Scruggs Prosecutors Will Introduce Similar Acts

Prosecutors in US v. Scruggs et al on Monday filed notice that they “will seek to introduce similar acts evidence pursuant to Rule 404(b), Fed. R. Evid., at the trial of the above-captioned case”. Patsy Brumfield’s preliminary story in the Daily Journal is here. The question, of course, is which similar acts; it could be the Langston case now unfolding, or others yet unknown.

Meanwhile, Scruggs seems intent on creating a possible appeal issue. On January 17, US District Judge Neal Biggers denied in no uncertain terms Scruggs’ motion to add attorney Kenneth Coghlan to his legal team. Reason: Coghlan had briefly represented Scruggs’ co-defendant Steve Patterson early in the case; Patterson has now pleaded guilty and is cooperating with prosecutors. But on Friday January 25, Scruggs’ lead attorney John Keker filed a motion to reconsider which announces Scruggs’ intent to consult Coghlan on non-evidentiary issues if the motion is denied. Alyssa Schnugg’s Oxford Eagle story is here.