Federal judge rules LSP report is evidence
By Zach Parker zach@ouachitacitizen.com
Fourth Judicial District Court Judge Sharon Marchman can use information from a Louisiana State Police investigation as evidence in her lawsuit against district court officials and their attorneys, a federal judge ruled last week.
The State Police investigative report has surfaced as a key element in the controversy surrounding Allyson Campbell, a law clerk at Fourth Judicial District Court. The State Police report on the investigation of Campbell’s activities is incriminating, according to a pleading filed Tuesday by Marchman.
Marchman’s lawsuit in U.S. District Court claims Campbell was paid for hours she did not work at Fourth Judicial District Court and that she also destroyed or concealed documents filed with the district court. Some Fourth Judicial District Court judges as well as local and state attorneys concealed Campbell’s activities and conspired with Campbell to retaliate against Marchman when the judge tried to shed light on the allegations against the clerk, according to Marchman’s lawsuit.
The State Police report on the investigation of the district court was filed under seal with the federal court last month. Marchman filed the State Police report as evidence to support her opposition to requests, or motions, for dismissal filed by Campbell, her attorney Brian Crawford of Monroe and the judges’ attorney, Jon Guice of Monroe. Those three individuals, who are each defendants in Marchman’s lawsuit, had previously asked the federal court to dismiss Marchman’s lawsuit.
Lincoln Parish News Online 
07/14/2016 at 9:38 am |
The noose gets smaller around the necks of the judges. You need to cop a deal.
07/14/2016 at 12:38 pm |
No,we need honest,new judges.
07/14/2016 at 2:03 pm |
Do you hear a loud sucking noise? That is the sound of judges being sucked into the abis.
07/14/2016 at 9:06 pm |
Abyss.
07/19/2016 at 2:30 pm |
looks like the conspiracy now includes 4 judges, numerous private practice lawyers, 2 separate Attorney Generals (who bitterly opposed each other in their recent campaign), an Investigative general, and 3 separate lawsuits all over the same general information OR someone made up the allegations – which seems more likely?