DHECC - Lionel Sutton Interview Part 3 - recipe for a zombie

In the third installment of the Lionel Sutton interview series, I’m going to focus on the investigation conducted by Special Master Louis Freeh which led to Sutton, his wife Christine Reitano, and the Andry Lerner Law Firm being accused of various criminal activity.   Specifically, we will examine how, in Reitano’s case, these allegations led to termination from the Claims Office.

Fraud    ...       

Before we get into the nuances of the "Freeh Style" investigation techniques, I want to show you a particular sound byte regarding fraudulent seafood claims.

Folks have criticized me for “burying the lead” in past posts, and I think they have a damn good point so let’s kick this post off with a bang:

Lionel Sutton - 15 - Page 60 - 2.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

A disclaimer:  Lionel qualified this statement by saying he was not absolutely sure that this particular instance of fraud is what Louis Freeh was referring to on page 60 of his first report.  The only person who knows that, for sure, is Louis Freeh.  Unfortunately, it appears Freeh lost the scent and we may never know what firm he was talking about.  

Good news is it doesn’t matter.  Fraud has been alleged....now we all know.

Let me restate this revelation ….A plaintiff steering committee firm filed FRAUDULENT seafood claims....multiple.  After it was discovered by employees in the Claims Office it was brought to the attention of the Claims Administrator, Pat Juneau. 

According to Sutton, Pat simply told the firm not to do it again...a mere slap on the hand.  

This epiphany begs the question, "Were the fraudulent claims paid out even after it was brought to the attention of the Claims Administrator?" 

Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing that unless Juneau addresses the matter, publicly.  

Chew on this whole thing for a second....then let's take a look at the issues Freeh's first report addressed.

Lying liars who lie?

I think it's preposterous to assume Louis Freeh isn't aware of this PSC firm's fraudulent seafood claims.  And I can’t imagine Judge Barbier doesn’t know about it considering Sutton wrote it down in a memo of opposition his attorney filed with the Court. 

Understand this.....these falsified claims by the PSC firm are ILLEGAL.  

Please consider the gravitas here….a PSC firm used their knowledge of the claims process to manipulate and file false seafood claims.  This wasn't a simple scam to milk BP, it is detrimental to the other class seafood claimants.

Lionel explains why in this byte:  

Lionel Sutton - 14 - Page 60 - 1.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

If this allegation is true.....Juneau is absolutely complicit in a cover up.  Freeh is complicit if he doesn’t act against the firm.  Judge Barbier is complicit if he doesn’t demand that Louis Freeh make the allegations public and suggest criminal charges be brought against the firm in the same way Freeh did to Sutton and Reitano.

A disclaimer...

I know who the alleged firm is…at least the one Sutton is referring to in these sound bytes.  But that doesn't mean it's the same firm Freeh was referring to on page 60. 

I also know how the seafood claims were manipulated, in fact I expounded on it in this post.

I plan on revealing who this PSC firm is soon but I want to validate the story through one more source (the 4th) and I want to give the firm an opportunity to respond to the allegations.  I also have a standing request to interview Pat Juneau that has yet to be acknowledged.

Justice isn't Freeh

The real question mark that arises from this revelation is why would Freeh be protecting the PSC firm?  Why would Judge Barbier allow it?  Most importantly, was Louis Freeh really brought into the picture to actually conduct an unbiased investigation? 

Finally…has Freeh even come close to conducting an unbiased investigation?

The litmus test for those questions lies with Freeh’s charges against Christine Reitano more so than Lionel Sutton.  Sutton explains the allegations Freeh brought against Reitano in this byte, also, he talks about the evidence Freeh accrued to make the charges:

Lionel Sutton - -8 -Chrisitne and Mancuso.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

To recap here, Freeh claimed Reitano knew her husband,  Lionel Sutton, was getting the referral fee on the Thonn claim and she then lied to his investigators about it under oath.  

Lionel states in this byte that Christine absolutely did not know about the referral fee because he never told her.

I know it's difficult to digest but if there's one thing I've learned from writing this blog, never assume a wife knows what a husband is doing...and vice-versa.  I can quote you  three husband/wife scenarios I've written about on this blog where this fact holds true....Bennett, Ellis, St. Pierre...Meffert.  OK, that's four....number five is forever grateful I stopped at four.  

                                                                               

Freeh also stated that Reitano was using her position at the Claims Office to negotiate a larger referral fee for Sutton with the Andry Lerner firm.  His basis for this statement was a phone conversation Reitano had with Andry Lerner attorney,  Christine Mancuso. 

Reitano vehemently denied this allegation after Freeh released his report.  In fact, even Mancuso denied the allegation Freeh made against Reitano.  

Here Sutton discusses how Freeh obtained the evidence to levy his allegations:

Lionel Sutton - 9 - Freeh no deposition, acct false accusation.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

No actual affidavits or depositions were taken by the Freeh group in their investigation with the exception of Pat Juneau, Lionel Sutton and Christine Reitano.  Instead, the investigators "interpreted" the witnesses’ testimony.  

Now,  two of these witnesses have come forward to contradict the allegations made in the Freeh report.

Purgatory 

What’s more, Judge Barbier has denied the accused parties' request for discovery, including their ability to take their own depositions with the key witnesses:

Lionel Sutton - 11 - Not allowed discovery.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Not only has the Court denied the accused the right to discovery and due process, Barbier had Christine Reitano’s "breach of contract" lawsuit against the Claims Office (and BP) removed from civil court and into his own court.

There, it lies in limbo:

Lionel Sutton - 16 - Reitano issues and MDL.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Why would Barbier deny Reitano her civil rights and bury this case?  I humbly ask, "Does that constitute obstruction of justice?" 

They are being denied the right to face their accuser and question witnesses in order to argue their innocence.  How is that legal?  

A zombie?

In the next segment, I'll address impetus. Most notably why both Freeh and Judge Barbier seem intent on protecting the PSC firm that filed the fraudulent claims .  Also, why the Judge is denying Andry Lerner, Sutton…and most importantly, Reitano…due process.  

--> hounds kuzimu uchaguzi wako

DHECC - Blood in the water

This letter was sent to Judge Barbier's court today from BP counsel:

BP Letter to Barbier, Jan. 21, 2014

BP clearly knows a lot more about possible issues with Duval, Fisher, Odom, Juneau and possibly even Judge Duval and Magistrate Judge Shushan than what the last Freeh report revealed.

Keep in mind that Odom and Duval's deposition was not provided to Andry, Sutton or Reitano upon request.  However, Fisher's was provided.

There's a lot going on right now that I'm trying to iron out but I find it curious that BP did not mention the page 60 firm in this letter.  It's clear they are still going after Juneau but they seem to be adverse to addressing the PSC firm mentioned in the first report.

More coming....

Oh...and in the meantime...per Kevin...can anyone name all the folks in this picture?

It was reportedly snapped at a ritzy wedding at the Chanticleer on Nantucket island, September 13, 2003.

Happy hour on me to the first person who can name these dapper dans.

UPDATE:  This link just came in on the comment section:

http://www.tulanelink.com/tulanelink/duval_box.htm  

DHECC - Freeh's interests may not be so free

As most of you know, in July of this year, 2013, Judge Carl Barbier appointed former FBI Director, Louis Freeh, to conduct an investigation into possible misconduct by lawyers within the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center (DHECC).  This investigation was spurred from accusations of misconduct against Claims Center attorney, Lionel Sutton.  Sutton has denied the allegations and has yet to be officially charged with any wrongdoing.

Freeh conducted his investigation and submitted his report to Barbier's court on September 6, 2013.

In the report, Freeh claims Sutton may have committed wire fraud and money laundering by accepting payments from the Andry Lerner law firm in order to expedite one or more of their client's claims through the Claims Center.   According to Freeh, the payoff for Sutton was conducted "using circuitous and convoluted interstate wire transfers".

Freeh has also called into question Sutton's fiduciary duties as an attorney and his fiduciary duty to the DHECC, then suggested an investigation should be launched by the Louisiana Bar Association resulting in possible disbarment.

 The Freeh report provided some pretty nifty diagrams to show the connections between Sutton and Andry Lerner in order to try and sort out the "convoluted and circuitous" plot.  In his conclusion, on page 81, Freeh states:

Instead, Mr. Sutton concealed his improper financial relationships and interests, hid the receipt of his payments by having them passed to a defunct corporate bank account, misrepresented the payments when asked about them by a court official, and misrepresented his actions before the Special Master. 

"....concealed his improper financial relationships and interests...", I want to pick that up and go in another direction.  The exact opposite direction...back towards Freeh.

I didn't have the time to make nifty diagrams but I will try to break this down as simply as I can.

- Louis Freeh is the Chairman of his firm, The Freeh Group.

- The Freeh Group is a wholly owned subsidiary of the law firm, Pepper Hamilton, LLP.

- Louis Freeh is also a partner and chair of the Executive Committee of Pepper Hamilton, LLP.

- Another attorney named Greg Paw is a senior partner at Pepper Hamilton, LLP.

- Freeh, Greg Paw (paw@freehgroup)/Pepper Hamilton have had numerous business dealings with the law firm Kirkland & Ellis.

- Kirkland & Ellis is currently representing BP in the Deepwater Horizon Settlement process.  In fact, Kirkland & Ellis has referred clients to Pepper Hamilton in the past...and possibly the present.

Where do you think I'm going next?  Take a break for a second...look back over that chain of factoids.  

Ok....

- Greg Paw and the Freeh Group are currently deeply entrenched in the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center.  Paw's reported title is "Special Master's Attorney", the Special Master being Freeh.

I think the Marquis De Sade set up this titling hierarchy in case you're wondering.

Despite his title, the question really is, "What is he doing there?"

Reportedly, Judge Barbier has given Freeh, and his business partner Paw, total domain over the ability to not only deny claims but "claw back" claims that have already technically passed through the claims process.  Let's call Freeh a claw-back Czar....kind of a big deal, huh?

In fact, other employees of the Freeh Group are now being brought into the DHECC.

I have been informed from my sources that many of the claims are getting bottlenecked and re-queued at the quality control level, the last step in the process.  For a run-down of the process and the court vendors involved, refer to this video I made a couple of months ago:

American Zombie - The DHECC claims process from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

I've also been told that claim approvals have ground to a halt with Freeh's entry into the Claims Center.

The Andry Lerner Law Firm has filed a memo in Barbier's court to get info for a possible motion for recusal of Special Master Freeh .  Their motivation is obvious, to invalidate Freeh's report, but in the memo they lay out some of the connections I mentioned above and Freeh's apparent conflict of interest.  There is also a series of questions to the Judge regarding the entanglement of Pepper Hamilton with Kirkland & Ellis.

I think these are questions we all need to examine:

1.  How many Kirkland and Ellis lawyers are working with Freeh Group or Pepper Hamilton lawyers currently?  What is the extent of the financial relationships between the two firms?  For example, are the referrals from Kirkland & Ellis dependent on cooperative endeavors, or fees shared, and is there an ongoing back and forth relationship, Pepper to Kirkland, Kirkland to Pepper, or Freeh to either one?

2.  What are the ecomomic consequences to the Freeh Group of past and current associations with Kirkland & Ellis?

3.  What are the economic consequences to the Pepper Hamilton Group of past and current associations with Kirkland & Ellis?  What is the actual status of the ongoing cases?  Did these precede this appointment?  What fees have been paid since this appointment?  What fees are anticipated in the future in relationship to those cases while this appointment continues?

4.  All of the pre-Special Master contacts between the Freeh Group, Pepper Hamilton attroneys and Kirkland Ellis attorneys.  The amounts of money received to date and anticipated to be received in the future by The Freeh Group or Pepper Hamilton as a result of this appointment, which ultimately must be approved and paid by BP.

5.  What are the lines of authority, vis-a-vis, the co-defendant clients in relationship to the cooperation with BP versus Pepper, or in conjunction with Pepper on these litigation and counseling matters?

6.  Are there currently under consideration future relationships between Kirkland & Ellis and Pepper, or Kirkland & Ellis and Freeh?

And the following paragraph lays out the real problem with the conflict and how it may be affecting the amount of claims being paid:

The Freeh Group has succeeded in putting an embargo on legitimate claims with erroneous assumptions.  Simultaneously it is benefitting internally through its billing, and externally through its advertising , from its own findings.  It requires no imagination to understand the value to BP and by extension its law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, of the criticisms made by Freeh.  A simple look at the ad attached to this motion run by BP immediately after release of the Freeh Report satisfies the benefit (Exhibit 2)  A review of Exhibit 1 shows Freeh advertising his work that helps BP, and Exhibit 2 shows BP advertising the work of Freeh.  At the same time, Jon Andry's clients and referral attorneys are being denied claims already approved twice by the Claims Office.

Read the whole memo and this motion filed to determine the request for Freeh's recusal as it states a specific case where Pepper Hamilton and Kirkland & Ellis are litigating together as co-counsel, the Avandia National class action.

Now...I'm pointing all this out not to argue Andry Lerner's case.  I'm pointing it out because this may represent a clear collusion between BP, the folks running the ship at the DHECC and possibly with the Plantiff Steering Committee (PSC) lawyers.  Possibly worse than that.

Here are some questions I have:

1.  PSC lawyers - were they aware of the Freeh/Pepper Hamilton conflicts with Kirkland & Ellis before Freeh was named as Special Master?  If so did they waive the possible conflict of interest?  They have a fiduciary duty to the claimants along the Gulf Coast who file claims with the DHECC, why are they not bringing up these issues instead of Andry Lerner?  Are we to believe Herman, Roy, Fayard....top national attorneys.....see no conflict of interest with the relationship between Freeh/Pepper Hamilton and Kirkland & Ellis?  Why have they allowed Freeh (and peeps) to be inserted into the DHECC as a "Clawback Czar"?

Freeh claimed he disclosed the relationship between Pepper Hamilton and Kirkland & Ellis before he was hired but I'm having a hard time understanding how this conflict of interest was waived by the PSC, if that's what happened.

2.  Judge Barbier - was he aware of the Freeh/Pepper Hamilton conflicts with Kirkland & Ellis before Freeh was named as Special Master?  Freeh said he disclosed it so I assume he was.  How could he have waived this conflict?  More importantly, how can he justify allowing it to go on?

These issues are huge.  Why would the PSC and Judge Barbier sit idly by and allow this to occur?   They may all have breached their fiduciary duty, every damn one of them.  There may need to be a separate investigation into how Freeh was chosen to conduct the original investigation.  Wouldn't that be something?

As I've stated before, I have reason to believe that at least some of the PSC attorneys used their power and influence to manipulate the Claims Center to get their private claimants paid before everyone else's...exactly what Sutton has been accused of by Freeh.

I filed a FOIA request with the DHECC, back in March, to try and obtain a list of the claims that were paid out in the first four weeks of the Claims Center opening.  I was denied based on the premise that the Claims Center is not a public agency:



I was also informed that some of the information in the claims is private, such as Social Security #s, so I drafted a letter to Judge Barbier asking him to redact any private information in the claims and make them public in order to ensure transparency and resolve the allegations.

Not surprisingly, I didn't receive a reply.  I get that I'm a lowly blogger and probably don't warrant a Federal Judge's attention but I think the people of the Gulf Coast do warrant his attention and deserve some answers to these allegations....especially now that these issues have been exposed with Freeh, Pepper Hamilton and Kirkland & Ellis.  I don't see how it can be ignored...not now.

It's worth noting that there was a clear collusion between BP attorneys and PSC lawyer, Steve Herman, in respect to the Wisner case.  But it seems no one is too worried about that, either.

Barbier and Juneau keep trumpeting that the DHECC and the claims process is transparent.  That's ironic considering we don't even know who's working in the office, what their roles are, their salaries, how those salaries are being paid, etc.

One interesting development I did confirm with the Claims Center was that Appeals Coordinator, David Duval, son of Federal Judge Stanwood Duval, Jr., abruptly resigned two weeks ago on October 7, 2013.  I don't know what prompted his resignation but it's curious.

Stay tuned...more to come.