Category: Rogers vs. Morgan

Zarzaur’s Latest Filing

This was filed on November 18th, 2019; it is PLAINTIFF’S RULE 37(c) MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR MATERIAL DISCOVERY VIOLATIONS AND/OR MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PERMIT LIMITED DISCOVERY ON RECENTLY UNCOVERED MATERIAL EVIDENCE. After Zarzaur received the texts from the PBA and well…here ya go.

The most important pages are below. For the whole document, click here.  The exhibits are here.

Pages from 108_Page_1Pages from 108_Page_2Pages from 108_Page_3Pages from 108_Page_4

Morgan and Haines are caught in lies under oath yet. Bill Eddins says their lying.

4930389297332224

As for the exhibits, this is the most exculpatory is his list of sex cases of officers listed by Morgan, is less than truthful.

Pages from 108-44.jpg

Morgan’s response as flimsy as it is can be found here.

Officer Zaid is missing. Officer Custer is also missing. The CFO, Henrique Dias who allegedly got caught in another jurisdiction with a transvestite prostitute.  Another set of employees were caught having sex on duty in the garage parking lot. Oh and how about the civilian who was caught exposing himself at the Creighton Rd. Walmart. Employees of a news outlet attest to being on site after hearing the incident on a police scanner. Somehow it is alleged that Morgan talked to the PPD and got that incident erased. Unfortunately, there were a few witnesses who have nothing to gain by telling this tale. Even if the CFO and the civilian incidents can’t be documented, thanks to Morgan and Haines having evidence destroyed, the others are disturbingly absent from the list. Why?

They are others that are alleged but also cannot be proven due to the lack of documentation generated on the incidence. In the texts, Haines talks about not wanting Tyree to “create a public record” with the PBA letter. That is a theme I have heard about too many times.  In speaking of the texts, I am mentioned a number of times within them.

staley excerpt5staley excerpt4staley excerpt3staley excerpt2staley excerpt1staley excerptstaley excerpt6

I love to see how much I’m in their heads, particularly Debra Little. She seems to have a contempt for me that is stronger than I would have guessed. Oh well.  I will let the documents speak for themselves. I don’t believe it is too difficult to glean the intent of Morgan and Haines in these documents.

 

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.

5254512728866816

53740923107409925286696596537344

Now look at Michael Lyman’s CV

lyman expert cv_Page_1Pages from lyman expert cvlyman expert cv_Page_3lyman expert cv_Page_4

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.

motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_01motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_02

 

motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_03motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_04motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_05

motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_06motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_07motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_08motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_09motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_10motion to exclude expert testimony_Page_11

 

‘

motion to exclude exhibit 1_Page_1motion to exclude exhibit 1_Page_2motion to exclude exhibit 1_Page_3motion to exclude exhibit 1_Page_4

motion to exclude exhibit2

 

Pages from motion to exclude exhibit 3

motion to exclude exhibit 3_Page_2

motion to exclude exhibit 3_Page_3

motion to exclude exhibit 3_Page_4

motion to exclude exhibit 3_Page_5

More Morgan Drama

So the Rogers vs. Morgan lawsuit has heated up. This is a new twist. Mindy Pare claimed her letters to and from Leah Manning were not relevant to this lawsuit only to be proven wrong after an inspection of the letters on camera.

Pages from ROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quashROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quash_Page_2ROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quash_Page_3ROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quash_Page_4ROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quash_Page_5ROGERS_v_MORGAN_et_al__flndce-17-00753__0085.0 quash_Page_6

The excerpt says:

“I hope to make Morgan eat his words from the press conference (in 2015). He deliberately gave false information about the pictures and the computers, just to make a bigger better case. Fuck him and his election year! ANYWAYS! I feel he did it so it would make us look our daughters predators and it would get picked up by more news affiliates instead of just teens accusing of wrongdoings! And then he got to throw my sex life in and make the juicy twist. What goes around comes around and he has quite alot going around in his life. I wonder if he (illegible) his cell # when it showed up in my phone? LOL! Enough about that for now. It’s like a tv show. …to be continued!”

 

2 Sheriffs, One Sex Scandal

img_0673

On February 23rd, 2017, Chief Deputy Eric Haines started an internal affairs investigation into deputy Heath Jackson and with allegations of Jackson giving information to Leah & Doug Manning when they were on the run in 2015.  The IA investigation was thrown together and completed very quickly. It consisted of testimony of Doug Manning, Leah Manning, Heath Jackson and phone records. There was no true investigation as pieces of the criminal investigation and other internal affairs investigations were cropped together, to give the facade of an actual investigation being conducted. Naturally, the IA found the claims unsubstantiated. This was a political favor because Heath Jackson had political ambitions. He wanted to run for Sheriff in Escambia County, Alabama. In 2019, Jackson was sworn in after winning that election.

The sham of an internal affairs investigation doesn’t pass the legitimacy test. The key is in looking at the timeline of events.Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_1Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_2Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_3Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_4Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_5Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_6Pages from Chief Deputy Eric Haines - 30(b)(6) Deposition Exhibit Number 8 (1)_Page_7

The entirety of the IA file can be seen here.

This is an investigation that began on February 23, 2017, with Heath Jackson contacting Eric Haines. The first interview of this IA is Doug Manning from January 2016. Why was no IA started then? Then, an IA interview with Doug on February 10th, 2017 (before the IA began).  How is that possible?  Answer: IT ISN’T.