Cajunguy
New Member
Duhhh, who's got the boudin?
Posts: 42
|
Post by Cajunguy on May 10, 2008 8:24:05 GMT -6
Ronnief - " . . . A girl was dismissed just recently because she was too busty . . ." What, no pics? .
|
|
bunny
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by bunny on May 11, 2008 19:20:23 GMT -6
Actually, the news in our office was the employee was reprimanded for showing cleavage & then the straw that broke the camel's back was she wore capris one day, which is AGAINST THE LAW that was established by the clerk simply because he doesn't like capris (among many other types of dress apparel) & the girl gave some flack about it to her supervisor & boom - "she no longer works there". Wonder if she was given the 3 warnings prior to being canned...oh, that rule probably changed...Another one bites the dust !! Can't help but wonder who will be the next victim
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on May 15, 2008 0:35:16 GMT -6
And now one of the girls that was unjustly terminated (26 year employee) is working in courthouse canteen. That must be interesting. I'll bet some people are walking on eggshells.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on May 16, 2008 18:59:10 GMT -6
The Legislative Auditor this past Monday (5/12) released a scathing audit of a DA in the Acadiana area.
If the Auditor is not afraid of a DA, he certainly won't be afraid of a clerk! Can't wait to see the audit of the local Clerk.
BTY, the clerk telling people that the audit was his "annual audit" is pure horse hockey. The Clerk is obviously willing to make a false statment ( a lie ) when it suits his purpose.
|
|
ij
New Member
Posts: 44
|
Post by ij on May 17, 2008 8:03:02 GMT -6
In most communities an adverse audit of a public entity makes big headlines. Doesn't ever seem to happen here though. Our lack of local scrunity of public entities amazes me. Do our newssies think we're still in the old country and ruled by kings and queens? Are they fearful of retribution? Very seldom read or hear of any untoward actions of our local government. Lots of Bush bashing but nada on our locals.
|
|
toadm
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by toadm on May 20, 2008 12:49:08 GMT -6
Hey zoe, the girl who was working in the canteen of the courthouse was not terminated, that employee "retired". Although I'm sure the Clerk would have terminated her if she had not retired before. And get this in January when it was time for raises (supposedly on the performance of your work) this employee only received a $50.00 raise. The employee was told by the Clerk that the employees work was terrific and that employee was a work horse, but could only get $50.00, and this was because he said he had heard that the employee was openly asking voters to vote for the opposing person (Mr. Lehman) Then had the nerve to tell this employee, "You know the people I'm hearing this from really like you." I would sure hate to meet this employees enemy. The raise that was given should have been much higher if this employee was doing their job so well, but, I don't think there is many things that are being done fairly in that office. I was even told that this employee was never given a chance to return to their desk to clean it out, it had been done by administration. Administration had also been digging at this employees desk looking for a so-say list,(of fired or retired employees) and the employee noticed someone had been there. Can you imagine, the cubicle must have been their jail cell and the wardens were going through it, but guess what, 'THEY FOUND NOTHING. This employee was led out of the Clerk's office by the Clerk himself, he really did not want this employee to talk to anyone. Well the Clerk should worry more now because this employee like many others can speak freely now and a lot of us sure hope they do. Boy, I can't wait to see the audit on the Clerk. He is always bragging and has other employees bragging to fellow employees. (Their just on fishing expeditions) This Clerk has everyone wondering just who can you trust in that office.
|
|
bunny
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by bunny on Jun 4, 2008 19:31:03 GMT -6
"Silence is golden" ;D
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Jun 7, 2008 14:56:16 GMT -6
Has anybody actually seen the audit of the Lafayette Parish Clerk? Certainly not on the internet... The audit as published, is nothing but blank pages. I have the very latest version of acrobat, not reader, but acrobat 8 professional ($439.00, thank you) , and there is nothing there. Maybe the auditor was so embarrassed to give Perret a clean audit knowing the facts, he published blank pages! And a clean audit? One has to wonder what pressures were brought to bare on the legislative auditor to issue such an audit. Just look how the auditor beat up the DA in Jefferson Davis Parish, just look at how the auditor beat up the Madison Parish Clerk, just look at how the auditor beat up some judges in Plaquemines Parish and Perret walks for doing many of the same or similar things?
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jun 9, 2008 7:22:07 GMT -6
I was told by someone that the Auditor was leaned on by a certain senator whom I shall not name but his name starts with an "M" and ends with a "t". That senator sits on the appropriations committee ( funds each office) and I understand has a "close" relationship with the clerk of court . I too went to the Auditors web site and noted a lot of blank pages after stating why he went there. Th auditore never stated if allegations were true, not true or accurate. Can you spell malfease ?
I suppose someone must go to the press (not the Advertiser) or the U S Attorney to get things done properly. That is what I would do.
|
|
|
Post by ronnief on Jun 9, 2008 15:55:55 GMT -6
Well Beth, you can spell malfease but not auditor (just joking - my typing is not so hot either).
Well, real newspapers love a good story, especially if the story involves a politician who says one thing but does another. I am pretty impressed that the clerk was able to keep his employees quiet about the audit thing in the first place; looks like that would have been all over the place but I never saw it on the news or anything. See, it pays to bully and intimidate your employees. Keep up the good work,clerk !
|
|
bunny
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by bunny on Jun 9, 2008 17:58:39 GMT -6
We understand that the Clerk is calling this investigative audit his "annual" audit...that is an outright lie !!! People may not say anything but EVERYONE KNOWS he's lying !!!! Wonder what kind of BS the clerk will dish out when the annual auditors DO ARRIVE!!! Even the best of professional thieves get caught, not in lying, because they are PROFESSIONAL at what they do & they don't have little elves covering up for them..they work alone because they do not need help...but will get caught in a mess up & even though for some, it takes years to catch them, they ALWAYS get caught.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jun 10, 2008 15:23:28 GMT -6
As I understand it, the legislative auditor or people from his office spent the entire month of March in the office of the Lafayette Parish Clerk of Court and they found everything in order, absolutely no violations of any kind?
It took forensic auditors/accountants a month to that? It would seem that after a day or 2, they would have determined that the (a) complaint was without merit and left post haste. The legislative auditor does not have the staff or resources to chase wild geese.
The fact that they spent so long there would tend to indicate that something was covered up.....
Heck, the regular auditors don't spend that much time there......
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jun 10, 2008 17:47:40 GMT -6
Well, I can tell you this; The clerk is not too scared of auditors because he and his family are in Destin Florida (yes, again) at the judges "Nuts and Bolts" conference. He is not a judge, so go figure. Does the office pay for the condo ?
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jun 11, 2008 5:53:50 GMT -6
If the conference were in a less desirable place, bet you he would not be there and his family would most certainly not be with him!!!!!
Public vehicle of course..... public paid for gas .......public paid for room.....
gotta love the good life
|
|
|
Post by bonnie on Jun 13, 2008 22:52:58 GMT -6
Wow. So much gossip, hate, speculation and half-truths on this site! These messages seem to be a reflection of persons quite unhappy with themselves. Remember that your actions will determine your afterlife. Until then, suit yourself, but at least be truthful.
|
|
bunny
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by bunny on Jun 14, 2008 1:18:14 GMT -6
Bonnie, these writings you have read is the truth, the whole truth & nothing BUT the truth. This particular site is not a chat room, but a place provided as an opportunity to express & voice opinions & happenings of an elected official who has caused tremendous deception, to the point of lying & much more! It appears you are either partial or unaware, and, perhaps, have not been directly or indirectly affected...but then this is just "speculation". And this is your choice & your opinion, which is welcomed. These writings, even going further back in time, are based on real people, as yourself, who have experienced (& for some, still are experiencing) very real problems with the clerk & his administration....some problems are detrimental, not only on personal levels, but city wide. Bonnie, people have been cheated!!! If you were perhaps, not directly affected, but even aware, I feel sure you would not be so judgmental...think about it, hasn't anyone ever done a grave injustice to you or someone you know? And didn't you voice your opinion about it? Now, on a much broader scale, take the general public, whose pocket books have been stripped because of the clerk's outrageous costs & misuse of public funds...It's not that people here are unhappy with themselves, but yearn for justice with the clerk's grave deceptions. We're desiring accountability on the clerk's behalf, ie, judging the clerk; and you are judging the writers for their personal testimonies & that of others they know...so, tell me, what is the difference? And finally, certain actions can AFFECT your after life, but not necessarily determine it.
|
|
bunny
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by bunny on Jun 19, 2008 0:16:56 GMT -6
So what's w/the cameras at the DA & Clerk's offices...supposedly for security, making the Clerk & DA look good in the public eye for their measures toward security...which could be understood & approved of if this was the only intention...but as usual, the Clerk has other motives...how could the DA let that man twist his arm into agreeing to these cameras to watch over their employees ?? Just what kind of persuasion did the Clerk have up his sleeve to cinch this deal w/the DA Man, don't these high paying officials have anything better to do with their paid for nothing time ?? Designated employees will now have to be stationed at monitors to watch over the employees...go figure...Shouldn't security guards be assigned to do this job? This should not be a task that any DA or Clerk employee should be required to do...this does NOT fit into the job descriptions nor functions of the DA & the Clerk's offices...this spying project has NOTHING to do with the mission & responsibilities of the DA & the Clerk ..This is disturbing...to say the least !!! Why do they need cameras when the public is not allowed even a camera phone
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jun 19, 2008 8:29:29 GMT -6
Cameras in the Court House?
You must be kidding. There is a big sign on the door
"NO CAMERAS ALLOWED"
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Jun 19, 2008 8:34:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Jun 21, 2008 18:04:54 GMT -6
So Bonnie, what specific half truths and hate on this board are you referring to ?
|
|