Will an investigation lead to attempted fraud of the Federal Government?
FACTS:
We have many unanswered questions. I am referring to an article entitled, D.A.:Levee expense needed council OK, written by Emilie Bahr, in the Friday, August 18, 2006 edition of the Daily Comet.
OPINION:
According to the above mentioned article, in an opinion by Lafourche parish DA Cam Morvant, Parish President Charlotte Randolph should have sought Parish Council approval for the use of $5.3 million of inflatable flood control devices. Morvant stated that he would wait for council direction before proceeding with further research into the matter.
QUESTIONS:
1. Is this the same DA that stated in a recent public Council meeting, “if it ain’t in the charter, we ain’t doing it”?
2. Is this the same DA that stated, “if it is brought to my attention, I will not put my head in the sand”?
3. Did the DA state that there were serious consequences for violating the charter?
4. What Happened, as an officer of the court, why is the DA waiting for council direction?
5. Is the DA waiting to receive directions from some of the same people who may be involved in an alleged conspiracy to defraud the Federal Government?
6. Could this be an attempted cover up of an alleged cover up?
According to the above mentioned article, In his letter, Morvant references photos taken of the area he said show that as of 2 P.M. Sept. 25, the devices had not yet been put into position.
QUESTIONS:
7. Is there any evidence showing that the amount of tubes FEMA is being invoiced for, were actually placed and inflated?
8. If the total amount invoiced were never placed, inflated or remained, would the actions constitute FEMA Fraud?
9. If there was an attempt to cover up (hide from public and governing authority) would the buck stop with the Parish President or would her alleged co-conspirators be equally responsible in the eyes of the law?
According to the above mentioned article, Picciola said he was called out to the levee by the parish public works director (not the North Lafourche Levee District authority) the Sept. 24, the day the storm came ashore and observed a precarious situation . Left alone, he said, “it was imminent that they could have had a (levee) failure very easily… if they hadn’t sandbagged, I really thought they would have lost that levee” because of the scouring he said could have occurred if the water had been allowed to rush through.
QUESTIONS:
10. Was the danger of flooding over with, prior to the arrival of the engineer on the 24th?
11. Does the engineer ever mention a need for inflatable tubes?
12. The engineer said that he witnessed the sand bags in place at some point on the levee between Lockport and Larose, but did he mention where the inflatable tubes were placed? Can the engineer verify that all of the tubes that are being invoiced for were used and were necessary? The tubes were allegedly placed to prevent over-topping of the levees, can this engineer produce scientific data proving that the water reached an elevation that would top the levee in the location of the alleged tube placement?
In my opinion, Charlotte Randolph, Brent Callais and Phillip Gouaux are publicity hounds. Do you believe for one minute, that if all of those tubes would have been inflated in place and actually protecting homes, businesses and schools, there wouldn’t have been a large colored photo on the front page of the Daily Comet and the Gazette? Why no publicity? Why the secret? Will there ever be a criminal investigation of everyone involved? Do you believe that the DA may choose to stay out of the investigation and turn the matter over to the federal authorities?
Stay in touch, it is only beginning to get interesting.
