Email from Billy Broussard to Robin Sylvester


From: Billy Broussard <>
Date: October 4, 2018 at 1:38:54 PM CDT
Subject: Fwd: Subpoenaing Kelly Fontenot for 10/25/18 court hearing


Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Billy Broussard <>
Date: October 4, 2018 at 12:23:32 PM CDT
To: "Robin A. Sylvester" <>
Cc: "Mr. Most Attorney" <>,
Subject: Subpoenaing Kelly Fontenot for 10/25/18 court hearing

 Mr. Sylvester,


We need to subpoena Kelly Fontenot for the court hearing on 10/25/18:


  1. In Mr. Stutes’ letter of 2/16/15,, he references having received “numerous complaints by Calcasieu Parish officials” entailing my requests for public documents.  Those complaints are known to have originated from Fontenot, whom I believe I can firmly substantiate committed perjury under oath during questioning by me on March 23, 2015 once you and Attorney General Jeff Landry were no longer working my case and I was serving pro se and questioning her on the witness stand.

  2. Fontenot described her position with the Calcasieu Parish Police Jury as, “Layman’s terms, internal auditor.”:  
  3. Fontenot also stated under oath during my questioning of her, regarding the picking up of ineligible debris, “I have no knowledge of that even from my communication with them (GOHSEP).:  
  4. The reality is Fontenot knew darn well there was ineligible debris!
  5. How do we know this?  Simple!  She sent an email on 5/20/09 to FEMA monitor Dan Kennedy stating, “We need those GPS sites to go away.”:  
  6. Prior to the email referenced in # 4 above, on 5/17/08 (a Saturday!), Fontenot again sent an email to FEMA monitor Dan Kennedy stating, “FEMA/State Monitor will approve whether it is eligible or not.”  She further goes on to indicate to Kennedy that she is, “setting up my future argument” in the event debris is subsequently deemed ineligible:  In fact, she even goes so far as to state, entailing Kennedy, “with your help, of course.”
  7. In an email of 8/20/08 again to Kennedy which has Fontenot’s own handwritten notation of the following day, 8/21/08, Fontenot states that Kennedy has indicated that, if I was directed to pick up debris that was ineligible (nobody even disputes that I was so directed), it would be at “our cost.”:  
  8. It was Ms. Fontenot and her fear that I would openly expose her secretive plots as outlined above that prompted HER to seek a restraining order against me to hinder my efforts to further demonstrate what she knew I’d already authoritatively documented!  Further, I have spoken to an Assistant DA in another parish who has stated in no uncertain terms, your indications to me to the contrary notwithstanding, that:  “Kelly Fontenot had no such authority!  There could be no filing for injunctive relief against you without a vote of the bodies to commence with such an initiative.”

  9. Just how damning is it that a person who describes her job title as “layman’s terms, internal auditor,” would author emails actively seeking to conceal the fact ineligible debris exists (i. e. “we need those GPS sites to go away” and further indicating she is “setting up my future argument” for ineligible debris “with your (FEMA monitor Dan Kennedy) help, of course.”

  10. One really cannot conclude any other scenario but that Fontenot is utilizing her own audit knowledge and skills to, at best and being kind, be deceitful to FEMA!!


Now, the preceding documents represent easily-comprehensible damning material that can be read in a matter of mere seconds!  Who provided the above links?  That would be the dreaded blogger, Robert Burns, of Sound Off Louisiana.  You made the statement that, “If he (Burns) is at the hearing, I am leaving.”  Now I realize that was in the context that I wanted him to be a witness to the fact Police Juror Hal McMillin stated to Burns that he had “no knowledge whatsoever” that any restraining order had ever been filed.  Burns has indicated to me that such testimony on his part would be clearly inadmissible as hearsay and that McMillin himself would have to be placed on the witness stand to make such a statement.  That fact notwithstanding, Burns IS going to be present, and he will be producing a feature outside the courthouse once the hearing concludes.  


The content of what he produces will be a function of your performance in court.  It would be my desire that he be able to indicate to his viewing audience (as he embeds the damning email jpegs into his Sound Off post to where they are staring readers right in the face rather than having to click on links as is the case above in this email) that my attorney “went to bat for her client (me) and swung for the fences,” rather than reporting something along the lines that you were too timid to grill Fontenot (or God forbid, too timid even subpoena her to be present!) on the obvious problems of her prior testimony which, again, I believe constituted perjury, and the obvious damning nature of her emails linked above.  I would certainly hope that, should you demonstrate any such timidity entailing your questioning of Ms. Fontenot, it would not be as the result of an effort to avoid alienating the “courthouse crew” in Calcasieu Parish because doing so may inhibit your chances of a successful run for judge yourself.


Now, I gave Mr. Burns the entire “New Evidence” PDF file earlier today, and he was gracious to convert the entire document into a searchable format.  The link for the document follows:  He also converted a document I gave him some time back to be searchable (it has Fontenot’s hand-written notation above on page four).  The link for that document follows:  I will be more than happy to meet with you in person or discuss by phone additional items within “New Evidence” just linked with which you can attack Ms. Fontenot because SHE IS THE KEY this entire matter!!  Lastly, I gave Burns the entirety of the court transcript of March 23, 2015, and he was gracious to convert the PDF document to be searchable, and here’s the link for that searchable document:  


I am merely asking you to take the baton and run with it where I left off in the court hearing when I had Fontenot on the stand.  Mr. Stutes could tell I was about to box her in by having to admit to the emails linked above (just go to page 87 of the transcript immediately after Fontenot said she “had no knowledge” of ineligible debris and I responded, “I want to show you something,” and see how Stutes jumped in an went on a dissertation!!!).  Stutes (and Fontenot) were extremely concerned that I would demonstrate to the court the very obvious collusion that Fontenot’s emails demonstrate and the fact that she #1) knew there was ineligible debris, #2) sought out covert manners to conceal that fact (i.e. “make GPS sites go away”), and #3) either made, or caused / knew of others to make / making false representations to me that I would be reimbursed for the debris they were ordering me to remove, only to covertly arrange for FEMA to reimburse them for such debris removal and then them divert money intended to pay me to their own workers who removed debris that was not even on the FEMA map and outside the Army Corps wetland map!  I had the entire set of documents linked at “New Evidence,” in court with me and was fully prepared to absolutely grill Fontenot on them, but Stutes, sensing that he and his client were about to be in one heck of a mess as I continued questioning Fontenot, protested the fact that it was 61 pages (which it is, simply click on the file) and that he’d had no chance to review it.  THAT is when Judge Ritchie cut me off indicating that I could ask only one more question.  You have the document in full (and you’re obviously both welcome and encouraged to provide it to Stutes), to include the damning links provided on bullet points #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, and # 7 above.  Now do your job as my attorney and #1) get me out from under this restraining order, AND #2) get me compensated for the work I did years ago which the documents above clearly and succinctly demonstrate that I SHOULD have been paid on years ago.


Thank you, and I look forward to seeing you in court on October 25, 2018 and you making Kelly Fontenot sweat under the intensity of your questioning just as I was all set to do on March 23, 2015.


Billy Broussard

(337) 316-6193


Sent from my iPhone