William Roberts Wilson, who was done out of his share of asbestos fees by Dickie Scruggs and lost the ensuing litigation (federal prosecutors say) because Scruggs's agents had reached the judge, says the bribe money Scruggs paid should be considered his rightful property and refunded. Former Mississippi tort luminary Joey Langston, who says he was gypped himself of his proper share of the payoffs in the Scruggs II (DeLaughter/Peters) bribery case, is backing Wilson up.
Scruggs opponent: how about giving that bribe money to me?
Related Entries:
- New Podcast: James Copland and Andrew Wise discuss 'honest services' fraud post-Skilling and the Kevin Ring trial
- New 'Global Economic Crime Survey' shows decline in bribery and money laundering
- Moving forward with FCPA reform efforts
- Promise of FCPA guidance prompts inquiries
- New Database Tracks FCPA Enforcement
- SEC Reports First FCPA Enforcement Statistics
- Around the web, August 25
- Around the web, August 15
- No surprises on Zach Scruggs
- Around the web, August 2
- Documentary "Injustice" on Reelz tonight
- Around the web, April 4
- Around the web, February 10
- Around the web, August 2
- Zach Scruggs: "post comments on all Rossmiller's blogs and overtake it with our propaganda"
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Bridget Carroll Press Officer, Manhattan Institute bcarroll@manhattan-institute.org |



