Apropos
Image
Reply
Category Archives: law enforcement
John Molchan, You are the Weakest Link
Featured
Dear Mr. Molchan,
I am writing this to obtain clarity after your pronouncement that Rakeem Florence’s recantation was moot due to the fact there was overwhelming evidence and his testimony being corroborated by the surveillance video. I take exception to both statements, specifically in the Patrick Gonzalez Jr. case.
I want to first remind you that this young man was a black 16 year old. He knew people that were on the periphery of this investigation. Your former boss, Mr. Eddins, informed the public this is a capital case. Florence is of the demographic most prone to false confessions. He is the only person of color, besides his family members, when he is interviewed by law enforcement. The circumstances of the crime, ie the media circus, the Sheriff constantly on television calling for public outrage as well as public help in finding the perpetrators of these murders, all culminate in a situation that probably seems like a no win situation to young black man. Imagine coming forward with information (which he & Thornton got straight on the way to police station) and realizing you could easily become a scapegoat. He was in over his head when he got there. Even his mother thought he only knew about some aspect of the murder; she did not believe her son was there.
This is an excerpt of the cross examination by Michelle Hendrix of Florence in Donnie Stallworth’s 2nd trial, which ended in a hung jury.
Do you know if Florence or Thornton ever talked to Hugh Wiggins, prior to them coming forward?
Here is a story that Gary Sumner’s mother told to me. Prior to the murders, Sumner and Wiggins had a business arrangement. Wiggins provided some capital to help Sumner stay afloat. As so, Wiggins called Sumner and told him he had dropped off a white van, after hours, at the shop. The next morning, Gary gets in and grabs the keys left in the dropbox. He gets into the van to move it inside. He claims there were 4 dead bodies in the back. He got out of the van, called Hugh to say the message was received. He believed it was a threat. Now whether you believe this story or not. It does not even matter if it was true. All that matters is that the teenagers thought it was true.
Also, I find it fascinating that you never called Florence to testify in Stallworth’s third trial, but I do know why. Michelle Hendrix impeached him with all the other testimonies he gave in the other cases, ex. Coldiron, Gonzalez Jr. etc. She really proved his testimony was worthless. Despite that you seem absolutely sure he was telling the truth. I am going to take a moment to speculate why you are all on-board with Florence and his testimony. I think you are more invested in this story than you are about finding the truth. Morgan conducted a shotty investigation, which the SAO never questioned just prosecuted. No one seriously looked at the family, who should have been scrutinized because they financially gained so much from their parents death. Morgan is a keystone cop. And yet, you took this far-fetched narrative rather than looking at the real issues. Here are some really good suspects: Hugh Wiggins, Justin Billings, Cab Tice. Remember originally Blue Markham told police he sold the van used in the crime to Cab Tice.
Here is just some of the cross-examination by Hendrix:
In fact, Florence tried to withdraw his plea on April 27, 2011. Yet now you seem to think Florence is disingenuous. This young man is the prime demographic of the textbook case of false confessions. As Ms. Hendrix proved in her cross-examination, his testimony was never consistent. He was not a good witness and you realized this as well. You opted not to put him on the stand in Stallworth’s third trial. It seems obvious you believe Florence was single-handedly the reason the jury was hung. So in your repetitive trials against Stallworth, after running him out of money, forcing him to opt for a public defender, you did not investigate whether there was something hinky with Florence’s testimony. You could and definitely should have further inquired as to why his story was ever changing. I mean, if the interest is in justice, that would have been the only prudent course. Yet your concern was the win; it was never justice.
Interestingly, I emailed Rakeem and asked him to explain what he called “evidence” of his coercion. This is his reply:
I hope, Mr. Molchan, you realize he is asserting you coerced him and provided the narrative that was factually questionable. You mention that the video surveillance corroborates both Florence’s testimony and Thornton’s testimony. It sounds like the reason it matches the video is because you crafted his testimony. Now ethically, it plainly looks to be improper for you to blast him on the news, knowing he does not have the same access to those media resources you have. Nevertheless, you are the one saying his recantation is moot, especially since he is accusing you of coercing this testimony. Convenient.
OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE
In reading every page of the thousands of documents dumped into the public domain prior to trial & the trial transcripts, I must presume you either do not know what evidence is, or you are so arrogant to think the pittance of information presented in Gonzalez Jr.’s trial, would put him on death row if presented today.
Here are some excerpts from the trial transcript of Mr. Eddins’s opening statement:
The highlighted portion is misleading. There was no “proof” only testimony by admitted co-conspirators.
This entire section is factually anemic because Leonard Gonzalez Sr. never testified in his son’s case, nor was his statement entered into evidence. In fact, this is a violation of Rule 4-3.4(E) of the RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR. That rule provides: A lawyer shall not … in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant, or the guilt or innocence of an accused. The state attorney was doing none of these things; he was exaggerating the totality of the evidence. This statement alludes to Sr. testimony which was never admitted. Carol Brant was Sr.’s common law wife and her testimony would only be admissible if it were corroborating Sr’s testimony, but it was not. These statements potentially taint the jury with facts which were never admitted into evidence, such as the Brady violation by not submitting the most recent criminal history of Smith and Eisa which was unknown by the defense and would have contributed to the weight their testimony carried to the jury.
Mr. Molchan, to recap, there was no legitimate, untainted testimony evidence that Gonzalez Jr. plotted anything. Not to point out the obvious but Thornton’s testimony was concocted in tandem with Florence’s.
As for the physical evidence, your office destroyed the red van you claimed was used in the crime. That evidence is no longer admissible. Carol Brant passed away. So, there are two co-conspirators, who developed their story together and now one has said it was false. You have no credible person to say Jr. plotted this crime. As for physical evidence. In the video, the shooter grabs Bud and Bud grabbed him in this struggle. This is confirmed by the only eyewitness, the child in the room. GMA reported the child stated:
There is DNA under Bud’s nails. And a profile for that DNA was developed. But Patrick Gonzalez Jr. is excluded as a contributor.
There is no DNA evidence to put Jr. at the seen or any of his DNA on any clothing. And let’s talk about the guns. The murder weapon was never linked to Gonzalez Jr. except by Hugh Wiggins who had possession of all the guns, the bloody clothes and the safe. Now tell me why he would not be the logical suspect? Remind me again who the owner of the weapons was. There seems to be no report showing the ATF established whose guns they were. You have Jr.’s fingerprints on the 2 of the guns not shot in this crime. You never established he did anything but touch those guns. Let’s say he did touch them, there is no evidence to suggest he touched those guns that night or during any crucial timeframe. Fingerprints do no come with a time stamp.
Morgan is a keystone cop and the SAO hitched its wagon to his “investigation”. Your office did not question it when he did not investigate the family, the people with the most to gain. What about Cab Tice? Remember Blue Markham told investigators that he sold the van used in the crime to Cab.
With real leads uninvestigated, how in the hell can you claim you are competent. There is so much reasonable doubt,. To sum it up, no physical evidence, no credible circumstantial evidence, leads not investigated. If Gonzalez Jr.’s case was tried today, how could you justify the amount of energy and taxpayer dollars you wasted aggressively pursuing a unviable set of cases. These are people’s lives, Mr. Molchan. There is so many unanswered questions, and you are a public servant. Years ago, I was told there is “no justice in Florida”. I have to say there seems to be so much tunnel vision.
Checkmate, Mr. Molchan. Your case is inviable. It’s time to put your ego aside and find the truth.
Share this:
Morgan’s Legal Team Laughable in Latest Motion
Sheriff David Morgan’s stellar, top-notch counsel has now filed a Daubert Motion to Exclude Testimony of Plaintiff’s Expert Witness, Michael D. Lyman & Memorandum of Law in the Rogers’ girls cases against him. A Daubert Motion is motion to have a legal expert deemed to not be considered an expert in a particular case. In this instance, Michael D. Lyman is a police consultant who is formerly a criminal justice professor, formerly a narcotics agent, and formerly a criminal investigator with the Kansas Bureau of Investigation. He is considered an expert in police procedure matters, use of force, arrests, search & seizure matters, as well as management and supervision issues (hiring, retention; evaluation/assessment; termination).
Lyman’s resume and CV is far more extensive than the combined command staff of the ECSO.
Now look at Michael Lyman’s CV
The funniest part of all this is that expert testimony is explicitly, expert opinion. An opinion given by someone with a background who would know. If Michael Lyman is not to be considered an expert and his background is far more law enforcement/criminal justice extensive than the top tier at the ECSO, then the conclusion that the top tier is not competent to hold the positions that have currently.
But just for fun I am putting the entire Daubert motion for public perusal.
‘
Share this:
Truth about “Personal Vendettas”
I want to address the fallacy spouted on Escambia Citizen’s Watch group on Facebook, aka JUECW or the Jackie Rogers Hate Group. Melissa Pino has been characterized as pursuing a personal vendetta after she told Doug Underhill she was coming for him. Let me explain this to the layperson that believes this is just a “personal vendetta”. There is a fortified, adulterated effort to pervert and abuse the processes of the county to secure personal gain either by political capital (favors in the wing) or subverted contributions to PAC’s or personal campaigns. This aligned effort by some of those in politics, like Underhill, Sheriff Morgan and Bill Eddins (Curtis Golden-light) are bought and paid for and act in there own best interest rather than honoring their oaths of office.
In full view of the public, this bunch act brazenly. They hide very little. Underhill subverts information for his own gain, such as the Seafarer incident, gating a public access beach, bought for the purpose of public access. Underhill also fixes fraud that he and his business partner, Morgan Speranzo committed via the contracting laws. When called on the illegal action, by me, he doctored the paperwork by telling people it didn’t happen and having the paperwork “adjusted” to fit an implausible circumstance, he claims happened.
Sir David became a millionaire on a public servant’s salary while his department went to hell in a handbasket. No one is safer since this man took his oath. Oh and let’s not forget the LET money he bought his reelection with, to the tune of $2million over 4 years.
Eddins showed his colors with the medical examiner recently, going against the county’s stance on Dr. Minyard’s bloated salary. Eddins supported Minyard when she is clearly replaceable. She was forced to step down twice in her career for incompetence. Failure to do paperwork (kind of essential in the Medical Examiner field) was her main flaw. While this sounds harmless, it is far from it. Imagine something happens to your loved one, and while, in Minyard’s care, personal items or autopsy reports are not accounted for or are missing. Also, imagine your loved one was possibly murdered, if the police say they suspect suicide, she concurs, when there may not be evidence to that effect because it lessens her case work. Now imagine her taking home in excess of $500K for treating your loved one, with such disregard. Now imagine the State Attorney of the 1st Judicial Circuit is throwing his weight behind this woman, against all logic.
My point is that if someone says publicly, “I’m coming for you” to one of these corrupt officials, it is plight with little recognition or support (publicly) and is, in and of itself, an albatross. There is nothing personal about this sort of targeting. In fact, if law enforcement were not so impotent, they would be targeting these individuals also, and that would not be considered a “vendetta”.
I have said to Sheriff Morgan via this blog that I am coming for him and hell’s coming with me. I set my sights on Morgan because I believe he is the most dangerous and most psychopathic of them all (Underling being a step behind and Eddins being merely a puppet working at the behest of his benefactors). Morgan has single handedly ruined more lives within his agency as he has outside his agency. He has neither the capability nor the psychological capacity to hold the position he was elected to steward. The evidence is in the public records, not the statistics, because there are deputies that will explain to you how they were directed to alter levels of crimes for the purpose of skewing the stats. Sexual assault is the tell-tale statistic. Currently, Frank Forte is giving gift cards for tickets written…highly unethical and probably illegal. But why should that be a factor for a law enforcement agency.
Predators on the community should be dealt with by the agencies designed to police them within the system, but since that is broken in this county, it falls on individuals with the moxie to stand up and name their target. Any bricks taken out of the wall of corruption, makes the others weaker. Divide and Conquer is my motto. While these men are not the true threats as much as puppets for those who are, pulling back the curtain is the mission. I hope Morgan, Underhill and Eddins know you can’t beat someone who doesn’t stop fighting. Melissa and I are ready for the long haul.
Share this:
A REAL “ASK THE SHERIFF”
I got this letter in response to a Facebook post:
Jimmie,
Recently, you posted on Facebook to list crimes committed by Morgan or the ECSO. There were a few responses and I applaud those who can speak out. Had there been an actual chance of people being able to exercise free speech you would have had many more responses. Sir David does not allow the speaking of wrong doing if it could cause his image to be tarnished. Had everyone been able to speak freely you would have been told stories that demonstrates people who destroy others for their own good. Stories of inexperience and inept leadership would have been described. You would have been told of people who will judge and destroy others but refuse to be judged for flaws they possess.
It is not even difficult to point out how unfair the ECSO leadership has been and continues to be. Now, one could believe that because Morgan has not been held responsible and is not mindful that he too must follow laws. Another explanation, for such blatant disregard for law, is because of ignorance to knowing the law. I would guess that it is a combination of the two obvious reasons. Sir David is an ignorant and inexperienced sheriff that has not been held accountable for improper actions. He has created a “brand” that resembles the rise of the Backstreet Boys more than it shows a law enforcement leader taking charge of a community to protect the citizens. The crime in that is appalling. Sir David has wasted 100s of thousands of dollars branding his poor law enforcement performance and creating a belief that he actually knows what he is doing. Those who support this effort are rewarded with undeserving promotions and pay increases. That is a fact that could never be argued. Anyone in the job, that truly understands law enforcement, would say that the ECSO has two worthless Majors that never accomplished mediocrity as deputies. Our PIO should feel fortunate that she isn’t paid based on the length of her skirts. If that were the case she would have to mortgage her home to pay the ECSO to work there. Sir David demonstrated that he does not care about the employees or the citizens by carving out the budget dollars he has for three people to pay back political or other favors.
Maj. Andrew Hobbs is making over $35 an hour and does not even supervise 10 people. In fact he is responsible for 6 employees. Two of the employees of Maj. Hobbs are sworn officers. Both of the officers under his supervision have more experience and accomplishments, as law enforcement officers, than Hobbs. The remaining employees are civilian employees with the assigned task of making Morgan appear to be a knowledgeable sheriff. That is a job that should come with a substantial pay increase. It must be a daunting endeavor to make Morgan appear to be competent with the lack of verifiable experience he claims to have. Couple that fact with his laughable antics in the numerous press conferences he has participated in and accomplished only looking like a poorly executed SNL skit. One would pause to consider how he found that many individuals to take on that job or why they would want that job.
Amber Southard receives a salary that is over $2600 for an 80 hour work period. This is appalling when you consider her job consists of mainly the production of propaganda to boost the image of an incompetent sheriff. She is provided an agency vehicle and fuel for the vehicle. She works a day schedule and, unless she has an abundance of drama in her private life, is never shot at, or spit on and is relatively safe during her work hours. Now, compare that to a sworn officer that will be paid just over $1300.00 for the same 80 hour work period. In no way does that seem to be a decision that any competent sheriff would make. In fact, it appears to be just what it is. Morgan provides for those who further his agenda void of consideration of the ethical obligation he has as a sheriff of our county.
Sir David has several law suits against him for wrongful acts to employees. He has allowed and been involved in destroying others for fictitious reasons but allowed others to avoid accountability when proven wrong. Lt. Frank Forte is a great example of Morgan ignoring wrongdoing because of personal reasons. Lt. Forte was caught lying under oath in his official capacity. Morgan took no substantial action against a lieutenant when proved to be a liar under oath.
Lt. Forte made a complaint on Sgt. Philip Nix about a court appearance. Lt. Forte stated that Sgt. Nix was “blurting” out derogatory remarks about the ECSO writing illegal tickets during a traffic hearing. Sgt Nix appeared under subpoena and testified in the case. Lt. Forte stated that Sgt. Nix was making comments that were embarrassing to the agency. Col. Steve Hardy responded to the complaint by Lt. Forte. He made efforts to get transcripts of the court appearance but never located the transcripts. Lt. Forte then had an opportunity to testify in an Internal Investigation interview and say whatever he wanted about the conduct of Sgt. Nix. Lt Forte continued to lie and embellish the story about court. Lt. Forte made an attempt to completely tarnish the reputation of Sgt. Nix. After reading the statement of Lt. Forte that was given to Internal Affairs one would conclude Sgt. Nix was an out of control maniac in court.
Apparently, Sgt. Nix was aware of the unethical conduct of Morgan and his posse. Sgt. Nix had paid for a transcript of the court hearing. Sgt. Nix did not provide the information to the ECSO and allowed the situation to take its course. The professional court transcript proved that Lt. Frank Forte was a liar. None of the accusations made about Sgt. Nix were true and Sgt. Nix had conducted himself as a professional would. I use this example because Nix is one of the only people who is not afraid of the backlash of using his real name.
Morgan took no action on Lt. Forte. The fact Lt. Forte is a liar was ignored…..for now. There will be point in time that Lt. Forte will have to explain his reason for ignoring the obligation that an officer takes to always be truthful and honest. Morgan will get the chance to explain all of the wrongs he has committed and many of those following his lead will enjoy that journey as well. I hope that they understand a Grand Jury is not as tolerant of liars and cheats as the Morgan administration is and what they are due will be paid.
In another incident, with an employee at the ECSO, an investigation by internal affairs finds reason to sustain or sanction policy violations for obeying the law. Most of you will read that sentence twice. It is true. An employee became a target of the ECSO administration and the rules, policies and laws were twisted until it was reconciled in their twisted minds the employee could be fired. The violation consisted of cooperation with an attorney during a deposition. The attorney was party against the ECSO so that would never be tolerated. Again, a career destroyed.
This matter will also be settled through a lawsuit. Morgan will distribute more taxpayer dollars to pay for the wrong he committed. More waste because of a staff that lacks the courage to tell Sir David he is wrong. It could be they are too selfish to take a chance on ruining their gravy train to stand for what is right. Many of those in a position of power in the ECSO staff is concerned that their “yes man” mentality did not prepare them for the job they have with Morgan or they don’t want to be exposed for the indiscretions committed in the past. Either reason creates a setting that forces them to vacate their principles always seeking Morgan’s approval first. There is no cost too high to pay for the approval of Morgan. If you follow the rules set by Sir David you will be rewarded with favors that have benefits some in his staff could never enjoy if based on their proven ability.
I would be remiss in my description of the ECSO if I were to leave Eric Haines out of this discussion. There is no rational reason that this imposter made his way to Chief Deputy. He has pretended to be something he is not his entire career. I regard to his advancement at the ECSO it could not be argued that he was successful in padding his retirement. Had our retirement system required that an employee actually demonstrate law enforcement ability during his career he would be on food stamps at the time he retires. Haines advanced his career pointing at the other person and pretending to be far more intelligent than he actually is. His bully personality is effective when you are in control of someone’s career. However, his actions have proven time and again that he has no conscious or consideration for any misery he causes. He appears to be the guy that is getting even with the world because he somehow feels life dealt him a losing hand. I can agree that he has numerous reasons to be pissed at life. Most people would consider themselves in hell if they were forced to be Haines. Haines does not have the right to continue to harm and destroy an entire agency and the employees who suffer from his foul display of a failed attempt to prove him a leader. He is not a leader and will never have the respect he is in search of because respect does not come from a title. Respect is earned slowly by those who make an observation of a person. They observe a person who is able to demonstrate needed ability to accomplish success in the area they are leading. Haines has never been successful at being a law enforcement offer and therefore will never gain any measurable amount of respect from true law enforcement officers.
All roads in this equation lead to Morgan. His fairy tales about law enforcement accomplishments and experience have proven to be laughable. It is easy to target him for silly “dress up like a big boy” uniforms and senseless remarks made in a desperate attempt to make it into the media cycle again. Then it comes to mind that this leadership has caused so much misery to those that encounter him with an opposing opinion. Worse there are lives that have been lost that effective leadership could have saved possibly. It is not that laughable when you actually take the time to evaluate who David Morgan really is in this situation. He is a failed sheriff that has hidden from the responsibility of that office. The citizens are suffering and they are unable to see the cause because the tax dollars they pay are being spent by Morgan to create an illusion all is well.
It is a shame that “Ask the Sheriff “isn’t a real thing. If it ever is I have questions. David, why did you leave the Air Force? Did you really pay for that cross thingy? Do you see the harm you have caused? Do you care about the lives you have ruined or caused to be lost? Do you lie in bed at night regretting the horrible things you have done to people? Do you really trust those you have surrounding you? You caused them to cut and run when you offered a better deal. Imagine what will happen when you are not the best deal anymore. .
Sincerely,
No Longer a Victim
Share this:
Sheriff Morgan: Wrongful Death?
Two weeks ago today, Kayla Crocker had roughly 48 hours to live. Billy Boyette’s latest stolen car was found close to her home with receipts from Walmart showing purchases of camping equipment. Yet with that knowledge, Sheriff David Morgan opted to not bring in bloodhounds to check the woods close to the abandoned car. We now know that for 2 days, Boyette and Rice were in those woods, prior to invading Kayla’s home and brutally murdering her.
Deputies approached me with information because Morgan was ENCOURAGED to use the resources available that could have ended the reign of terror the community felt. Social media was highly involved and invested in this manhunt. Could there be negligence in this lack of law enforcement action, intentionally ignored by Sheriff Morgan? It is worth investigating to say the least. Should Crocker’s people want more info on the deputies that came to me, I would be happy to put them in touch with said people.
Morgan’s lack of law enforcement experience was the pivotal factor here, either that or the good sense God gave a goat. Whichever was the case, this was preventable and his decisions were not congruent with catching this guy. But he did want the media attention he got for this man’s rampage.
He even went so far as to second guess the teletype from Georgia stating that Billy Boyette and Mary Rice were there. While the standoff is happening in Georgia with someone talking to Boyette, Morgan dispatches a SWAT team to the landfill for a report of a backpacked man walking around. Even while Morgan is contacted asking him for comment on Boyette’s death, he stammers and is evasive because he still has his men out. Priceless, Morgan tries to upstage the actual standoff. He is a piece of work & incompetent to a lethal degree in this case.
Share this:
Dangers of Being an ECSO Deputy
It is funny how so many deputies, scared of losing their jobs, want to speak out against the administration under Sir David & his cronies. Here is yet another deputy with a message.
Editorial by a Deputy
As the holiday season starts, I began to reflect on the year. The one topic that causes the most concern is how cops are being attacked. We are 70% more likely to be killed this year compared to last year. That is such an alarming jump. No officer deserves to be killed for merely being a cop. Our society is failing when we allow this to occur and take no action. This should be at the top of the list of concerns of every law enforcement agency in our country.
It is unfortunate, but obvious, the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office does not have the safety of officers at the top of the list. We have seen that thousands of dollars were spent to inform people to lock their doors. Thousands were spent to give David Morgan exposure during an election year. Had Morgan ever been a cop, he would understand the feeling that cops have when they are subject to unprovoked attacks. Morgan would know what the dangers are for cops in the national sphere and here locally. The increased fear to go into the street and attempt to enforce the law knowing just wearing a badge could mean the end of the officer’s life is a REAL THING. Had he ever actually completed a tour of duty as a cop, Morgan would have likely considered spending the money on dealing with the increased pressure and scrutiny to generate good PR for officers for their own well-being instead of widening the gap between the community and law enforcement. He could have addressed the elephant in the room in talking about how Ferguson, Trayvon and other national events might affect the cops and community of Escambia County. But instead he has wasted training dollars on senseless simulations, THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS on billboards with his face and meaningless reminders for the community to lock their doors. Or how about the time and cost of educating the ECSO on guidelines for Pokemon GO? And the real kicker is the time invested in convincing cops that ratting on other cops for minor indiscretions to the upper echelon will get you brownie points. Internal Affairs cases have exponentially increased over the most stupid things like not having signed in on a training log in sheet. Cops are not prepared to work the streets where reality and tragedies occur.
Unfortunately, Morgan chose to take the path of a liar and does what he says he will not do on a continual basis. Moving officers from a precinct may technically not be “closing” it, but it absolutely has the same effect in lack of law enforcement for that area. Morgan will have his social media trolls do their best to insult anyone that tries to present this argument. They will be attacked and told they are not cops and could not know what is best. Documentation will be produced to show that there is not a change of coverage and that geographical area is getting the same if not better coverage. Really that is a lie.
I had the misfortune of being a part of the transition of the Cantonment shut down. It is a fact there are times there is not ANY officers beyond Kingsfield Road. It is a fact that there are times that only ONE officer is working an area that is supposed be manned by a minimum of 2 at any given time. It is a fact that the coverage is not what it was when there was an active precinct for that part of the county.
When the social media attacks come, know what questions to ask so you are comparing apples to apples. When the roster showing an officer was 10-8 (on duty) in that area is produced, ask to see a roster to compare it to from last year at the same time. When the roster is produced to show that on each shift an officer is assigned and there is always coverage, ask about the total number of officers assigned at this time last year. What Morgan and Haines will not volunteer is that each of those precincts has “flex officers” that do not work traditional shift hours. There will not be a shift from in-town to provide coverage for those positions. Those officers will be lost completely. The overall numbers will fall drastically when compared to the new system of assigning officers. In fact, the total number of officers, including supervisors, will decrease by a minimum of 3 officers each day. Be prepared for Haines to attack this number and show documentation that the number is wrong. He will say that there is no change. The only way he could be correct is, if manpower has been so reduced that there is not a current deputy assigned and the position is vacant.
The truth is this administration has to reduce services because the ability of the leadership has been reduced as well as the funds to develop and keep good cops. Morgan is not a cop and assumed the ECSO would run itself while he was busy trying to get re-elected or networking to enhance his social standing in pure pretense. Haines is not able to admit wrong in any thing he implemented and will not admit when he makes a mistake. He spends more time trying to validate a bad decision and convince everyone else how it is actually a good decision than he does correcting what is wrong and improving the situation. Instead he rides a dead horse on principle. The result of this failure way of running the show causes us to have less capable officers and officers not having the same experience as we once enjoyed. Our agency is imploding on itself, but it’s all good if we are making sure that Morgan keeps his celebrity status in good order. Haines is not concerned by failure because he doesn’t know what a successful agency looks like. He wants to build the illusion he has been successful. His objective, or maybe his destiny, is to leave the agency. That is welcomed by any cop that cares about the good of the agency.
My one request to the powers that be is to please just stop chasing off good cops that want to be here and care about the dangers currently facing this community. If nothing else, you should preserve these cops because their community impact will only improve the overall perception of the agency and thereby your own agenda of pleasing yourself. This is a pipe dream because anyone who reads this and is in the position to fix it has been critiqued which is only going to hurt their feelings and cause retribution to the rest of us. But someone has to say something. Someone has to care and that is not David Morgan or Eric Haines and I fear, not Chip Simmons if he is enjoying being David Morgan’s new BFF.
Birds of a feather…..
Share this:
It Doesn’t Get Any Better than this!
You know when you have someone tell you something emphatically, but then turns around and does just what they emphatically told you they WOULD NOT do, well you just have to relish your good fortune or laugh like hell at the irony.
No more commentary. I will let the facts tell themselves.
Setting:
“Rumors” around the ECSO were that the Perdido satellite precinct office would be closed. Also Chip Simmons was hired to work as Chief Deputy. People had to assume the current Chief Deputy was going to be replaced.
November 23, 2016: WEAR3.com
**Chief Deputy Haines did not move; however his job was diminished and he will give up half his responsibilities.
ANY QUESTIONS ???
Share this:
Do You Really Know Your Sheriff? PART 1
I wanted to make one last request for the citizens of Escambia County as to the decision to re-elect Sheriff David Morgan for a third term. I have many issues I am going to present over the next few days. I hope you bear with me in the explanation and totality of ALL the issues I put forth. Even if you disagree with any one of the points, please consider them all in consideration as to the job duties and responsibilities that come with being the head law enforcement officer in Escambia County.
- In Florida, the duties of Sheriff, as defined by the Florida Statutes are this:
The duties, as enumerated in Chapter 30 of the Florida Statutes, include:.
- Being conservator of the peace in its county.
- Suppressing tumults, riots, and unlawful assemblies in its county with force and strong hand when necessary.
- Apprehending, without warrant, any person disturbing the peace, and carrying that person before the proper judicial officer, that further proceedings may be had against him or her according to law.
Conserving the peace of the county is the primarily deficient role Morgan does not meet. Preserving the peace is, in essence, keeping–CONSERVING–the peace, safety and stability of the county. That means he is responsible for the overall safety of the county. He summarily denies this is his job duty. He claims if people raise their kids right, then the community would be safer. That is a cop out. He is the conservator of the county, as it may be and evolve. That means it is his job to preserve your safety and he is currently not fulfilling that duty and telling the community he will not be responsible for the actions within the community. His contention is that you, the citizens, have that responsibility. HE IS WRONG.
By his own declaration, he will not address the problems of crime.
Be pragmatic; if someone who worked for you failed to fulfill the duties as specified by their job, and who clearly and contemptuously tried to re-write their job description, would you keep them on?
Additionally, he has more legally sound complaints for civil rights violations, particularly from his deputies and administration. At least a dozen of these lawsuits cite, hostile work environment, sexual & gender discrimination, retaliation against the Sheriff and his close underlings. These deputies are being run off because they are on the wrong side of Morgan. Of the deputies who are suing, the majority are women.
Even if you dismiss the “sour grapes” argument for the employees suing the Sheriff, remember there are 116 lawsuits that have been filed against this Sheriff. 116 people with attorneys, roughly 200 members of your community who found sufficient evidence to bring court actions against your Sheriff. An example of what ALL the suits have in common is civil rights violations like this:
- Defendant, Sheriff Morgan, had in place, a policy, statements, regulation, decision, custom or usage of relying on its deputies completing Statements of Probable Cause without verifying the identity of the accused, either by actual witness identification, or use of either an actual lineup or a photographic lineup.
- Defendant, Sheriff Morgan, had no policy, statements, regulation, decision, custom or usage in place for verifying the name, social security number, drivers license number, address, phone number, age, date of birth or photograph of a suspect prior to including this infonnation in a probable cause statement or warrant request, or if such policies, statements, regulation, decision, custom or usage were in place, Sheriff Morgan failed to insure that such policies, statements, regulation, decision, custom or usage was being followed.
- Defendant, Sheriff Morgan, had prior notice that his deputies were submitting erroneous probable cause statements and failed to take appropriate actions to correct these acts.
- Defendant, Sheriff Morgan, in failing to adopt and implement appropriate police procedures acted with deliberate indifference to Plaintiff, Hallam’s, Constitutional right to be free from unreasonable seizure as guaranteed by the 4 and 14th Amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America.
You may think the Sheriff is good guy and says all the right things, but that isn’t what his job is about. You can be a good guy but a bad leader. Yes, Morgan is charismatic, but he is problematic as a law enforcement officer. Maybe politics outside law enforcement is his calling because let’s look at his record and performance over the last 8 years:
- He fails to sufficiently keep the peace and safety of the community.
- He has lost more employees than any other Sheriff and he is being sued for mistreatment and civil rights violations from others ie he is a horrible boss.
IF SOMEONE FAILS TO DO THEIR JOB, THEY ARE A LIABILITY. SHERIFF MORGAN IS UNABLE TO FULFILL THE JOB HE IS ELECTED FOR BASED ON HIS RECORD AS SHERIFF.
MORGAN IS A POLITICIAN—NOT A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
REMEMBER THE DISTINCTION.
Share this:
“MAJOR DRUG BUST” Purely Accidental
Sir David got some face time with this drug bust done several days ago. He was out of town at a marketing conference in New Orleans. This also allowed him time to develop this overblown story of a 4 year investigation that culminated in the seizure of $500K of drugs. There are many details of this “investigation” that are being propagated & are false.
To clarify, this pursuit may have been originated 4 years ago, but was it continually worked and on-going? The answer is yes and no. The dealer, Alfred Hayes, went by the nickname “E”. E has been tracked by a “stingray”. The deputies got a line that a deal was going down but prematurely hit the house only to find the money for drugs and no actual drugs. The money “was seized” but no arrests were made and paradoxically, the money was never recorded at the ECSO.
This week, the “bust” in the spotlight, a source who was inside the holding area reported Melissa Buchanan was stopped on a routine traffic stop. No one knows her from Adam. She is in possession and trafficking of a quantity of methamphetamine and is taken into custody. In the holding room at the ECSO, she is overheard trying to cover her own ass to try to make a deal. She calls E but he’s callous as to her arrest but she gives him 30 minutes to arrange her release. After the time expired, in her panic and feeling of being shunned, she dimed him and his cousins out. E is the grandson of a woman that owns a nursing home. The family had been selling prescription drugs of people who had passed on. This is common knowledge in the community.
The prevarication of events in the press conference were a self-serving narrative developed over the days following these arrests for maximum political collateral for Sir David’s re-election efforts. An accidental arrest turned sting…not a prolonged investigative effort that finally paid off. Misdirection and misrepresentation of events…sounds vaguely familiar for the stories Sir David likes to deliver to the unknowing people of the county.
Conjuring Justice 