By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter
MONTGOMERY—On Monday, the State’s prosecution in the Speaker Mike Hubbard felony corruption case answered Hubbard’s renewed request for a more defined statement of the charges against him.
The more defined statement of facts released on February 27, was the body-blow to the well-crafted media campaign executed by Hubbard and his high-priced attorneys since his indictment on 23 felony counts of public corruption.
Hubbard’s criminal defense attorney J. Mark White had asked for a more defined statement of facts, yet by all accounts, was not happy with the results.
In the latest answer to White’s renewed request for a more defined statement of facts, the State references a quote by Benjamin Franklin, in which the sage politician opines, “He that blows the coals . . . has no right to complain if the sparks fly in his face.”
In the State’s answer, it becomes crystal clear that Hubbard’s attorney has once again used the media to mislead, when he alleged that the timing of the State’s filing was politically motivated.
In a press release on February 27, White said, “This filing – just days before the start of the 2015 legislative session – yet again raises questions about political timing and motivations surrounding this matter.”
However, court filings show at a scheduling conference on January 30, 2015, “Hubbard confirmed his agreement that the State could have until February 27, 2015, to respond to the Motion.”
In a letter dated Jan. 28, 2015, White confirmed his agreement with the February 27 deadline.
The State’s prosecution says, White statements to the media are, “therefore indefensible.” In plain English, they say he lied in the press. (But since the press just prints his press statements without follow-up questions, White seems to take every opportunity to spin those in the media who do his bidding.)
Not only do these latest revelations demonstrate how White has spread falsehood throughout the media, it shows how he continues to file meaningless motions before the court.
The prosecution, in responding to Hubbard’s latest Motion for More Definite Statement, says that he “misapplies Alabama law, raises irrelevant federal filing rules (which obviously do not apply in this state court case), and attempts to re-litigate the issue of whether State filings should be made under seal.”
White has asked the court to place all filing related to the Hubbard case under seal, hoping to shield his client from the customary openness of criminal proceeding.
The State also says, “Tellingly, Hubbard completely ignores his burden to show ‘good cause’ before his motion for more definite statement can be granted.”
The prosecution goes further by asserting, “Even if Hubbard had attempted to satisfy his burden, Hubbard still cannot show “good cause” because, as set forth in the State’s detailed Response, the indictment and discovery clearly inform Hubbard ‘with a reasonable certainty of the nature of the accusation against him so that he may prepare his defense.’”
White again tries to make the argument that some of the 85 exhibits released on February 27, in response to his first request for a more defined statement of facts, make in fact be illegal under federal law. (White conceded they there is no state equivalent.)
In response, the State reminds the defense that federal law does not apply; only State statutes.
White has sought to have pleadings or documents in Hubbard’s case filed under seal, however, the court has not required the State to make pretrial filings under seal.
The prosecution rejects White’s argument that Hubbard should be given some special treatment. But Hubbard’s attorney wishes to litigate in secret, rather than the customary manner of State criminal cases.
The State contends that in his original Motion for More Definite Statement, Hubbard asked the prosecution to “put some meat on the bones of the indictment.”
The State did as he requested, and now his deeds are even more obvious.
But, the State seems to indicate that is that is his problem, because they simple did as requested.
Perhaps another Franklin quote is apropos, “Pride that dines on vanity, sups on contempt.”