 |
| David Roberson |
Has Drummond Company waived its right to seek a third stay of discovery in David Roberson's $75-million lawsuit by sending out discovery requests of its own? A lawyer source says he has never heard of such a tactic, but a definitive answer to the question remains unclear. This much, however, is clear: Drummond has sent out discovery requests to the plaintiffs, and evidence of that is embedded at the end of this post. In fact, Roberson already has responded to Drummond's requests for admission, and some of his answers are pretty darned interesting. Here are a few that jump out to us:
3. Pertains to the following statement from the [criminal trial] transcript: "Your Honor, I'm an honest and trusted man and have been my entire life. Aside from a speeding ticket 20 years ago, I have not broken the law. I am innocent of all the charges that were brought against me. My entire career for over 42 years has been devoted to being honest and abiding by the law."
e. Admit that during your employment with Drummond, you never recommended, or had any knowledge of, any contribution to a public official which was violative of the law.
Response: Admit as head of government affairs I never made or recommended on behalf of Drummond any contribution to a public official which was violative of the law. Deny the remainder.
12. Admit that, during your employment with Drummond, you never told anyone at Drummond the dealings with Oliver Robinson and/or the Oliver Robinson Foundation were of questionable legality.
Response: Deny.
14 (a)-(f) pertain to the following statement from the [criminal trial] transcript: "I believed then and I still believe I am innocent because my work with Balch was based on advice of counsel in relation to their contract with the Oliver Robinson Foundation and the foundation grassroots work in the vicinity of the ABC Coke plant.
e. Admit that you suggested Oliver Robinson and/or one of his affiliated entities to perform such work.
Response: Deny.
f. Admit that you are aware of no one else at Drummond suggesting that Oliver Robinson and/or one of his associate entities perform such work.
Response: Admit. Neither myself nor anyone at Drummond recommended Oliver for this work.
23. Admit that you were present at a meeting attended by Mike Tracy, Blake Andrews, and Joel Gilbert at which Mr. Tracy asked Mr. Gilbert if the work proposed to be done by Oliver Robinson . . . was legal.
Response: Admit.
24 Admit that Mr. Gilbert responded to Mr. Tracy's question referenced above . . . that there was nothing problematic with engaging Oliver Robinson . . .
Response: Admit.
25. Admit that you are not aware of any invoice ever submitted by Balch and Bingham to Blake Andrews for reimbursement of payments made to the Oliver Robinson Foundation.
Response: Deny.
26. Admit that every invoice submitted by Balch and Bingham to Drummond for reimbursement of payments to the Oliver Robinson Foundation were addressed to you.
Response: Deny.
37. Admit that the only federal crimes with which you have been charged appear in the indictment available on PACER.
Response: Admit. However the testimony that Scott Phillips was hired by Drummond to lobby his own agency, which I was totally unaware of, played a big role in my being found guilty in my criminal trial.
42. Admit that you never had any written employment agreement with Drummond.
Response: Deny.
43. Admit that you never told anyone that Drummond had done anything improper in relation to matters made the basis of your complaint until after you were terminated by Drummond.
Response: Deny.
No comments:
Post a Comment