Vinson’s Dismissal of the Rogers’ Cases

Featured

Judge Roger Vinson dismissed the lawsuits against Sir David last month. Morgan made short order in getting his version out in spite of the Corona Virus Craziness. I’m sure he’d hoped my response to this would be seen poorly, as an attack on the “first responders”.  I did wait to reply as I see this whole thing will decline quickly, restoring Morgan’s image as a the coward he is rather than the false facade of heroic first responder.

Vinson claimed the one claim by Zarzaur that made these federal cases was the “deliberate indifference” of children in the home with the foresight to see that sexual abuse of the girls could be predicted.  He found no evidence to be presented that definitively showed Morgan was aware of the existence of the Rogers twins and thereby couldn’t be indifferent. The following passage says it all:

6

So the other things mentioned….he doesn’t run a tight ship regarding sex on duty and that he interfered with Internal Investigations of such misconduct, are now facts of law.

This includes the the following: 34

I have attached the full opinion here and I believe sexual deviance could be predicted. We know sexual predators don’t stop or go backwards. Sexual deviance progresses much the same way. The thrill is in the taboo of the situation. Once the taboo loses its excitement, something more “taboo” and exciting will be sought. Given that there were adolescents in the home that sexual escalation was absolutely forseeable.

But the biggest “gotcha” is that Morgan despite many many times claiming he didn’t “have sex with that woman”, did not convince a judge .i could not would not

Commentary:  I believe Bill Chavers is collateral damage here of a vindictive Mindy Pare.

 

More Morgan Drama

Featured

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.