Category: fraud

More details regarding the Tate Homecoming Witch hunt

Featured

This story is consistent with most cases I have researched. There is this dichotomy of cases the state attorney’s office prosecutes that are factually anemic and the cases that office refuses to prosecute regardless of abundant proof of countless crimes. Victims are created in both types of cases. What do you do when you are the object of a prosecutor’s tenacious claim of wrongdoing, while you are innocent? Is it worse than when someone has taken advantage of you or your family and that person thumbs their nose at you, denying you justice?

Laura Carroll and Emily Grover have been casted into the role of wrongly accused victims. I will delve into the “whys” in another post. What I wanted to bring out is the evidence presented. To give a bit of background, after the voting was complete, administrator, Carolyn Gray sorted through the votes. She is familiar with this app, Election Runner. She analyzed the data provided. According to her, she started deleting “suspicious votes” (as she had done in prior elections) she stopped deleting and sent the info to the school district to evaluate. The problem is we have no idea how many votes she deleted that might have altered the results or how many votes that were deleted that would point to someone else? We have incomplete information that is being used to prosecute a woman and her daughter. WTF?

Also brought out was the time the votes came in, according to Ms. Gray, there could be a lag in how said votes came in, which has come under scrutiny as well. The way the votes came into the program, is also being called “fishy”. But is it fishy if there is a lag??

Here are a couple of points in her deposition that I think deserve some attention:

So, we don’t know how many votes were suspicious and were deleted by Ms. Gray. My question on this is: if evidence is tampered with providing a clip of what happened, how do we know that data wouldn’t implicate someone else or give a fuller view of what we are looking at? Capturing some evidence that points to Emily or her family seems moot on its face because we don’t know the context of the data we now have. If you found a dead body and you cleaned up some blood around the body, wouldn’t that be destroying evidence? If you think someone hacked your computer, wouldn’t it be destruction of evidence to delete the proof of such? In both cases, it would significantly alter the outcome of any trial. You have unknown info swirling around that could have potential to exculpate people; why is that not being seen?

There are a couple of points to make Ms. Gray’s participation in this case sketchy; so far, we have a criminal case initiated with incomplete evidence; an administrator assuming guilt based on said incomplete evidence; the same administrator, did not authenticate the data (the portion she didn’t delete) before she sought to escalate this. Because she deleted some, authentication is necessary to see if any foul play occurred at all.

To me, it appears like they are backdooring this issue of authentication by using the records on FOCUS, the county site rather than that of the Election Runner app. This is deceptive info. It may show logins to FOCUS but it does not show the Election Runner results. It depends on the authenticity of the Election Runner app.

Just to clarify. One cannot enter the Election Runner app through FOCUS. It’s not possible. The two programs have no connection except that the school board believe that info gathered from FOCUS access to get the information that was needed to fraudulently vote for other students.

Stay Tuned!!

Source from Inside ECSO Speaks Again!

The most recent headline creates the Illusion that Sheriff Morgan has rid the ECSO of another rogue employee. The story has all the popular buzz words that would cause the reader to believe a dangerous “drug trafficker” has been removed from society. This criminal will not enjoy any benefit for being an employee of the ECSO and will suffer every penalty allowed by law. Sheriff Morgan has exposed her violation of law and emphasized his dedication to destroying the “good ole boy system” by offering her as a sacrifice to the citizens of our county.

For those not familiar with the hypocrisy of Sir David I’ll explain. It is entirely possible that the accused in this case has violated the law. She is not a favorite of any of the incompetent staff members at the agency. She is a very accomplished crime scene technician. She is the senior tech in that unit. She has been dedicated to her job and remained loyal for many years despite the low pay and lack of appreciation. She has attended training classes without fanfare or begging for the spotlight. She is a dependable employee with actual job-related skills. With all the attributes described, she should be held accountable if she betrayed the trust of the agency. If found guilty, she should be punished as would any person found guilty for this type of crime. The standard should be applied to all employees at the ECSO, I would think. The problem is, it is not how the agency operates.

Recently, there have been stories posted about other employees that were caught violating laws. Jessica Hackathorn was reported for committing insurance fraud. This is the same employee that initiated a complaint on an officer for having a step-child on the agency insurance plan after divorcing the mother of the child. The officer was placed on administrative leave and investigated for nearly a year. Evidence supporting that the officer committed no violation of law, was ignored. That exculpatory evidence included a court order stating the officer would pay child support and provide insurance. Any person would interpret this order, from a Circuit Court in this district, to be proof that a crime had not occurred. Somehow, that is not how Chief Eric Haines viewed it.

Chief Haines disagreed with the States Attorney’s Office that no charges should be filed. Haines has developed the reputation for being less than knowledgeable concerning law enforcement issues and having strong tendencies to avoid any display of honest behavior. If, in fact, he had truly believed a law violation had occurred Florida law allows him every opportunity to prepare an affidavit stating probable cause for the court to review. It would only be conjecture to speculate why he did not do this. One could assume his cowardly nature, fear of giving a statement under oath or just lack of intestinal fortitude, contributed to avoiding this option. What he did do is contact the Florida agency tasked with investigating insurance fraud cases. When informed there was not a fraud in this situation, by an official that investigates these crimes as a career, Chief Haines accused the official of misconduct by failing to file charges against the officer because of “professional courtesy,  refusing to believe there was a possibility he was simply wrong. Fortunately, Haines failed to succeed with his bully tactics and the officer was able to return to duty. Haines did feed his demented appetite for abusing people he dislikes by causing the officer to serve a short suspension before returning to duty.

Currently, Hackathorn has found herself in a similar situation. She put a child of an ex-boyfriend on her insurance policy at the agency. She is not the mother of the child and has no legal custodial rights to the child. I applaud her desire to care for this child and would believe she is a decent person to extend her affection to the child. However, she gave misleading information to the insurance company when asking if she could add the child to her policy. It should be mentioned that she would be considered the fiduciary of the insurance plan offered at the ECSO. Add the fact that she considered herself expert enough to file a complaint on an officer for having a “non-qualified” individual on the plan. She considered herself expert enough to even argue against a judge’s court order. I believe it would be extremely unreasonable for her to claim she made an honest error. Facts support what she did was manipulate the law and process to give her an out. She knew the process well and is well-informed on the rules of the insurance plan. She is the gate-keeper for the agency plan. Her job is dedicated to informing all agency employees on rules and answering questions they may have concerning the plan. Within weeks of illegally adding the child to the plan the child had an insurance claim for glasses and braces. I am not saying this was planned but I am saying it is suspicious. All indication here is that she willfully committed a fraud. Maybe, Chief Haines could inform us what he found out after talking to the state about fraud. Surely, he put the same effort into this issue as he did the one he investigated involving the officer.

Then the issue concerning a gun inside a county building. Jamie Higdon was a mechanic working in the garage at the ECSO. He was in possession of a firearm, while at work. There is written documentation that proves he had permission to possess the firearm during certain work-related duties. The state law allows for this. Again, enter Haines with his less than stellar knowledge of the law. An investigation is ordered, and the results are a surprising. The investigation revealed exactly what Haines had stated as law violations. The problem is with this matter:  Haines was wrong. One may ask how that could be. I’ll answer that. One explanation is that the person responsible for the investigation is as ignorant to the law as Chief Haines. This is entirely plausible, as it was one of the incompetent staff members of Sir David that completed the investigation. Another explanation is the investigation was corrupted by Haines. It is common knowledge that Haines never actually makes decisions that can be directly blamed on him personally. He uses internal investigations or another agency to do his dirty work. This gives him the opportunity to blame others and avoid being accountable himself. Either scenario supports the overwhelming opinion that the agency is corrupt and incompetent. Higdon ultimately leaves the agency. A superior employee lost to the poor leadership at the ECSO.

The comparable incident to this story involves Coleen Burt. She is a crime scene tech at the agency. She is often applauded for her stellar ability. Recently, Burt attended a training class and for her graduation, staff members went on a road trip to Tallahassee to celebrate. Never have I known of staff members attending an employee’s graduation ceremony out-of-town. Also, Burt works inside the main building at the ECSO. Her position is a civilian position. No civilian should be armed with a firearm in the area she reports to for work. This is an area defined specifically by state law as being an area that guns will not be in possession of civilians. Well, that isn’t the case for Burt. She mistakenly left her personal firearm in the bathroom while working. It is explicitly illegal for her to have been in possession of a firearm in the area and she carelessly left hers laying unattended for some period. The area is a secure area and often has members of the public in the area there for various business they may have at the ECSO. Had the wrong person found this gun before a responsible individual, what would happen? What if a child went into that bathroom and retrieved that weapon?

Let’s examine Burt. She has been involved in various “investigations” involving her propensity to be involved with individuals that are married or in some way relate to promiscuous behavior. Some jokingly comment her job title should be “Sex Scene Tech” and not Crime Scene tech, because there are more biologicals left by her than taken from a crime scene. This description is not “slut shaming” or being plain hateful. A public records request of investigations she has been involved in would support what is stated here, assuming Haines will, in fact release this information.

Here is a prediction. Hackathorn and Burt will never have to answer for the incidents described above. When their investigations are completed, no action will be taken. In fact, Hackathorn’s fraud related investigation is focused on the “leak” to Hunt insurance and not the lie/ fraud she committed. If the ECSO is called out, the defense will be the recent arrest of the employee in the headlines now. Morgan will use her as an example of just how honorable he is. He will say all employees are treated equal. You know now that he is a liar and that is not true. Do not allow him to do that when the time comes.

 

 

Bill Richbourg, C’mon Down!

So in the long line of people who cashed in, exploited and turned a blind eye in the Billings case, I want to welcome Bill Richbourg to the cast of characters who should be on the other side of the bars that they put their clients in. Mr. Richbourg could arguably be the most deplorable of the attorneys who rolled over and played dead in this case. Mr. Richbourg was hired by Gary Sumner to represent him. He paid Mr. Richbourg. For 6 weeks seemingly, work was done to further the defense case for Sumner.  But on April 25, 2011, the day set for the jury selection, Mr. Richbourg tells Sumner (as they approach the courtroom) that he could not win this case, Sumner had no option but to take a plea. Richbourg strong-armed a disadvantaged young black man. Then the state had the gall to sue Sumner for the time they wasted for trial.

But the best part here is that Richbourg had an agenda from the onset of representing Sumner. He represented Bud Billings in the adoption fraud suit that somehow left the “stolen” child with the captor. Richbourg organized that circa 1989-90.richbourg clip

Can you say CONFLICT???? Representing a man that is being charged with killing a past client and then tanking the representation? Cheryl Barnes, Gary Sumner’s mother, should be suing this man on Gary’s behalf. Not only unethical, but it rises to level of criminal when he forced Gary into signing away his life rather than actually representing him. Any civil rights lawyers out there should be on top of this.

But the people who failed to do their job in this case is so numerous. Richbourg is just ONE of the highly respected attorneys who dropped the ball.

Tony Henderson forced Lenny Gonzalez into his plea and signed off on the man’s legal mental competence, despite the SSI ruling that states the man has brain damage, dementia, and numerous mental health issues. Also his VAN WAS INOPERABLE. That was a defense within itself, but Henderson managed to negotiate Lenny’s fate which led to his death. Shouldn’t that be beyond malpractice as well?

What about the public defenders who handled Florence & Thornton?  There was a huge case for coerced confessions but they never represented their clients. They took the money  the state paid them and walked those boys into prison.  Now their lives are cast in stone.  Statistics say that uneducated black men imprisoned early (18-25) build “criminal capital”. They turn prison into a community that they are comfortable with, can network in, to feel a sense of inclusion into SOMETHING. It is the same psycho-social phenomenon that draws people into gangs. That is on  Joel M. Cohen (Florence’s public defender),  & Cheryl Alverson (Thornton’s public defender).

Richbourg has a great deal of company in his criminality.  I hope to see them punished just like Eddins, Geeker & Sir David.

 

 

 

 

I Hate to Say “I Told You”….

Since late 2015, I postulated that Mark Smith of the Manning Sex Case would “walk” away from these crimes. On Thursday last week, that theory was proven true. I have been distressed to come up with a post in response to this crazy ass decision.  The way this case played out was more odious than I could have never perceived the events as they manifested. Not only did this degenerate “walk”, but he was found “not guilty”.  He can NEVER be held accountable for the crimes known to have been committed against Brittany Cutting or Kaitlyn and Kayla Rogers. How could that be possible? Ask Sir David.  He is the puppeteer of this tragedy.

I can hear people saying, under their breathe, that I blame Sir David for the rain. If only that were so. It would be easier to dismiss me and this post by saying I am on a crusade against what I perceive is the Devil himself. Regrettably the Devil himself could not evoke the despondency Sheriff Morgan has in the heart of girls whose only sin was the family they were born into.

I cannot make a more compelling case for the imprisonment of Mark Smith. I have put document after document out there that support the predatory nature of this man’s heart. I’ve asked the question as to how he got a badge to begin with. He was discharged from the US Navy due to a “Personality Disorder”. He explains he was young and threatened suicide. However, being familiar with military protocol, I know you don’t get out of your obligation to serve that easily. For this reason for discharge, there must have been evidence to justify that Smith was a LIABILITY to the service.

Furthermore, a fellow cop who has 15 years experience in criminal investigations was persuaded to investigate a colleague. Not only that but he convinced a judge, who most certainly was apprehensive in issuing the search warrant, to find cause to effectively shred the credibility of deputy. For this case to be so compelling as to have an investigator come forward on his own as well as a judiciary who finds legal sufficiency to go after a law enforcement officer is HUGE.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

To question the judgment of the arresting officer, Zack Ward is question all cases in his 15 years of service at the Sheriff’s office, including the Billings Case. If the evidence Inv. Ward found was not legally sufficient in the eyes of the jury, how could it have been sufficient for the State Attorney?  The question here is who dropped the ball.In a press conference BEFORE THE MANNINGS WERE ARRESTED, Morgan says:

 We received some information downloaded from computer systems involving this case,” said Morgan. “We have over 100,000 images that have to be reviewed in addition to videotapes. As you can well imagine what a labor-intensive process that’s going to be for us to go through all of that material.”

This means there were images from Smith, Thomas and/or the victims. Yet in a Facebook conversation 10/4/15 with Eric Haines, Chief Deputy of the ECSO, he says:

 I unloaded on him including attacking his religiosity.  But the point is clear, Morgan says there were videos and images

but NOW Haines says, there aren’t any videos and pictures. No video or picture evidence was presented to the jury.

What happened to them?

I’ve asked the question as to how he got a badge to begin with. He was discharged from the US Navy due to a “Personality Disorder”. He explains he was young and threatened suicide. However, being familiar with military protocol, I know you don’t get out of your obligation to serve that easily. For this reason for discharge, there must have been evidence to justify that Smith was a LIABILITY to the service.

IN ADDITION, lest we forget my post from over a year ago:

yourprezi_Page_04

Erin Ambrose is the starting point because the entirety of the story seemingly circles back to her. She is also the person in this story with the most influence and has the greatest obligation to do the right thing. Her job title and ethical responsibility is higher than the rest and her part in this story is the most egregious. This is not an isolated incident for the State Attorney’s office. They have been more concerned with covering things up rather than pursuing justice. This is case merely epitomizes what happens on a day to day basis under Bill Eddins and his cronies.

Ms. Ambrose, Assistant State Attorney for the First Judicial Circuit, is engaged to a deputy by the name of Jason Young (Jason Von Ansbach Young).

10697416_10100595171443963_3087119126674280417_o (1) Jason is probably the least culpable of the bunch. While he is an adult and a law enforcement officer, which, in and of itself, carries responsibility for serving and protecting the public, he is not an active participant in endangering children; he is, however, complicit.

Jason’s brother and soon-to-be best man in his wedding in January is Ryan Von Ansbach Young, an ex-deputy who is married to Mindy Von Ansbach Young, a current Lieutenant at the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office.

 10763_1063480463680611_818962773520710047_n1919474_100376989990968_4173802_n

The Von Ansbach Youngs have foster children as well as their own children. Ryan Von Ansbach Young posted bail for his wife’s colleague, Mark Smith on 3/09/2015. This act which had to be known by the Sheriff’s Office due to the hand in hand relationships they have with bail bondsmen. If they did not know, it is because they did not want to know. Having a deputy, Ryan’s wife, suborning the release of a child sex offender, by extension, shows complicity of the entire organization for which she and her family represent. This is also the caveat that Ms. Ambrose falls prey to.

It is telling that this impropriety and the ability to connect this sort of deviant, sex offender with the people who are supposed to police and cage these monsters. Cozying up with them off the clock shows how little regard they have for the humanity they are supposed to be protecting. Of course, this gives a bad message to all that have knowledge of it. Of course, it de-legitimizes the entire criminal justice system in Pensacola, because cronyism trumps proper handling of criminal cases. This is the downfall of the entire community.

10173692_686024901453670_2236079528720823431_nyourprezi_Page_03

The malfeasance is that with all these children in their home, the Von Ansbach Youngs, all current or prior law enforcement professionals, allow a sex offender into their home. They allow said offender to come and go freely with children in the home.

Sr. Deputy Mark SmithEscambia Sheriff's K-9 tops at national trials - Studer Community Institute.clipular

The sex offender, who should not have contact with children is Mark Smith, an ex-Senior Deputy of the Escambia Sheriff’s Office. He is awaiting adjudication currently for multiple counts of sexual battery/rape of children over 16 and under 21, which has been minimized through the State Attorney’s office. Most counts being reduced to misdemeanors, even though there is video evidence of his impropriety as well accounts of sexual misconduct against others that the Sheriff’s dept. refused to acknowledge (See my post “Where’s Gavin?“)

Coming full circle back to Erin Ambrose, who is SUPPOSED to be an advocate of the children molested, battered and raped by  Walter Thomas and of course Mark Smith, who were both Escambia County Deputies at the time of the offenses.

10473866_10204243856329120_2942019695593477156_n 1015429_10200868804664193_937361007_o

The most malicious of the acts in the fact that not only is Ms. Ambrose violating her position as Assistant State Attorney by being involved personally with a case she is prosecuting but she is closely entangled in this family that neglects their moral and ethical duties as servants of the county and officers of the court to protect children against exposure to child sex predators. She knows what happens in this close knit family that she is about to become apart of and is aware of Smith’s consistent presence in the home as well as his “access” to the children. That is a conflict of nature that corrupts the entire justice process.

The girls victimized by these sexual predators are not being protected by the system. The system is more interested in covering its as. In addition to this situation, regarding this same case, Sheriff David Morgan effectively endowed Gulf Coast Kids House with $50K for a new wing AFTER he personally became aware of the abuse of his deputies on children. This was a stop-gap measure to preemptively control the reaction of the Gulf Coast Kids House when the story inevitably became public. These two organizations colluded to sweep this incident under the rug with Gulf Coast Kids House turning a blind eye to the additional victims that may have been affected by the deputies that Sheriff Morgan failed to investigate.

86204-check

This is the price of silence in Escambia County. 

With my head bowed, I say “I was right”. 

The boundaries of victimization is overwhelming & this check shows you how justice is bought & paid for in Escambia County. 

The Honorable Sheriff Morgan: Personification of Hubris

In the face of an active investigation of his misuse and misappropriation of LET funds,  Sir David shamelessly boasts about his fleecing the county on Facebook.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

This is an attempt to deceive the public into believing that what he did is lawful. However, if it was 100% above board, would the State Attorney be investigating this? The answer is NO. Sources inside the SAO claim that Pam Bondi has put Bill Eddins on notice that she expects him to do his job so that she won’t have to intervene. Clearly, there is some indication of concern of a cover-up. The implication here is indicative that Ms. Bondi foresees the gravitas of the issues coming out of this investigation. For example the impeachment or removal of county commissioners as well as ye olde Sheriff.

The members of the BOCC were suppose to govern this fund. The director of Management and Budget Services, Amy Lovoy was not aware of the necessity of the commissioners to monitor the fund. She has reportedly stated that very thing to the State Attorney’s office.  What that means is that the standard practice– as long as she has been involved–has been in violation of the statute. County Commissioners were also “unaware” of their duties. According to an opinion from Ms. Bondi’s site:

Att’y Gen. Fla. 81-99 (1981) (board of county commissioners vested with exclusive authority to decide appropriation of contraband trust funds to the sheriff’s office). See also Op. Att’y Gen. Fla. 78-55 (1978), concluding that it is the duty and responsibility of the governing bodies of the affected counties and municipalities to approve or disapprove the expenditures from, and the appropriation of, funds collected under the contraband forfeiture act.

But folks we are dealing with people who reap huge salaries and haven’t read their own job description or the statutes that define how the county is supposed to work. HELLO! The bad thing is that Morgan seems to have played all of them. They look like fools for his crimes and yes, the misappropriation of over $1Million is a crime. Some organizations may even be compelled to return the funds which could throw this entire fiasco into an oblivion of chaos. These agencies, like the Filipino-American Club, has no justification to receive these funds; they have not provided documents to show that the money was appropriated to the specifications of the statute.

Historically, in the state of Florida, any money granted to an agency from special trust funds like this has caveats that be accountability as to how the money was spent. When that is not complied with–even assuming they were funded in good faith with crime/drug prevention in mind–it was required to be repaid. Grants and trust funds with this caveat could be asking charities that got the ill-begotten funds to return it to the county.  The Fil-Am Club received operating expenses out of this fund. That is illegal.

The most grotesque thing about this is that Morgan is acting as if he is being altruistic by helping the areas of the communities with these funds. Those of us that see Morgan for what he is, know that it is a way to manipulate people to donate money to his campaign.

Consider this, practically, if he used the money for the proper things to improve the agency, the county would be safer. However, he is selling the county safety in not training or retaining officers that WILL STAY. He is selling safety by taking money that could be used to provide more training for the new officers out there due to the high attrition rate and even better equipment to deal with the kinds of crime emerging. The big thing is Morgan has run off the better officers and the new ones don’t stay. That is a problem. That is Morgan’s problem. Yet the money he spends is on outward organizations as he puts the onus and responsibility for safety on the public.  He is undermining his organization for political gain.

The kind of corruption the media talk about, the kind the Supreme Court was concerned about, involves the putative sale of votes in exchange for campaign contributions–. James L. Buckley

Instagram photo by The Mind Unleashed - Jun 14, 2016 at 3-23 AM.clipular

 

ECSO Commits FRAUD to Cover LET Misappropriation

PART 1 OF A 2 PART SERIES:

ESCAMBIA CO. SHERIFF REVEALS COUNTYWIDE CORRUPTION

In addition to spending LET money with great abandon, the Honorable Sheriff Morgan debased himself to a new low by exploiting his discretion of this fund even more. It should be no surprise, as Mr. Doug Underhill stated in the Panhandle Politico,  Morgan has been soliciting LET money  to other organizations. This is unprecedented and unauthorized by Florida Statute.  As Ms. Jeanne Griffin stated, the process is that organizations request money from the Sheriff’s office…… ORGANIZATIONS REQUEST MONEY. The fact Morgan has to offer money to people who then have to jump through hoops to get to money, is out of the normal.  It begs the question of “why”?

Regardless of motivations, the most recent foolishness is the Hadji Shrine Temple’s recent golf tournament to raise non-deductible, non-501(3)c donations for operational costs for their organization. This was not something donors could right off. Standard advertising sponsorship was $100 for a sign at one of the tees. They also sold sponsorship for golf teams. It was $300 per 4 man team.

The entire scenario is sketchy.  One afternoon, while canvassing the area for donations, Sheriff Morgan approached Jay Cowick, in his yard. Morgan asked him if he was the man to see regarding sponsorship at the golf tournament. Jay said he was and explained the $100 per sign sponsorship they had. Sheriff Morgan responded that he thought he could probably do better than that. He’d have someone contact this Jay  with more information.

The following Monday,  an unidentified woman called Jay and asked what $5000 would get the Sheriff’s Office. Shocked, Jay said they would have 18 signs, 1 at ever tee (value of $1800) and 2 teams (value of $600).  There was nothing else really that they had to give. They could come up with a banner for the Sheriff for free.  This was agreed upon.

Sources within the ranks of the Hadji Temple confirmed that no further documentation was provided to the Sheriff’s office for this transaction. They did not sign anything; no justification documentation went to the Sheriff’s Office and a check was received. Upon a inspection of a public records request, there is an entire packet of documentation attached for this check. There is an unsigned request form, an email from Alison Morgan to Jay Cowick asking about where to send the check, a letter from Jan 2016 asking the Sheriff’s office to donate items to be given away at the door for this tournament–oh by the way, if they are interested in sponsorship here are the basics. Additionally a Sunbiz printout with the Hadji Temple’s 501(3)c listing , a copy of the tax exemption form, which has no bearing on the request as the money is not for tax-deductible funds.  The troubling part of this is that the Sheriff’s office, according the Hadji Shrine Temple, put this documentation together without their knowledge and hastily so that they did not see that the donations were not going for the crippled children, directly. This entire transaction was doctored up. IT IS FRAUDULENT!

But wait there’s more…

The golf tournament was on May 14, 2016. The morning of the tournament, Sheriff Morgan and entourage arrive with a huge number of campaign signs and starts placing them everywhere. This had the other Shriners questioning just what this check was going to cost them. Upon inspection, the donation was out of the LET fund.  The Shriners did not formally provide a request, necessary by Florida statute. The check came to them after being solicited by the Sheriff.

shriners

This one transaction shows the corrupt nature of this Sheriff and his view of the fund. He went to people and asked them what he could give for donations. What purpose is there to ask people to give. Maybe we can break it down a little. For the Shriners, 18 holes with 18 signs would have been $1800. Morgan got 2 golf teams registered at $300 per team. That is $600 + the sign money is $2400 in total.  He did not get a thing more than if he had only written a check for $2400 to the Shriners. Why $5000?  Influence & power to put up signs illegally without the organization questioning him. This solicitation to DONATE money is bizarre and seems to have proverbial strings, but Doug Underhill corroborates this in the Panhandle Politico article when asked if he intiated the $25K  donation for Cyberthon. His response was, “during a conversation about the program, Sheriff Morgan offered to support the event with LET funding.”

There seems to be some sort of expected quid pro quo for these donations. It is possible that the recipients do not know they are selling their souls to Sheriff Morgan for unspoken future favors. I made this assertion in regards to the GCKH donation in 2014. I am even more convinced of it now.

Recruiting high dollar donations with the caveat of “what can you give me for this money” is a perversion of the altruistic facade the Honorable Sheriff receives accolades for, not to mention the overt cover up the facts surrounding these donations, specifically by fraudulently creating documentation to make the Shriners look like they came to Morgan is simply criminal.  This is exactly the reason the entire Escambia County Board of Commissioners should be impeached along with this Sheriff. The BOCC members have a responsibility to the taxpayers to govern and make sure the money for the county is handled correctly. By giving up those rights, they are faltering in their duty to the taxpayers. The buck stops with them and not knowing is not an excuse for allowing this. The inmate is running the asylum, while the commissioners do nothing.

Degree deceit, Sir David, Fraud, Webster University

Pseudologia Fantastica. Richard Townsend Syndrome…Pathological lying. When a person rises to a level of lying that is complex, intricate and disproportionate to all end views or lying when telling the truth would be more beneficial. It is a pathos–a compulsion. Very rarely do pathological liars lie about one aspect of life and are honest about another, which brings us to Sir David.

The DD214 which either answers questions or creates more, depending on your point of view. To me, it definitively shows that Sir David is not honest about his military record. He was only in the military for 20 years and had 3 occupations throughout that time; thus he does not have 20 years experience in any one but in all 3 cumulatively. Also, either he was in OSI and did not realize it would be significant to his law enforcement career and claimed to be a security police, which makes no sense, or he that was a made up line he tried to get by with but didn’t. Either way, something is off.

Knowing that and many, many of the numerous other things Sir David has lied about, I decided to verify his education, specifically his Master’s Degree in Business Administration from Webster University.  For those who don’t know, the National Student Clearinghouse is a service used to verify educational credentials. It’s a pay service whereby, after payment is made, information is submitted and gathered by a national database. Should that info not be readily in that database, they contact the school directly.  So this is what I did.  Here is the response I received:

From: <degreeverify@studentclearinghouse.org>

Date: Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:14 PM

Subject: Verification Services Trans. #131173081: Unable to Confirm Your Verification Services Request

To: CHASINGDIXIE2@gmail.com

**************************************************************************************

This e-mail was sent from a notification-only address that cannot accept incoming e-mail.

Please DO NOT reply to this message.

**************************************************************************************

____________________________________________________________________________

IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ the following comment(s) provided by the institution:

NO RECORD FOUND.

____________________________________________________________________________

If you are able to obtain a copy of the degree from the individual, fax it to the Clearinghouse at 703-318-4058, along with the Transaction ID for this request.  We will work with the school to determine whether or not the record(s) is genuine.

INFORMATION YOU PROVIDED

____________________________________________________________

Subject Name

        First Name………….: THELBERT

        Middle Name…………: DAVID

        Last Name…………..: MORGAN

School Name…………….: WEBSTER UNIVERSITY (002521-00)

Attempt To……………..: Verify a degree.

Reference ID……………:

Disclaimer: All information verified was obtained directly and exclusively from the individual’s educational institution. 

Disclaimer: I make no presumptions about the veracity of this information. I have attempted to contact Webster University but have not received any follow-up contact.