- Several of the players in Jeff's case, including Judge Royal Furgeson and Charla Aldous are connected to similar cases of alleged impropriety. In the case highlighted in the story below, Judge Furgeson's wife is partner in the law offices of Stephen Malouf, who is partner of Charla Aldous (Judge Furgeson permitted Aldous to make a $7 million intervention in Jeff's case for performing a few weeks of work).Public record's reveal that since at least 2003 up to and includng 2010 Judge Furgeson's wife has received compensation consisting of "Salary, Partnership distribution, andTust-Salary" from Charla Aldous' partner. There is no indication the remuneration has ceased. Click Here to view the Amicus Curiae Brief Regarding Judge Royal Furgeson, Jr. The players are all intertwined in numerous cases, collecting salaries from the same people involved in the cases. They have a history of collusion and cronyism among Judge Furgeson, his wife Malouf-Furgeson, Stephen Malouf and others. Page 18 of the above brief uncovers a financial disclosure from Judge Furgeson showing Furgeson's compensation from these persons.
- Onother case involves Henry Goltz. Click Here to view a misconduct Complaint from Mr. Goltz. Judge Furgson. Goltz's complaint illustrates similar misconduct by Furgeson as in Baron's case. In this complaint, Mr Goltz was explains how he was denied due process, was threatened in court of incarceration, and complained of judicial bias, stating "At the court appearance on 1 February 2006, before having heard any testimony, Judge Furgeson repeatedly threatened me with 'up to eighteen months incarceration' for contempt of court...".
- For more complaints of judicial misconduct against Judge Royal Furgeson, Click Here to view a complaint by attorney Andrea Arnold.
The lawyers/judges in Jeff's case have been the subject of investigation by journalists involving another similar case. Lawyers Charla Aldous, and Stephen Malouf were allegedly involved in a billing scam against another one of their clients, Albert Hill. Aldous and her partners sued Mr. Hill for approximately $50 million for approximately $5 months work. Days before the trial, when it came time for Mr. Hill to tell his side, the lawyers allegedly had their friend at the D.A's office indict Mr. Hill in an unrelated incident to prevent him from testifying against his lawyers. This is a dangerous group of lawyers who are very well connected to Judges and other public figures. Click Here to View one of the many articles published about the convoluted Hill case, which led to the investigation of the Dallas D.A. for allegedly impropriety with the lawyers.