits thanks to the activities of the mayor. Homeowner Jennifer Sutton is suing the city for repairs or the purchase price of the Ridgeway Street duplex Melton and his entourage destroyed in front of witnesses last year. Jackson resident Tara Donelson is also suing the city for "past, present and future medical expenses," and "pain and suffering," allegedly caused by Melton standing on her porch in 2006, shotgun in hand, challenging family members to come out.

The Phelps Dunbar firm, which the council hired in August to represent the mayor and city in these two lawsuits—for $185 per hour—recommended the council now hire a second law firm, Coxwell & Associates—also at $185 per hour, plus additional costs and expenses—to defend Melton in those same two cases due to conflicts of interests.

The $15,000 price tag for Smith and Winston is a drop down from their original asking price earlier this year.

Smith, who recently won election as the new Hinds County district attorney, had earlier requested $30,000 for his representation of Wright, while Thompson originally asked for $20,000. Council President Leslie McLemore told the Jackson Free Press in June that the original fees were "exorbitant."

"They're living in fantasyland if they think I'm personally going to agree to pay that much," McLemore told the JFP in June. "… This trial was only a week long, and they basically rode the back of (Melton's attorney Dale) Danks. If I agreed to pay for services rendered, I'd say their fee is more worth between $5,000 or $10,000 a piece, tops."

Ward 6 Councilman Marshand Crisler said the city should not have to finance the legal fees because he believed Melton and his bodyguards acted outside the scope of their authority in demolishing the home.

"I don't feel the city should have to be responsible for something like that. I don't know where in the Constitution it allows an executive authority to go out and raze people's houses," Crisler said. "To me, he should consider it a lessoned learned. You should bear that cost yourself so that you might pause before going out and doing something like that again."

The issue had gone unaddressed before the council with members predicting Smith and Thompson would take their fee demands to court, where a judge would likely re-assess the value of their work. Plaintiff attorneys in the Sutton suit may also convince a jury that Melton and his bodyguards were indeed outside the scope of their authority in demolishing the home. Council members opposed to paying the fees could then use that court decision in their own legal argument to duck paying the attorney's fees.

Previous Commentsshow

If the mayor and his body guards were broke, they should have used a public defender. Also, they should have used better judgement. Who is the heck do they think they are? Just as melton's insurance would not assume liability in the cases with the MBN men, Council should not vote to pick up this tab. Insurance companys do not pay for you to deliberately go out and harm people or their property. frank still says that he would do it again, because...... This is exactly what melton and Co. did: So, let them eat crow!

justjess

Dec 13 2007

It is remarkable. And you gotta love that it's Ed Peters trying to get them paid.

DonnaLadd

Dec 13 2007

This is the same Ed Peters who appears "of counsel" on the Balducci (of the Scruggs bribery scheme) letterhead. What he wants does not hold much water for me.

malt

Dec 13 2007

Huh. I did not know that. Small world, our state.

DonnaLadd

Dec 13 2007

Here's the cache site of the now-defunct page listing the bios of the Hurricance Insurance Help Group. It includes bios for Balducci, Steve Patterson and, yes, Ed Peters—and his is mostly about him convicting Beckwith. Here's a case that Peters and Balducci worked together on in Tennessee. Ironic, kind of.

DonnaLadd

Dec 13 2007

I wonder why they went up to Tennessee to investigate a police-brutality case—it's not like we don't have any here in Mississippi.

DonnaLadd

Dec 13 2007

so, an ex-DA who left a backlog in the thousands, the new DA who got frank's boys off, an ex-mayor, ex-cons, and gang members are all in the city's pockets courtesy of king frank. does that just about sum it all up? oh yeah, i forgot about the county sheriff, too.

eyerah

Dec 14 2007

Somebody has to pay the lawyers for that fine work they did to free those innocent, able and good officers. If not us, who? If not now, when? The mayor who is working for us without recompense and soley for the purpose of giving us something we never had before (superior leadership and vision) shouldn't have to pay for everything. I support the mayor and all his demands. He knows what he's doing.

Ray Carter

Dec 14 2007

Ray Carter, that was tooooooooooo funny. Now on a more serious note, WHY can't these up-standing, law-abiding, "innocent, able and good officers" and the mayor use public defenders? If this is a stupid question and there is an intelligible answer, please don't hesitate to inform.

justjess

Dec 18 2007

Too often public defenders are inadequate because they're overworked, outgunned and outnumbered. Some of the time they simply don't care about their clients.The mayor and his cohorts needed and deserved the best. The mayor is broke!

Ray Carter

Dec 18 2007

Well heck Ray, an inadequate mayor deserves an inadequate attorney: An overworked client deserves an overworked attorney. frank has enough and knows enough criminals with guns to even the playing field. frank could not care about this city and continue his negative behavior. Since Danks was the attorney responsible for the "back room deal" with our Chief PoliEriff position, why isn't he representing melton?

justjess

Dec 18 2007