DHECC - Louis Freeh: Trojan stalking horse

...yes I'm mixing metaphors, deal with it

An interesting document landed on my desk recently and I wanted to share it with AZ readers.

Memo to Louis Freeh and Pat Juneau from Plaintiff Steering Committee regarding policy on fraudulent claims

There is so much right and wrong with this letter, I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with what's right about it.  The PSC is correct in that BP did agree to the current terms of the settlement and originally showed little concern for the potential of numerous fraudulent claims being filed under the agreed upon parameters.  They are correct that recently the number of claims being paid has dwindled to a miserable number due to the overly zealous scrutiny of the Freeh group attempting to justify and expand their multi-gazillion dollar contract with the Claims Office.  They are also correct in fighting for the claimants to get their claims paid in a reasonable time frame.

What's wrong about it?

- They suggest that when fraud is alleged or suspected the claimant be notified and given a chance to (a) withdraw the Claim, (b) do nothing, or (c) attempt to respond with an explanation, clarification and/or additional documentation.

Was Casey Thonn given this option?  Obviously the more powerful Page 60 (of Louis Freeh's first report), PSC law firm was given the option considering we've seen nothing come of that.  Recently Louis Freeh filed a memo claiming shrimper Jason Zirlott of Alabama filed a fraudulent seafood claim but only mentioned Zirlott's law firm in an attachment.  Why was the law firm that filed the claim for Zirlott not run up the flag pole by Louis Freeh like the AndryLerner firm was with the Thonn claim?

Even more so than a claimant, if a law firm has knowingly filed a fraudulent claim they should be censured in some way, not simply ignored or covered up like the Page 60 PSC firm has been.  The public deserves to know who is gaming the system especially considering at least one of the firms gaming it was a PSC firm entrusted to represent the entire class.  I suspect it's the same firm that drafted this letter.

- The memo suggests that Louis Freeh was brought into the settlement to "enforce a broad array of local, state or federal statutes, ordinances, requirements or regulations."  It follows with "The purpose is not to 'catch' people, but to validate legitimate settlement program claims."

Uhhh...no.  Freeh was brought in to investigate corruption and potential issues of fraud...that's exactly why he, a former director of the FBI, was chosen.  Of course once he got his foot in the door he kicked it down, redefining and greatly expanding his role in the DHECC.  Freeh has now filled the office with his own employees whose sole goal seems to be to grind the settlement to a screeching halt and minimize BP's financial burden. The trojan horse is empty and the Freeh battalion has now conquered Troy.

It's also my personal opinion that Freeh was introduced to the Court by a member of the PSC and this specific attorney handed him the evidence he used to "prosecute" the Thonn claim.  I believe this was done for two reasons, one is that it was a personal vendetta by this specific attorney for past dealings with the Andrys and secondly I believe Thonn, AndryLerner, Lionel Sutton and Christine Reitano were offered up to BP as a red herring to pacify BP's cries of fraud at the time.

It's rather karmic that the PSC, who have continually whined about BP's "buyer's remorse", now appear to have buyer's remorse with their chosen stalking horse, Louis Freeh.  I suspect Judge Barbier also shares that sentiment.  But I'm sure they're not too upset considering they already got their own claims paid.

    

DHECC - Juneau perjured himself

E 10 with exhibits

This exhibit in BP's motion to remove Juneau as Claims Administrator of the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center clearly shows that Juneau was representing the state against BP when he accepted his position.  He should have at least disclosed the potential conflict but not only did he hide it, he lied about it.

I went back and looked at Juneau's interview with Special Master Louis Freeh to see if Freeh asked Juneau if he had represented anyone in the BP litigation prior to accepting the position as Claims Administrator.  This interview was conducted under oath:

Start at line 7 on this page

"Now, I knew, from reading the newspaper -- I didn't have any involvement in anything in the spill.  I didn't represent any claimants in the spill, wasn't representing any defendants in the spill, had really no connection with the spill per se."

That's a bald-faced lie...we now know from the exhibit posted above.  It's also perjury because he was under oath in this interview.  And I'd like to see him play the "foggy memory card" because he prefaced the whole statement with "I vividly remember...".

BP lawyer Mark Holstein even says in the exhibit had he known of the conflict previously he would have brought it to the attention of Special Master Louis Freeh.  Well Freeh didn't even have to ask him, Juneau willingly denied having any "involvement with the spill" or having represented any claimants in the spill.

The reason this is a big deal is because Louis Freeh accused both Lionel Sutton and Christine Reitano of committing perjury when he interviewed them and suggested they be prosecuted for it, even though I don't think they did perjure themselves.  Here, Juneau clearly did so.

Louis Freeh is currently incapacitated due to injuries he suffered in a very serious automobile accident in Vermont.  Regardless of my opinion of his performance with the DHECC, I wish him a speedy recovery.

But someone within the Freeh Group should now make a statement regarding this matter of Juneau perjuring himself, no?  If this was such a serious matter regarding employees under the Claims Administrator it should be much more serious coming from the CA himself.  

DHECC - Lionel Sutton interview part 4 - hiding behind the robe

In this final segment of the Lionel Sutton interview, we will focus on the influence of the PSC on the Claims Office, why Judge Barbier seems intent on quashing any attempt by those accused by Louis Freeh the opportunity to defend themselves, and why both Freeh and Barbier may be protecting the PSC firm that filed the fraudulent seafood claims.

This first byte is about the influence the PSC had at the Claims Office while Sutton was there. Lionel notes that he was not involved in any policy creation and he also expounds on why the claims expedited by the PSC are such a big issue now:

Lionel Sutton - 18 - PSC Influence and policy.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Here is a very specific example of a PSC attorney using their position and influence to benefit their own personal claims:

Lionel Sutton - 17 - Joe Rice access from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Interesting that Rice would say, "I'm putting on my private attorney hat now, not my PSC hat."  The point is that the only reason he had access to the Claims Office employees and even a top level Pricewaterhousecoopers (PWC) accountant is because he was a PSC member.  Juneau would not have sent the three of them to just any plaintiff attorney's office to discuss and even negotiate the nature of how their claims were going to be processed.

These next two bytes, Sutton discusses how he, Reitano and Andry Lerner have been denied any reasonable level of due process in order to defend themselves against Freeh's charges:

Lionel Sutton - 13 - Not allowed due process.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Here, Lionel elaborates a little further on why Barbier is so determined to bury the issue and deny them discovery:

Lionel Sutton - 12 - Why Barbier is ignoring and blocking.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

How could both the Judge and Freeh simply ignore the issues that have been brought up already on this blog and by Lionel Sutton?  Let's run down the biggest:

• Patrick Juneau expedited a claim for a friend. 

• The PSC expedited, at minimum, 409 claims, many of them their own.  One PSC member, Calvin Fayard, may have expedited his cousin and business partner's claim.

•  A PSC firm filed fraudulent seafood claims.

•  Members of the Appeals Panel, themselves, had claims with the DHECC.

• Some PSC members had direct access and influence to accountants that were processing their personal claims.

How can Louis Freeh, and the Judge for that matter, not address any of these issues?

Louis Freeh is addressing other issues, though.  He is still going after Andry Lerner claims.  It appears Freeh has a vendetta against these guys as well as Christine Mancuso who contradicted his "interpretation" of her investigation interview regarding Reitano's alleged attempt to negotiate the Thonn claim.

In fact, I'm beginning to question the impetus for bringing Freeh on board to begin with as well as his laser-like focus on the Andry Lerner firm.  Does Andry Lerner have any enemies in positions of power on this settlement?  Who introduced Freeh into the fray to begin with?

Lionel stated that if he and Reitano were allowed to conduct discovery, they would uncover much worse issues with Pat Juneau and the PSC than anything of which Freeh has accused them.  It would appear Judge Barbier is doing his best to make sure those issues don't surface.

Is that justice?  Or is it the same old song and dance this state is famous for?  We know our politicians are corrupt but when our judiciary falls into step with them, who do you turn to?

DHECC - Lionel Sutton Interview Part 2 - how the "go-to guy" became the fall guy

In this segment of posts on the Lionel Sutton interview, I want to back up and examine the history of how Sutton and his wife, Christine Reitano, came to work at the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center, what their roles were and I want to let Lionel draw a picture for AZ readers as to the general operations and M.O. at the Claims Office in respect to his own job.

This will be a lengthy post but I think it’s important to lay the foundation for upcoming posts.

Remember, Sutton held no stipulations on what I could ask him.  He was an open book and answered all my questions….on camera….and that shit ain’t easy.   

Freeh, Juneau and some of the PSC members have conducted multiple interviews with MSM entities but none of these journalistic resources have asked questions about the issues I've brought up on AZ.  Claims Administrator, Patrick Juneau, has repeatedly ignored my requests for an interview.  

Doing what this blog (and I suppose any blog worth its salt) does best, I’d like to give the voiceless...the pariah...Lionel Sutton...the stage.  I'd like to allow Mr. Sutton the opportunity to explain his side of the story and his current plight.  You, AZ reader, can draw your own conclusions.

  

One may consider this interview series a biased effort but keep in mind, I have extended multiple invitations to Mr. Juneau for interviews and received no response.  I still extend the invitation to interview anyone involved in this story: Pat Juneau, Louis Freeh, Carl J. Barbier, Sally Shushan, and any PSC firm….in fact I beg them to speak with me on the record.  I've even begged them through FOIA requests. 

How He Got The Job

This first byte is basically background on Lionel Sutton’s relationship with Pat Juneau previous to his employment at the Claims Office and how both he and his wife, Christine Reitano, came to work at the Claims Office:

Lionel Sutton interveiw 1 - How did Lionel and Christine get the job from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

This byte establishes a couple of interesting factoids.  

Reitano was a full-time employee where Sutton was simply a part-time contractor.  This is why she has filed the "breach of contract" lawsuit against the office and Sutton doesn’t have that option.  But Sutton’s situation works both ways, he also never signed the same confidentiality agreements Reitano did to gain employment at the Claims Office….therefore, he can speak freely.

Another really interesting revelation in this byte is the history between Sutton and Juneau…it certainly wasn’t a casual relationship.  According to Lionel, they had known each other for years and even had business relationships previous to Sutton’s tenure at the Claims Office.  

This story doesn’t seem to gel with Pat Juneau’s deposition in Louis Freeh’s investigation:

Freeh (interviewer for Freeh Group):  Are you the individual who hired Mr. Sutton?

Juneau:  I guess you could say -- yeah, I think so.

Freeh (interviewer for Freeh Group): Did anyone recommend that you hire him, if you recall?

Juneau:  No. I don't think -- I mean, I don't remember anybody

this is what I remember. I remember he sought the employment.

Obviously, his wife, she had been there since the

inception. I knew Sutton before. He was from New Iberia,

Louisiana. He had worked for me for a short period of time, I

don't know, maybe a year -- I don't know how many years ago,

15 years ago or something like that -- in Lafayette, Louisiana.

I hadn't seen that guy. I had no contact with him

subsequent to that.

I hired his wife. Then he came and said he would

like to work. I considered that. I said, "Well, give me your

resume.”

Juneau clearly had contact with Lionel Sutton within that 15-year time frame.  Sutton stated that he was the one who asked Juneau to hire Reitano….they were absolutely in contact with each other.

His whole response there is rather aloof but that seems to be Pat Juneau’s general strategy…plausible deniability.  He played that card with the 409 expedited claims by suggesting they were part of a “sampling process” but I still haven’t been able to find any record of this sampling process in the court record.  More importantly, we still haven’t received a plausible excuse for expediting the Corps Constructors claim which occurred well after the fairness hearing and Corps Constructors couldn’t possibly have been part of a “sampling process”.

We also don't have any idea what knowledge Federal Judge Carl J. Barbier had of the 409 expedited claims or of Barbier's alleged "sampling process".   The Judge has been conveniently silent on that one. 

The Job Description

In this next byte, Sutton explains how his duties immediately shifted at the Claims Office, once he started working for Juneau.  He describes how he inadvertently became the “go-to” guy at the office and started fielding claimants’ and claims attorneys’ questions:

2 Lionel Sutton - 3 - What Lionel was doing at the DHECC.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

This is an interesting byte to me because it provides a snapshot into the operations and hierarchy of the office.  It’s pretty clear Juneau surrounded himself with “filters”, Sutton being one of the most important.  

I’m not criticizing Juneau here, I’m just noting that it appears he has a very hands-off approach to management.  That could explain how he may have allowed Kirk Fisher and David Odom to subcontract their own business, Alpha Consulting, to the Claims Office…perhaps he really didn’t know what was going on.  Once again…plausible deniability.

The Hammer Drops

In the next byte, I ask Lionel about the charges brought against him by Louis Freeh and how he first discovered he was being investigated:

2 Lionel Sutton - 4 - How Lionel found out he was being investigated.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

So, keep in mind that Sutton has repeatedly stated that he informed Juneau of his involvement with the Thonn claim before he ever took his part-time position at the Claims Office.  He does admit to asking for the referral fee on this claim which he passed off to Andry-Lerner before he took the job at the DHECC but he denies ever having tried to expedite and/or manipulate the claim once he started working at the office, an allegation of which Freeh accused him. 

In this byte he also points out that checking on claims was his job….he was continually being asked to check on the status of claims by the Claims Administrator, Pat Juneau, himself.  

I’m not playing defense attorney, I’m simply reiterating Sutton’s assertions here in case you’re too lazy to watch the video.  

The other allegations Freeh brought up against Sutton were his business dealings with Glen Lerner and that he, Sutton, had claims pending in the Claims Office.  Lionel addresses that matter in this byte:

2 Lionel Sutton - 6 - Romeo Papa and Lerner Biz deals.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

According to Lionel, there seemed to be no clear mandate regarding a conflict of interest with him being in business with Lerner or having a business claim filed in the DHECC while he was working within the Claims Office.  

The guidelines apparently weren’t even understood by Pat Juneau, himself, per the story Lionel Sutton told about Juneau’s son having a claim and Magistrate Shushan ordering Juneau to have his son withdraw the claim.  I don't honestly see what the problem was with Juneau's son having a claim in the system as long as Juneau wasn't manipulating it in any way but he had him withdraw it so there's no issue there.

But hang on...

Admittedly, the above explanation by Sutton may seem excusatory but I want you to listen to this next byte:

Lionel Sutton - 7 - Appeals Panelists.mov from Jason Berry on Vimeo.

Members of the appeals panel had claims themselves?  (Did they have seafood claims?  I’ll explain why that matters later.)

Freeh: Ambiguity = "Crime"?  Or Freeh: "Prosecution" = $$$$?  Both.
  

Alright...let’s wrap this post up.

After working on this story for over a year, having talked to multiple sources and hearing this firsthand account by Lionel Sutton….I want to propose a basic thesis…actually a theory, if you will:

I don’t think anyone really knew what the ethical parameters of this settlement were because I don’t think the guy in charge, Pat Juneau, defined the parameters clearly from the onset of the settlement.  I don’t think he defined them because I don’t think he had a clear idea of what they should be to begin with.  

Or perhaps he did and he just didn’t do his job.

For a guy that is reportedly making 300k a month on this settlement and over 7 million to date (not substantiated…yet...but working on it)…..that’s inexcusable.  

Compound that with the fact that he’s reportedly billing this MDL settlement 40 hours a week while simultaneously serving as the Claims Administrator for two other MDL settlements….

….well….Houston...and London…we have a problem.   

Juneau's MO aside, what happened with the Freeh investigation is more important. 

Sutton, Reitano and Andry Lerner were offered up to BP and subsequently to the international MSM volcano gods by super-duper, glorified-gumshoe, Louis Freeh.  They were thrown into the mouth of the volcano and the lava did flow. 

(Keep in mind, that’s all Freeh really is…a private investigator hired by the Federal Court.  The guy has no ability to make criminal charges and if he or his minions have threatened people with that power then Freeh himself, and his employees, need to be investigated.)  

In his report, Freeh went so far as to suggest criminal charges should be brought up against Sutton, Reitano and Andry Lerner.  His job was supposed to root out all instances of corruption within the DHECC.  He's released two reports and ignored one of the main items he mentioned in his first report, the page 60 firm who falsified claims. 

Surprisingly, this guy’s company is now, possibly, the largest contractor in the settlement.

Try to wrap your head around this....Freeh “prosecuted” himself into an ever-expanding multimillion-dollar contract within this settlement.  And when he got in, everything started to change, including the actual terms of the settlement, itself, and the scrutiny of how claims are interpreted.   All to BP’s delight.

Also understand that no criminal charges have EVER been brought against the people he originally named in his first report.  None.  Nada.  Nothing.

When you read stories about BP's defeat in the appellate court...ignore the word "defeat".  BP has exactly what they want, the Freeh Group running the Claims Office.  

I”m going to break off here.  Next up we’re going to take a closer look at Louis Freeh’s “investigation”.  That will lead us into the Page 60 firm….yowza...

It’s good stuff, stay tuned.     

DHECC - Samples? Possibly....Random? Not likely.

Last Friday I received a tip from an anon that the blacked-out claim on the email from PSC attorney Calvin Fayard to Christine Reitano is for a company called Fab-Worx in Hammond, LA.  This is of great importance because Fab-Worx just happens to be owned by Fayard's cousin and business partner in multiple businesses, Robert A. Maurin, III.

While I haven't been able find any direct ownership on Fayard's part with Fab-Worx, the company name has multiple filings with the Louisiana Secretary of State and I'm unable to ascertain which company with "Fab-worx" in the name may have filed a claim with the DHECC.

There is a Hammond-based Fab-Worx Holding, LLC that was registered in 2011 which would put the company's incorporation date after the Deepwater Horizon accident and nullify their ability to file a claim but then there is another filing called Fab-Worx Properties, L.l.C., that was registered from a Baton Rouge location in 2008.

I am slowly uncovering multiple business ventures between Calvin Fayard and Robert Maurin, as well as ventures between his daughter and lawyer at his firm, Caroline Fayard, and Maurin.

The fact that Fayard had this particular claim expedited calls into question Patrick Juneau's explanation that the claims listed in the email chain were being used as part of a "sampling program".  If that's the case, and this blacked-out claim is indeed Fab-Worx, then we can assume the "samples" chosen were not random.  Unless Fayard randomly plucked his cousin's claim out of a hat.

Last night I faxed the following letter to Special Master Louis Freeh asking him to please investigate this matter while cc'ing the Court, Fayard and other various legal entities:

Special Master Louis Freeh,

Hello, my name is Jason Berry and I am the investigative journalist who authors The American Zombie blog here in New Orleans, La.  As you may know, I have been writing about issues that have occurred within the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center since it’s inception, particularly specific members of the attorneys appointed as class counsel to the settlement, the Plaintiff Steering Committee.  

Recently, I posted a report based on information I anonymously received in the mail that confirmed an allegation I have been researching for over a year that the PSC members had expedited their own claims ahead of other class members’ claims with the knowledge and consent of the the Claims Administrator, Patrick Juneau.  

Upon publishing the story, Mr. Juneau replied to the me via email with the following explanation:

“In response to your recent inquiry, we thought that you should be made aware of the actual facts. In the fall of 2012 the DHECC Program was fast approaching the fairness hearing and the opt-out deadline.  To avoid confusion as to who should opt-out versus who should stay in the class, it was important for the class as a whole to have a representative sample of paid claims across all of the claim types in order for them to assess which was the better path forward for them.  This could not be accomplished in the time required using the first-in/first-out (FIFO) method outlined in the Settlement Agreement, which method had been used for the summer of 2012, because many of the claims were incomplete and therefore not ready for processing.

After discussion with the Court, BP and the PSC, it was determined that a larger number of claims should be examined before the fairness hearing so that the Court, the parties, objectors and claimants could see how the settlement program was working.  As noted above, since the program had encountered problems with a lot of the claims not having complete documentation it was difficult to come up with claims that could be analyzed and determined, so a sample of sufficiently documented claims was needed.

The Claims Administrator, with the knowledge and input of the PSC and BP, asked the PSC to provide a listing of such cases and a sampling was taken of those cases.  This action had nothing to do with trying to expedite a claim for any particular attorney or party. Pursuant to that request, claims were submitted, a sampling taken and determinations were made, and those results were made available to the Court and the parties at the time of the fairness hearing.  During this same time frame some of the objectors were taking the position that in order to be able to determine whether or not to opt out, they needed to see at the time of the fairness hearing a determination on the type of claims they were handling.  We therefore took samples of claims from the several of the objectors and made determinations which were also available at the time of the fairness hearing.  It is interesting to note that over 60% of the claims that were considered were not represented by the PSC. 

The issues as they stood at that time and the above outline of facts are supported by the e-mails recently made public which were subject to confidentiality.”

I have since filed a request (enclosed) with Mr. Juneau to provide me with the following:

“In the spirit of transparency of the claims process to the public it serves, I once again implore that you please provide me with a copy of (or the court record document number to) all orders, minute entries, and transcripts of each hearing, conference and telephone call (including conference calls) between and among you, the Administrator, and/or anyone on behalf of the DHECC or CAO, the PSC, BP representatives, and most importantly the Court, for each “discussion” you referenced in your response to my story.”

I subsequently contacted representatives from BP to verify that they were aware of the expedited claims.   BP’s Head of Communications Geoff Morrell replied to Mr. Juneau’s comments with the following comment:

“BP was aware of efforts by the Claims Administrator in the Fall of 2012 to get the CSSP up and running, including how to make the claims process more efficient and, correspondingly, increase the amount of claim payments in advance of the final approval hearing in November 2012.

However, there are other aspects of your blog postings -- including the e-mails from PSC members to the Claims Administrator you present -- that BP was not aware of, but  we are concerned about them and are trying to look into them now.”

Judging from Mr. Morrell’s response, it appears BP may not have been aware that the PSC attorneys and Mr. Juneau had expedited their own claims as part of the suggested “sampling program”.

Since writing this story, another matter has been brought to my attention which I believe is great cause for concern regarding the ethical matters of the expedited claims.  I have been told that the claim Mr. Calvin Fayard had expedited in the email, with Mr. Juneau’s knowledge and consent, may have been for a construction (it may not be construction depending on which company filed the claim) company owned by Mr. Juneau’s (I made this mistake in the original letter but sent a corrective letter shortly after) Mr Fayard's cousin,  Robert A. Maurin, III.  The company’s name is called Fab-Worx  and is based in Hammond, LA.  

Here is the email which details the request to expedite the claim:

Please note, there is no mention of a “sampling process” in this email exchange nor have I been able to find any mention of this process in the Fairness Hearing transcript which occurred in November of 2012, one month after the above email exchange.

As a reporter, I do not have access to claimant information and as the claim number was blacked out in the documents I received, I have no way of verifying if the above claim was indeed for Fab-Worx.  

However, you do have that access as a Special Master and investigator of the DHECC.  You also have access to the above email and the other emails I posted in my original story which can be found at the following URL:

http://www.theamericanzombie.com/2014/03/dhecc-proof-positive-of-claims-being.html

I believe this issue is of the utmost importance in respect to your ongoing investigation into alleged improprieties within the Claims Office.  If a PSC attorney was expediting his own relative’s claims above the rest of the class claims this is a clear violation of the laws of the settlement as dictated by Judge Carl J. Barbier:

“New claims may be filed during the Transition Process until such time as the Court Supervised Claims Program is established and operational as set forth above. New claims submitted shall be processed and evaluated in the order they are received. Non-deficient claims previously pending with the GCCF shall be processed and evaluated prior to any new claims filed after the creation of the Transition Process.”

The fact that this may have been a nepotistic effort for Mr. Fayard to enrich his own relative and possibly even himself by expediting his cousin’s claim is of profound importance to the public.  I believe the matter deserves investigation on your part to ensure  the claims process is being run equitably.  I trust you will pursue this matter as vigorously as you did the Thonn claim which involved the Andry Lerner Law Firm, Lionel Sutton, and Christine Reitano.  

In order to help your investigation, I have obtained some documents from the Louisiana Secretary of State database that show joint business ventures between Mr. Calvin Fayard and his cousin, Mr. Robert A. Maurin, III.  I also have found business relationships between Calvin Faryard’s daughter and member of his law firm, Caroline Fayard, and  Mr. Maurin.  I am enclosing these business filings:

Fab-Worx business filings:

Wiliston Oil and Gas (joint venture between Robert Maurin and Calvin Fayard):

Safari Investments (joint venture between Robert Maurin and Caroline Fayard):

I trust this information will help you in your investigation into the problems occurring within the DHECC and you will pursue this matter as vigorously as you did the Andry/Lerner, Sutton, Reitano, Thonn matter.  

Thank you for your consideration and please contact me if I can be of assistance on the matter.

Sincerely,

Jason Berry, Independent, Investigative Reporter,

The American Zombie

ashedambala@gmail.com

(504) 975-3922

cc:  The Honorable Carl J. Barbier

The Honorable Sally Shushan

Kenneth A. Polite, Jr, U.S. Attorney

Charles B. Plattsmier, Office of the Disciplinary Counsel

John G. Heyburn II, Chairman, Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Calvin C. Fayard, Esq.

I am still researching the web of companies tying the Fayards and Maurin together.

I would like to ask any anon. who may be able to identify the claim number blacked-out in the email or any anon. who may have direct information identifying which claim Fayard had expedited, please email me or make an anonymous comment with the information.

Thanks.

DHECC - Special Master Blaster run Bartertown!

Yesterday, the Coastal Claims Group (CCG) filed a motion to dismiss Greg Paw's (Freeh Group) attempt to claw back money from the Thonn claim.  As AZ noted last month, Freeh and Paw must not have understood how claims and referrals work, as they severely overstated the amount of money they were attempting to claw back from the parties involved in the claim.

In CCG's case...they received nothing from the claim to begin with but Paw demanded they pay back $20,182.50.  Here is the motion to dismiss filed by CCG:

CCG Motion to dismiss motion of the special master for return of payments made to Casey C. Thonn and others

I was having a hard time believing my eyes as I was reading this last night.  CCG's attorney contacted Greg Paw to inform him that the special master was mistaken in including them in the claw back to which Paw replied:

“Please let us know if your client does contest the Court's jurisdiction, as we will then review whether the DHECC should continue to consider documents prepared by your client given your client’s [sic] assertion that it is not subject to the Court's oversight for such submissions.”  

Uhhh...what?  The motion called that a "thinly-veiled threat"....I would call it something else but it didn't stop there.  In a second email, within the week, Paw made the thinly-veiled threat clearer:

“[y]our client should be aware that how it addresses this motion will have a bearing on its future ability to play any role in the DHECC claims process.”

That....is what I would call extortion.  CCG can call it whatever the hell they want but I call it extortion...pure and simple.  The fact that Paw replied this way is harrowing.  The fact that he put the threats on paper (email) is either stupid beyond belief or brash beyond belief...or both.

Instead of recognizing they made a mistake...a tens of thousands of dollars mistake...Paw threatens CCG to either shut up about it and pay up or they will stop processing CCG's other claims.  I think that's the very definition of extortion, is it not?

 
I've been told Paw used to work for Chris Christie...I wonder who taught whom?

I will link the exhibits later.

DHECC - for 3 mill a month you'd think The Freeh Group could buy a calculator

Alright, my AZ power rangers have tabulated the numbers and it's not pretty.

Freeh is claiming that Thonn got $357,002.35 including the accounting reimbursement.  So according to Freeh that number was deposited in the Andry Lerner trust account.  Here's (what we think) is the breakdown:

Total Award - $357,002.35

Of that Andry Lerner would have taken a 20% fee - $71,400.40

The Coastal Claims Group would have received -  $20,182.00

That would put Thonn's net @ - $265,419.95

So the total fee for Andry Lerner (50/50 split with Sutton) would be -  $35,700.20

The total referral fee for Lionel Sutton would be -  $35,700.20

Ok...now in Freeh's motion here is what he is seeking from each of the four entities:

Thonn:  $357,002.35
Coastal Claims Group:  $20,182.00
Lionel Sutton:  $35,700.20
Andry Lerner:  $35,700.20 (not 100% sure about that number)

That would put the total amount Freeh is trying to claw back at:  $448,584.75

IF...if...these numbers are correct, Freeh is trying to pull back about $91,000 more than BP actually paid out on the claim.

WTF?  That's the first claim he's clawed back and he overshot the amount by $91,000?  If this is right you have to ask whether or not the guy even understands the breakdown on individual claims and how the referrals are paid.  It actually makes me wonder if these clawbacks aren't being orchestrated under a commission basis...that's just me speculating but if he's overshot the claw back by 91k right out of the gate, this a pretty big deal.

The only thing I can think of is that the claim BP paid was actually $448k and perhaps Andry Lerner took out an extra $91k on the commission which would put their total commission amount at $126,700.20.  That's about 35 1/2 % commission if that's what happened.  I don't think that's legal and I can't imagine Andry Lerner would be that stupid unless the client agreed to it.

I'm not sure what's going on here but I hope some folks smarter than I can chirp in on the comment section.  

DHECC: Tits and ass, corporate espionage, white-collar mercenaries...the truth is in there somewhere

Almost every day there seems to be a new development in the BP claims process and the going-ons at the DHECC.  Last week, the AP ran a story stating that DHECC executives Bob Odom and Kirk Fisher had resigned amidst nebulous charges of having gone to a local strip club that had also filed an economic loss claim with the claims office.

On a local level, The Advocate followed up the AP story with their own reporting (thank you Advocate):

BP changing stance on claims payments puzzles experts

And while the headline is a topic of conversation all to itself (read this article by Tom Young only after you finish mine, of course : ) ), in this post I want to focus on The Advocate's commentary about the strip club "allegations" and what all this hullabaloo with Odom and Fisher may actually be about:

Without naming them, the ad said that two key administrators at the program recently left amid reports they went to a strip club that had received $550,000 from the claims facility.  The facility's former chief operating officer, Kurt Fisher, has disputed those claims, saying he and former CEO David Odom left to pursue "other opportunities".

As I stated in my previous post, it's a pregnant paragraph because it doesn't really say what Odom or Fisher did wrong other than go to a strip club that received a claim.  There is no substantive allegation here.  I'm sure they probably went to a lot of businesses that received claims or had claims queued so I don't understand what the big deal is.

I guess BP is trying to make hay that they are guilty of being horndogs by visiting the strip club but that has nothing to do with their responsibility as employees of the claims office.  I believe this whole thing was drummed up by the BP PR machine because it's sexy...literally...and they knew the Mindless Stream Media cycle would run with it.

However, I believe there is a lot more going on just beneath the surface, under the sensationalist headlines, and I've spoken with a lot of confidential sources in the past week to get a better picture of what may have been going on with these two guys, Odom and Fisher.

The domino effect  

Let's start with the basis for any investigation....motive, means, and opportunity.

What is BP's motive?  I believe their overall goal is to bring down the DHECC completely.  I know that may seem obvious to you but I've been in the dark for a while as to whether or not they actually want to collapse the settlement or if they want to keep it in place and simply gain control of the claims office from within.  Well, I think they now do have control of the office from within but I also think they still want to collapse the settlement.  I am speculating here but this is a rather educated guess.

With that goal in mind, how could BP collapse the settlement?  I think they want to cut Pat Juneau's head off.  I think they see Juneau as the universal joint in the DHECC framework and if they can manage to pull that joint out, the whole machine will come unraveled.  This BP strategy was parroted obediently by James Varney a month ago in his editorial.  If Juneau, himself, were to be disgraced it would possibly taint the entire office...possibly.

What about the opportunity?  The opportunity lies in picking off the underlings...first Sutton and Reitano, now Odom and Fisher.  Louis Freeh is providing the opportunities and he kicked it off by offering up Sutton and Reitano on a silver platter in his first report.  BP immediately ran that through the MSM organ grinder across every newspaper from here to London with the Wall Street monkey boys dancing on cue....singing, "Good ol' boys!" and "Kitchen table accounting".

The monkeys howl

Now, in the wake of strippergate, Bloomberg's Paul Barrett is playing color commentator on the "scandal":

"Even for New Orleans, a town with an expansive conception of entertainment and a generous sense of humor, that's a scandal."     

Ummm...no.  Not so much....in fact....not at all.  There isn't even an allegation for there to be a scandal.  Perhaps someone should adjust Paul's Nawlins Scandal Barometer hanging in his office in Manhattan.  A scandal in this town would be more along the lines of a city official fucking strippers on a yacht bought with city funds....that's a New Orleans' scandal.

But, if he and Bloomberg want a scandal I've got one fo' true.  I would suggest they look into the sudden expansion in claims office contracting that Louis Freeh's companies, The Freeh Group and Pepper Hamilton, have been awarded over the past 8 months.  Then I would check their expense account.  With over 40 employees now staying in the Roosevelt, the Ritz Carlton, and the Marriott, dining at Galatoire's, Emeril's (oh the irony)...the finest restaurants in the city, and possibly even entertaining their own "guests" at houses of less-than-sterling repute (oh double the irony).  I'm betting that expense account is pretty nasty right about now...but I know more than one service industry employee who's enjoying the high times pouring out of the claims office.

Also, perhaps they should look into the allegations the Andry firm made about the connections and former business associations between Pepper Hamilton and BP's current law firm, Kirkland and Ellis.

I digress...that's a post for a later date.  Let's just say that the paragraphs immediately above are even more pregnant than the one in The Advocate story.

I do want to point out one more item, though.  In this article Barrett boasts:

"Back in July, I warned that Freeh’s investigation “could reveal major legal funny business in the Big Easy.” That prediction was based on earlier reporting I had done for a Bloomberg Businessweek cover story on the creative recovery theories that plaintiffs’ lawyers were using to get their mitts on BP cash. Expect more such revelations in the new year."

He's not the one who originally reported that, not even close.

Is this really about T&A?  

Back to the story at hand...strip clubs.  Here's what I've been able to piece together about the actual strip club event...Odom, Fisher, possibly David Duval and some of the claims office employees went to a strip club after an office Christmas party (probably 2012) that was being held at a Dickie Brennan restaurant...either the Bourbon House or the Palace Cafe. I used to bartend at Palace and I would highly recommend either venue...the food is incredible.

That's it....no shit.

No one was snorting coke off buttcheeks, no one expensed anything to the claims office, no one took the strippers to a private yacht and dirtied down (as far as I know).  They just went to a strip club...that's all.  I am pretty sure it was either Rick's or the Penthouse Club on Bourbon.

Scandalous huh?  WTF...that captures international headlines?  That's what Barrett is claiming is scandalous even by New Orleanian standards?  Barrett's obviously never been to New Orleans...dude needs to get out more.

This strip club did file a claim and receive payment but I'm pretty sure Dickie Brennan did as well for his restaurants.  I would bet the hotels the Freeh Group and Pepper Hamilton are currently patronizing filed claims as well.  I am almost certain the restaurants Freeh Group employees are currently frequenting have filed claims.  John Georges owns Galatiore's...maybe The Advocate could fill us in on whether or not that restaurant filed a BP claim.

So...here's the twist....I don't think Odom and Fisher's departure has much to do with the strip club visit.  I think that was simply thrown out as a tabloid-headline-grabbing attempt to defame these men. But that's not to say they're squeaky clean.

I know that Odom had a French Quarter apartment that was being expensed to the claims office to the tune of about $3000/month and I have been sent some allegations through email that suggest Odom and Fisher may have ancillary business connections to the owners of the strip club they visited but this is still unsubstantiated.

According to the allegations by the AZ reader, if the strip club is the one I think it is, the owners of this club have multiple sex industry businesses including an adult video franchise, a porno production company and an escort service.  Another source has suggested to me that the Quarter apartment was being used as a shag pad to patronize the ladies from the aforementioned business's escort service.

I don't buy that allegation right now but let's pretend it's true....there is still no proven quid pro quo in respect to Odom or Fisher's role in the claims office.  Once again, even if this is true, there is no crime committed unless the shagging was being expensed to the claims office or if Odom or Fisher participated in increasing the strip club owner's claim and/or expedited the claim for "favors".

So...let's put the strippers and escorts to bed...metaphorically.  Just get the sexy shit out of your head for a minute because there is an entirely separate issue with Odom and Fisher that needs to be addressed.

Self dealing and free wheeling  

As AZ commenter Kevin has noted, Odom came to the claims process from The Shaw Group.  There has been a lot of speculation as to how Odom landed his job with the claims office but there is even more speculation as to how he contracted employees and bought office equipment once he was in the office.

Enter a Baton Rouge businessman named Michael Olinde and a company called Alpha Consulting:

  
Olinde is reported to be a business associate of Odom and Fisher previous to their tenure at the claims office.  Odom gave Alpha the contract to staff the claims office when it opened.  The staffing company hired mostly accountants to review claims.  As AZ commenter Kevin has continually pointed out on the blog, most of these employees were hired directly from LSU where Fisher teaches...essentially these LSU students were hired right out of college. There is a question as to whether or not the employees were being hired under the assumption that they were actual CPA's but I haven't been able to mesh that issue out yet.

The real issue is whether or not Fisher and Odom have any financial interest in Alpha Consulting.  If so, they essentially used their position in the claims office to sub-contract their own company...they're self dealing.  BUT...BUT....keep in mind that the DHECC is not a public entity.  They are not required to issue RFP/RFQ's or even advertise the positions that Alpha filled as long as the claims administrator approved the sub-contracting and hiring scenario.

Does it stink?  Yes...it smells like ass.  But it isn't necessarily a legal or ethical breach as long as it doesn't conflict with the terms of the DHECC and as long as it was approved by the claims admin., Juneau.

To be clear, I don't know if Fisher and Odom had any financial interest in Alpha but I do know they had previous connections with Olinde.

Now there's also another issue with Odom.  He has a company, Plexos, that he may have been using to expense office needs and other items per a Plexos credit card:

What's more, there is also a "Plexos, International" Llc. that is listed in the LA Sec. of State database registered to Bob Levine, the CFO of the DHECC, but seems to be inactive:

 

I put a request in to the DHECC over a month ago to interview Odom regarding an allegation that he and Levine expensed a trip to NYC in 2012 where they accepted an offer by the Garden City Group (GCG), a DHECC court vendor, to hang out in the company's skybox at Giants stadium for the Saints/Giants game.  The reason this is an issue is that the invitation was extended to multiple people within the claims office but Juneau told all the employees that it was unethical and he prohibited anyone from taking GCG up on the offer.  Christine Reitano recently included this invitation as an exhibit in a court filing:



This issue is very important because it establishes that Juneau was exercising some level of protocol in the office as to what was ethical and what wasn't.  Remember that Reitano was accused of unethical behavior by Freeh such as trying to secure a job for her husband, Lionel Sutton, with the Garden City Group.  But Reitano maintains that everything she did was disclosed to Juneau and on this matter he told her it wasn't kosher so she dropped it.

It appears that Odom and Levine, on the other hand, did not drop the matter of the invitation to Giants Stadium by the Garden City Group even after they were told it was unethical.  One reason this issue is important to me is because there is another angle with Odom and Fisher that involves their cozy relationship with the Garden City Group and their hostility towards another court vendor for the DHECC, Brown and Greer.

At this point you may want to read this post and watch my video explaining the roles of the four main court vendors for the DHECC:  American Zombie: A DHECC road map

Pirates of the Silicon Swamp?

The entire time Odom and Fisher were working in the claims office they were in the process of forming another company with the Carrolton Technology Group's Managing Partner, Chris Reade.  AZ readers may recall Reade as the guy who the Louisiana Technology Council tapped to try and retrieve the emails Mayor Nagin "lost" after a public records request was submitted by the TP.

Let me stress that I'm not suggesting there was anything wrong with Odom and Fisher's business venture with Reade, The Crescent City Group.  I think their goal was to create a local technology company in the framework of Brown and Greer that handles MDL and class action cases.  I know Chris Reade and I've found him to be more than competent and a damn fine gentleman....I am not suggesting any impropriety on his part.

The real issue is to what length Odom and Fisher went to fleece Brown and Greer of proprietary technology to create their own Crescent City Group claims processing company.  I know from multiple sources that B & G had a hostile relationship with Odom whereas the Garden City Group seemed to have a rather chummy one.  I bring this up because I think the next Freeh report may focus on this matter and whether or not Odom acted unethically in his desire to build the Crescent City Group up as a national technology company that handles MDL and class action claims.

Goin' all NSA on 'em

Another issue I want to bring up with Odom is what role, if any, he played in exposing the Thonn claim to Louis Freeh.

Lionel Sutton recently stated in a legal filing that he had informed Patrick Juneau of the Thonn claim when he was originally hired.  Sutton even claims he told Juneau that he referred the claim to the Andry Law firm for a fee well before it became an issue around January of 2012.  This admission seems to matter not in the Freeh investigation.  The "smoking gun" Freeh used to accuse Sutton of impropriety was Sutton's own emails...but not from his office account....from his personal email account.

The question is how did Freeh get Sutton's private email database to begin with.  Did Odom play any role?  Obviously the emails coming into the office were privy to Special Master Freeh but Sutton's personal email database was not.

In fact, in his report, Freeh cited Sutton's personal emails from seven months before Sutton even started working at the claims office.

How did he get Sutton's personal email database?  Was it obtained legally?  Was Sutton's password hacked by someone in the claims office?  If the emails were obtained illegally, would that constitute an obstruction of justice?  All pertinent questions.

Is The Freeh Group a white collar Blackwater?  

One thing I want AZ readers to keep in mind when they read the next Freeh report, is that I believe the first one was incredibly irresponsible and in some aspects downright inaccurate.  Unfortunately, the people who were accused in the first report, namely Reitano, have not been afforded the due process of law in order to challenge Special Master Freeh's allegations.  It appears Judge Barbier is allowing this guy to run (forgive me) freely through this investigation without any system of checks and balances or any opportunity for recourse by those he accuses.  The whole investigation is essentially operating above the law and by the looks of it Freeh has parlayed his carte blanche status into one hell of an expanding, lucrative contract with the DHECC.

I believe Freeh is reckless, shoddy and self-serving.  He doesn't care who he leaves in his wake as long as he offers up the goods and I believe he will go to any extent to do that.  The court has created a situation where there is an enormous personal financial incentive for Freeh to prosecute people, this scenario should not exist in the U.S. justice system.

Keep in mind Louis Freeh is not a federal agent any longer, he has no authority to act as one yet I believe he and his employees are doing just that. It would actually be better for the accused if this was a federal investigation because they could at least have some level of recourse and due process.

I would go so far as to say Freeh, Greg Paw and their minions are now running the claims office.  I would love to see what the Freeh Group and Pepper Hamilton are now billing the DHECC monthly on top of their expense reports....I'm betting it's millions.

I think what we're seeing here with the Freeh Group is the birth of a new type of hybrid private/public enforcement agency much like what Blackwater created for mercenary warfare and public/private security only Freeh is tapping the corporate, white-collar world.  That scares the hell out of me.

W'yat Z?

I have no doubt that fraud has occurred in the claims office and the DHECC.  I've been the one beating that drum harder than anyone....but I think Freeh may be as bad or worse than those he's accusing.

I also want to know why the fucking page 60 law firm in Freeh's first report...a PSC firm....hasn't been named.  Riddle me that.  Is he selectively prosecuting people?

The other day someone asked me, "Whose side are you on?  BP? Freeh? The trial attorneys?  The claims office?  I can't tell whose side you're on, man."  The answer is...the truth.  They're all assholes in my book but my main concern is with truth....because apparently most of our MSM resources aren't so concerned about it.    

     

DHECC: Here come the claw backs

I'm posting a lengthy number hopefully by tomorrow.  I am anticipating the release of the next Freeh report tomorrow and I want to fill you folks in on some things before it's released.

Yesterday, in a legal filing, Freeh asked Barbier to take back about $357,000 from the Andry Law Firm over the Thonn claim.  I think you count on this being the first in many more to come.

Freeh asks judge to rescind oil spill award

Here is the document.

AZ commenter Kevin had this to say:

Kevin has left a new comment on your post "A pregnant paragraph....": 

A motion was filed today by Special Master Freeh and, in my non-lawyer understanding or what I’m reading, it seems to make allegations that Casey Thonn submitted false tax returns to the DHECC to support his BP claim. The motion seems to ask the court to require Casey Thonn and “all professionals who assisted Mr. Thonn and benefitted from this unjustified payment from the DHECC.”

Freeh’s motion says: 

“Upon information and belief, Mr. Thonn’s counsel, the AndryLerner LLC law firm and its partners Jonathan Andry and Glen Lerner, received attorney’s fees for Mr. Thonn’s seafood claims. Approximately $35,700.23 of these fees was transferred as a referral fee to Lionel Sutton, III, a former DHECC staff member.”

“Coastal Claims Group, LLC submitted an invoice for $20,182.50 for its accounting work preparing the Report supporting Mr. Thonn’s seafood claims.”

$20 Grand to audit an allegedly fraudulent tax return? I believe there is a special allowance in the BP claims process for claimants to be reimbursed for accounting expenses in connection with auditing and certifying claims information. I bet that spawned a cottage industry for CPA firms!

I looked up Coastal Claims Group, LLC and found that Kevin Ingram of Covington, Steven Scott of New York, Brooke Andry of New Orleans and Bert Verdigets of Metairie are Members of the LLC.

There are a couple of familiar names in there