Welcome To The New Real School Police

Welcome To The New Real School Police

My newest blog, since I have more time on my hands now!!!

The Godley Files


The complete P.O.S.T record of Bob Godley. The former cop that thinks the whole county owes him an apology for his bad behavior.

There is a new blogger in town, who is also upset with this school system. Thank you Paul for standing up for what is right, and not backing down to the ESTABLISHMENT.

Camden County Schools The Truth


Please visit my other blogs:

Who Killed Racheyl Brinson


And don't forget the Dennis Perry trial transcript also:

Remember Dennis is the one framed by former Sheriff Bill Smith and his lying so called detective Dale Bundy.


Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Ding Dong The Wicked Witch Is Gone!!!!!!




Outside the courtroom                                                                                          Inside the courtroom

From http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/11/15/41446.htm
Ethics Panel Scorches Drug Court Judge


ATLANTA (CN) - Georgia's judicial ethics board filed misconduct charges against the head of the state's largest drug court. The Commission on Judicial Qualifications accused Glynn County Superior Court Chief Judge Amanda Williams of "tyrannical partiality," making false statements, indefinitely incarcerating defendants, abusing court visitors and defendants, and nepotism.

The 12-count Notice of Formal Proceedings caps a long investigation by the Judicial Qualifications Commission, made up of state-appointed investigators and attorneys, with former Georgia Supreme Court Justice Leah Ward Sears and former state Attorney General Michael Bowers as lead prosecutors on this case.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) already was investigating Williams when a March 2011 report from National Public Radio's "This American Life" brought some of Williams' behavior on the bench into the public spotlight.

Program host Ira Glass focused on the story of defendant Lindsey Dills, a repeat drug offender with a history of suicidal behavior whom Williams incarcerated for an indefinite jail term. Glass also reported on other cases in Judge Williams' court.

Drug Court, an alternative for repeat drug offenders, allows a defendant the chance to enter a county rehab drug education program, instead of doing hard time in jail.

According to the JQC complaint, Dills originally was charged with forging her parents' checks in 2005 and under the terms of her sentence entered into a drug court contract. When she violated the contract in 2008, Williams sentenced her to a 28-day prison sentence. According to the JQC's 31-page complaint, Williams knew Dills was suicidal.

"Despite her history, on or about October 8, 2008, you held in chambers and outside the presence of the public and a court reporter, a hearing at which you sanctioned Dills to 28 days in custody for 'violation of [her] drug court contract,'" the JQC complaint states.

It continues: "However, on or about October 8, 2008, after Dills was taken into custody and transported to jail, you sua sponte modified her 28-day sentence to a period of confinement 'indefinitely' in the Glynn County Jail and 'until further order of the court.'

"Furthermore, on or about October 8, 2008, after Dills had been sentenced and transported to jail, and you returned to the courtroom and gave verbal directives to personnel and/or court officers, to wit: 'On Lindsey Dills, she is not to have any telephone privileges and no one is to contact or visit her except Gail Kelly! Nobody! Total restriction!'

Dills was held for 73 days, during which "No one, including either Dills' drug counselor or her attorney, visited her," the complaint states.

She tried to kill herself on Dec. 9, "while in solitary and restrictive confinement," but even "(a)fter this suicide attempt, Dills remained on court-ordered lock-down until about December 22, 2008, when she was subsequently transferred to an inpatient treatment facility," the complaint states.

It continues: "At the time you ordered Dills into indefinite, restrictive custody, you knew or should have known that Dills was predisposed to suicidal tendencies, having previously signed an order placing her on a suicide-watch while she was in custody.

"When queried, you and/or your legal counsel, on your behalf, knowingly denied that you ordered any defendant at any time to be held in restricted custody, solitary confinement, or otherwise directed the conditions by which an inmate should be housed."

The JQC report says that Dills is not the only drug court defendant Walker ordered to be incarcerated indefinitely.

In another case, Williams jailed a defendant for more than 17 days for disputing his drug screening test, JQC says. Defendant Charlie McCullough was 3 months away from graduating from the drug court program, when he failed a random drug screening.

Upon request, McCullough took the same test within 20 minutes of the first, and his test was negative. A third test came out negative as well, according to the complaint.

The JQC says: "The drug counselor advised McCullough that he would be required to appear in court because of the result of the first drug test. Although he passed both the second and third tests, the counselor informed McCullough that you [Williams] would only use the first test in determining his sanction."

When McCullough asked to speak to Williams during his hearing, he said, "[The urine] was tested three times. I passed that, okay? I can't explain to you why. All I know is what I've done and what I haven't done, your honor.

"Williams: Well, you know, I don't believe you.

"McCullough: I'm not going to go 22 months with clean time and then three months from my graduation [from drug court] to use."

"Williams: Well, people have done it.

"Consequently, you sentenced McCullough to 17 days in the county jail. Court records show that the 17 days is comprised of two sanctions: 3 days for having a positive drug test and 14 days for 'disputing the initial screen.'"

The JQC also accuses Williams of making snap rulings without consulting opposing counsel, including granting an order allowing a defendant appearing before her in a child support case to consolidate an active criminal drug court charge with the child support case.

When opposing counsel, attorney J. Robert Morgan, learned of the order, he requested a meeting with Williams and the public defender.

"At this meeting, Attorney Morgan objected to your [Williams'] consolidation of the criminal and civil cases. In response, you told Attorney Morgan, 'I do not give a shit' who hears these cases," the complaint states.

"In response, Attorney Morgan presented you two 'Orders for Voluntary Recusal.' You refused to sign the orders and began yelling and cursing at Attorney Morgan.

"You initially refused to recuse yourself, but then improperly reassigned the cases to another judge you selected."

The JQC also accused Williams of nepotism by, inter alia, appointing her daughter as a guardian ad litem.

"You violated Canon 2B of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you showed favoritism in your order requiring payment to your daughter, under penalty of contempt, and in doing so allowed your family relationships to influence your judicial conduct," the complaint states.

"d. You violated Canon 2A ('judges shall respect and comply with the law') and Canon 3 ('judges shall disqualify in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned') of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you failed to recuse yourself in a matter where a member of your family appeared before you as guardian ad litem.

"e. You violated Canon 3 ('judges shall disqualify in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned') of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you failed to recuse yourself in cases where you had a conflict because your children and your husband appeared before you in the capacity as the lawyer in the proceeding.

"f. You violated Canon 3E of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you presided over a case in which you were disqualified and which you had previously reassigned to another judge.

"g. You violated Canon 3E of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you, having been disqualified, heard matters on an alleged 'emergency basis' under the 'rule of necessity' when no such emergency existed."

These accusations - Count Four - are more particularly described, as follows.

In the case of Walden v. Walden v. Gamer (as intervenor), a divorce action involving the custody of two minor children, on or about August 6, 2009, you heard a matter involving temporary custody. The litigant parents both appeared pro se. Garner, the great-grandmother, as intervenor, was represented by counsel.

"Also present in the courtroom was your daughter, Attorney Frances Williams Dyal. You asked your daughter, 'Frances, come forward. Go talk to these people [about the children].' Attorney Dyal, the father and Garner left the courtroom to discuss the matter. Garner's counsel remained in the courtroom and the mother was instructed to wait in the outer hallway.

"After a short period, Attorney Dyal, the father, and Garner returned to the courtroom and, along with Garner's counsel, approached the bench. Attorney Dyal, acting as the appointed guardian ad litem, recommended to you that temporary custody be given to Garner. You accepted your daughter's recommendation and instructed Garner's counsel to prepare an order.

"The mother had no opportunity to be heard on, challenge, participate in, or cross-examine Attorney Dyal's findings. You failed to allow all parties to be heard prior to accepting your daughter's recommendation.

"Attorney Dyal was operating under no written appointment as a guardian ad

litem. There was no disclosure on the record, or otherwise, to any party regarding

your familial relationship with Attorney Dyal." (Parentheses and brackets in complaint.)

The JQC says defendants were at the mercy of Williams' whims - and that she ordered one man "summarily jailed" for using slang, which was not obscene.

"A drug court defendant appeared before you to request to be excused from a Saturday class for a family function," the complaint states. "Because of your disdain for the young man's use of the term 'baby momma,' you ordered that the defendant be summarily jailed.

"You have often appeared frustrated with drug court defendants who wished to address the court, gesturing with your hand and saying 'don't talk to me.' Any further attempt by the defendant to speak would often result in you directing the bailiff to take them into custody. When the bailiff inquired about the duration of detention, you often replied that you did not know and/or to make it for an indefinite period of time."

Count 11 states, in its entirety: "The conduct in Counts One through Nine violates Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and O.C.G.A. §45-11-4, which prohibits you from 'using tyrannical partiality in the administration or under the color of [your] office.'" (Brackets in complaint.)

County 12 accuses Williams of making false statements during the JQC's investigation.

Williams has 30 days to respond to the complaint or to resign.

If she does not resign, the JQC, a seven-member panel of two judges, three attorneys and two private citizens, will hear the trial.

If the ethics violations are proven, the commission will issue a recommendation on disciplinary action. It's up to the Georgia Supreme Court to issue a final ruling.

Williams is represented by John J. Ossick Jr. of Kingsland, and Steven M. Collins, with Alston & Bird of Atlanta.

Past posts on Judge Williams

Judge steals money:

Inmate says he didn't get fair trial:

Thursday, November 03, 2011

Ethics Complaint Against Mayor and Entire City Council

Ethics complaint against Chief Hatch, Mayor Deloughy, and the entire City Council

Chief Hatch has lied about several things in my case. Many of you have seen the evidence I have provided.

First, Chief Hatch lied about an internal investigation I requested after my arrest. Chief Hatch said no such investigation took place, but I received a bill for my open records request for that document. Also in the email in response to my request, Chief Hatch stated it was not done yet, and he would send the final copy and the amount for the cost to the City Clerk for me to pay before I picked up the paperwork. Please find the enclosed documentation.

Second, I requested a second internal investigation one year later, claiming Joshua Hamlett falsified the police report in my case. Upon completion of this request, I got a copy and found it very disturbing. First the investigator didn’t do a complete investigation. He took the accused (Hamlett) word for it. If they would have done a complete investigation the 911 tapes would have been listened to and the investigator would have heard the Sheriff as the second caller, yet the investigator listed as an unknown caller. The sheriff says as 911 answers “This is the Sheriff”. They did not pull the CAD report from the 911 center that proves Hamlett couldn’t have done all that he said he did, as the CAD report lists him as being at the doctors office for only 20 minutes.

Third, when I started sending all this information to Chief Hatch, He took it as a threat and told me not to email him again. Since when is sending information about a case a threat? Maybe when that person knows he is caught in a huge lie.

Fourth, your city manager in defense of Chief Hatch sends me a threatening email and copied the city attorney on it stating that I need to remove an image that I use on Topix. This image is of Chief Hatch, and it was taken off a public domain website. Later after I returned Mr. Crowell email and stated that no laws were broken by my use of this image, Crowell admitted that is was not illegal, so why did he email me was it INTIMADATION?

And last but not least, The Mayor and entire city council has ignored every bit of this. They have ignored several complaints against Chief Hatch even after I predicted that Officer Hamlett would quit after I filed the second internal investigation. Oh by the way, he did quit 2 days later. All other officers in this case, also quit.

Further documentation upon request.

Rick Rogers

Monday, October 17, 2011

More Cops Get Away With Murder, This Time In Georgia! Can You Say Friends And Family!

From the Florida Times Union:

October 13, 2011 - 11:41am

FBI may investigate 2010 police shooting that killed Brunswick woman

The fatal shooting of a Brunswick woman by two veteran Glynn County police officers last year has attracted the attention of federal law enforcement authorities.

Sgt. Corey Sasser and Officer Todd Simpson fired eight .45-caliber bullets at Caroline McGehee Small as she tried to maneuver her boxed-in car, its four tires shredded down to the rims, following an erratic low-speed pursuit on June 18, 2010.

Two bullets struck Small, who had cocaine in her system, in the face. Small, 35, died without regaining consciousness one week later at a Savannah hospital. A mother of two young daughters, Small had a history of drug abuse and running from the police.

“It has come to our interest. …The shooting has been brought to our attention,” Lawrence J. Greene, the FBI’s supervisory senior resident agent in Savannah told the Times-Union.

Citing FBI policy, Greene would not confirm nor deny whether it has officially opened an investigation into the shooting. Greene declined comment about when or how the FBI was alerted to the case.

Officials with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia also declined comment. Georgia Bureau of Investigation officials would not comment either.

After the shooting, Sasser and Simpson talked about their marksmanship instead of checking to see if she was alive, according to recordings made by police dashboard video cameras.

Sasser, who had fired six shots, said he’d hit Small “right in the bridge of the nose.”

A witness said Simpson, who fired twice, told him that Small was dead because he had shot her in the head and “her head exploded.”

Those details are among the evidence contained in a 540-page case file the GBI recently released to the Times-Union in response to an open records request.

A Glynn County grand jury, in a 12-6 decision, cleared Sasser and Simpson of any criminal wrongdoing.

Both officers also were cleared by a police internal investigation. They remain with the Glynn police department.

teresa.stepzinski@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4075

Photo gallery: From the scene of the shooting

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2011-10-13/story/fbi-may-investigate-2010-police-shooting-killed-brunswick-woman#ixzz1b3b17hKg

Friday, August 19, 2011

St. Marys Police Chief Tim Hatch Sends Threatening Email

Mr. Rogers,

In light of the recent emails and phone calls that I have received from you, and the abusive, harassing and threatening nature of your communications, I am using this email to notify you that I will no longer accept your calls or your emails. Any contact that occurs between us will require your attorney to contact the City’s attorney in order for me to consider responding. Issues relating to your pending court case need to be presented to the judge on your court date. Future Open Records Requests need to be directed to Mrs. Darlene Roellig, City Clerk. Lastly, I want to caution you that the harassing and threatening nature of your communications, if they do not cease, may result in my seeking legal remedy through my personal attorney.

Chief Hatch

Rick's Comments:

Had I really threatened the chief, he would not have sent me an email he would have arrested me. Instead if it continues he will call his PERSONAL attorney.
Chief you are a public employee and the fact that you are not doing your job, and that this arrest was a setup and you know your cops are lying based all the evidence I have shown you, there is nothing you can do about it.

I have the right granted unto all americans to question those in charge.


Sheriff's Attorney Pops Off

From the T&G.

Sheriff's attorney questions quality of letters to the editor

Dear Editor,

I have no desire to engage in a letter-writing campaign concerning my client, Sheriff Bill Smith. I am writing in response to Robert Southwell's recent letter to the editor ("Sheriff's ethics, competence called to question," Jan. 12) only because I am mentioned, not only by name, but also in a way that could subject Mr. Southwell (and also your newspaper) to a valid claim for defamation.The recent controversy in which I represented Sheriff Smith before the State Ethics Commission was minor at best. The only thing Sheriff Smith did wrong was to inadvertently fail to mention two or three low value pieces of property he had inherited from his parents in a 2002 financial disclosure statement. The theory behind the original complaint, filed by a thoroughly-defeated political adversary, was that if the voters had known of the omission, it might have affected somebody's vote. Sheriff Smith got about 85 percent of the votes in that election, and, if everybody in Camden County had known of the minor omission, I don't think it would have changed a single vote.The only reason Sheriff Smith paid the $1,500 fine was because I advised him that the value of his service to Camden County for the entire day, when he would otherwise have been required to come to Atlanta to appear before the commission, was more than $1,500.Camden County is fortunate to have a sheriff with the competency and good character of Bill Smith. I am proud to consider him a long-time good friend, as well as a client.

Taylor W. Jones Attorney at lawAtlanta


Mr. Jones,

You know good and well this is not the first time the Sheriff ethics have been questioned, So why would we not ask about other ethics violations. We as Americans have the right to question our elected officials. We have the right to our opinions.

I have been the most outspoken person in regards to the Sheriff and his office. Yet they continue to bash Mr. Southwell. Why didn't Mr. Jones say anything about me! I know because I actually have the power. They all know what happened back in December have cost them dearly. Every commissioner was called out and none answered. As it stands now we have a lame duck government, and they will be very careful what they do in the future.




Mr. Southwell's letter is in the comments section. Someone please tell me what he said to deserve this ambulance chaser to threaten to sue.


What did Mr.Southwell say that was so bad?

Please someone tell me!!!

Here is his letter from the T&G.

Dear Editor,

By Sheriff Bill Smith admitting that he paid a fine to the State Ethics Commission confirms the fact that his ethics are the reason we question his competency as a sheriff of Camden County.

He has no problem answering to the State Ethics Commission through his attorney, Taylor W. Jones, who in my opinion sounds like a salesman with a mouth full of samples.

To the citizens of this county: If we don't vote him out in the next election, we will be subjected to this type of unjust justice for years to come. We need to stand up and elect an objective sheriff. I'm starting early on this campaign, and our next sheriff's last name should not be Proctor.

Robert Southwell

Thu Feb 08, 01:03:00 PM EST

May Mr. Southwell rest in peace. God bless you sir!!!!!

Chief Hatch Has SUCKER Written On His Forehead!!!!

So called arresting officer only on scene for 20 minutes

133 Josh Hamlett
139 Rich Riggle
124 Meredith Mastin

Previous reports signed by Hamlett says Hamlett talked with nurses, Hamlett got written statements from nurses, and ALL OF THIS IN ONLY TWENTY MINUTES.

What happens when all this hits the fan?

How will Hatch defend his guys actions in court?

He can no longer blame anyone but himself, as he is the only one left with any connection to this case.

All others have new jobs, and remember Hatch already lost one job.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Josh Hamlett,Second Cop Accused Of Lying Quits, Only One Left

Meredith Mastin




Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Alleged Suspect Solved 1 1/2 Year Mystery How Dumb Are The St. Marys Police?

This is the report from my complaint stating that Josh Hamlett submitted a false incident report.

Of course these people police themselves so the great detective Johnny Guy said there was no wrong doing by Hamlett.

Well in reviewing the documents I noticed in point #1 that it stated that the St. Marys Police had no idea who the second 911 caller was.

Well folks this will tell you what kind of people we have working for you. These people carry guns and can get away with shooing you. Yet they can't even listen to a simple audio recording.

Here is the report, followed by the actual 911 calls.

See if you can tell who called 911!




Monday, August 15, 2011

Hatch Lies Again?

Dear Mr. Rogers:
Attached please find a copy of the costs associated with your request for information dated August 10, 2010. A copy of the Georgia Code is also attached in reference to such charges. If you wish for us to move forward with your request, please sign the form agreeing to the costs and mail payment to the City of St. Marys at the address listed below. Or, you may choose to personally inspect the documents, which will be available at the Police Department after 9:00 a.m. on Monday, August 30th. If you wish to inspect them in lieu of copies, please contact Kelly Kotson at 882-4488 to schedule an appointment.
Darlene M. Roellig, CMC
City Clerk

RE: My Post On Your Wrong Doing!!!!
Monday, August 15, 2011 2:34 PM
From: "Tim Hatch" 100@stmpd.org
To: "'Rick Rogers'" , "'Kelly Kotson'" <145@stmpd.org>, steve.crowell@ci.st-marys.ga.usCc: "'Deb Hase'" , "'Greg Bird'" , "'Chuck Trader'" , "'Jay Moreno'" , "'Kieth'" , "'Bill'" , "'John'" , "'Sidney'" ... more

Mr. Rogers,
In answer to your question about the first investigation you requested:

No investigative file was found relating to the complaint number you supplied. When my Sergeant who manages our website returned from his vacation, we had him pull up the complaint number you provided. This complaint was reviewed when you submitted it, however; no investigation was conducted since you did not offer a complaint about anything that was actually against policy. Therefore, there is no file that corresponds to that complaint number for us to copy for you.

The most recent complaint you filed has been completed and you may make arrangements to obtain a copy of that investigative inquiry from my Administrative Assistant, Kelly Kotson. When you contact her, she will advise you what the applicable copy fees are before you arrive, if you like.

Chief Hatch

So Chief Hatch what were you trying to sell me back in August of 2010?

What The Cops Of St. Marys Search For?

See more IP address' and searches at http://www.box.net/download/account/f_866057570/0/IP+Address.mdb

Look up who owns that IP Address at

The following is what the St. Marys PD do while working!!!!!

Domain IP Address Keywords Referring Site City

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net real school police google.com Saint Marys

tds.net google.com Kingsland

tds.net gcps.blogspot.com Saint Marys

tds.net the real school police google.ca Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net "terry readdick""""" topix.com Marietta

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net camdenganews.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Lulu

tds.net att.net Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Woodbine

tds.net Brunswick

tds.net the real school police Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Brunswick

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net google.com Woodbine

tds.net google.com Pittsburgh

tds.net search.yahoo.com Fort Wayne

tds.net Brunswick

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net google.com Midway

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net sandy feller Saint Marys

tds.net Fernandina Beach

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Woodbine

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Simons Island

tds.net Atlanta

tds.net camden county georgia blogs Vidalia

tds.net topix.com Knoxville

tds.net Woodbine

tds.net Woodbine

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Kingsland

tds.net fairley cisco Kingsland

tds.net google.com Philadelphia

tds.net Gay

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net georgia state trooper complaints Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net search.yahoo.com Pittsburgh

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Brunswick

tds.net google.com Saint Marys

tds.net schoolpolice.blogspot.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net beth soles tax commissioner Kingsland

tds.net google.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net topix.com Kingsland

tds.net Lenore

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Kings Bay

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net google.com Kingsland

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net topix.com Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net the real school police Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net camden county blogspot Kingsland

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net the real school police Haralson

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net google.com Saint Marys

tds.net Atlanta

tds.net Naples

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Brunswick

tds.net google.com Mountain View

tds.net sheriff bill smith camdenganews.com Kingsland

tds.net topix.net Kingsland

tds.net the real school police Saint Marys

tds.net real school police Jacksonville

tds.net camdenganews.com Saint Marys

tds.net topix.net Saint Marys

tds.net google.com Jacksonville

tds.net blogger.com Woodbine

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net the real school police google.com Saint Marys

tds.net topix.com Kingsland

tds.net Morristown

tds.net recall sheriff bill smith Pittsburg

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net the real school police Kingsland

tds.net Woodbine

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net blogger.com Saint Marys

tds.net search.comcast.net Midway

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net sheriff bill smith topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net therealschoolpolice Kingsland

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net topix.com Saint Marys

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net schoolpolice.com google.com Brunswick

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net "ben jenkins"" ""cumberland island""""" topix.com Kingsland

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net Jacksonville

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Saint Simons Island

tds.net Saint Marys

tds.net google.com Jacksonville

tds.net Kingsland

tds.net Brunswick

St Marys PD Still All Over This Site, And Refuses To Release ORR!!!

That's right folks this cop station refused to look up information about former cop Bob Gedley before they hired him. Information that all of us new was true and the St. Marys Police Department ignored it and hired Godley anyways. But now this blogger is coming after them and now they will check out this site daily!!!

As for my open records request, it has been nearly two weeks since a request a copy of the internal investigation of my arrest from over a year ago. This report has been finished and a cost for the report was sent to me over a year ago. But since that time I have requested another investigation into a false police report, and now they will not release the first report. Why? Are they changing things in the report?


Where are my open records request Chief Hatch?

Friday, August 05, 2011

St Marys Has History Of Police Screwups!!!!

And the City Council sat by and did nothing!!!

Sound like this City Council:

787 F.2d 1496

Bradley Jay DEPEW, Plaintiff-Appellee,


CITY OF ST. MARYS, GEORGIA, Defendant-Appellant.

Charles Earl FOWLER, Plaintiff-Appellee,


CITY OF ST. MARYS, GEORGIA, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 85-8287, 85-8288.

United States Court of Appeals,

Eleventh Circuit.

April 28, 1986.


Richard A. Brown, Jr., Brunswick, Ga., for defendant-appellant.


Alva J. Hopkins, III, Folkston, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellees.


Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.


Before GODBOLD, Chief Judge, ANDERSON, Circuit Judge, and ATKINS*, Senior District Judge.

ATKINS, Senior District Judge:


The City of St. Marys appeals from an adverse verdict in consolidated section 1983 actions which were based upon allegations that the city knowingly approved a pattern of improper police conduct consisting of acts of violence, intimidation, and humiliation.1 Appellant maintains that the evidence was insufficient to prove a policy or custom establishing the city's fault regarding the constitutional deprivation of plaintiffs' rights. In addition, appellant maintains that plaintiffs were not denied due process because adequate state remedies exist.2 Because we find that the evidence supports the verdict, and that the existence of a state remedy does not bar a section 1983 action of this type, we affirm.


* There was sufficient evidence before the jury from which the following facts could be inferred. On July 22, 1983, plaintiffs, Fowler and Depew, began repairing a customer's jeep at Fowler's garage. After completing the repairs at 1:30 a.m. the next day, plaintiffs took the jeep for a test drive. Fowler noticed a problem with the steering, so he allowed the jeep to veer to the right on two occasions and was subsequently stopped by Officer Kusek.


Fowler explained what he was doing, but was told he had to submit to a sobriety test although none of the officers detected any alcohol odor on his breath. Fowler readily agreed to take the test. Later, a lab report showed negative alcohol content.


While Kusek went to his car, apparently to obtain the test equipment, Fowler sat down in the jeep. When Kusek returned to the jeep, he grabbed Fowler around the neck and tried to drag him from the jeep. Fowler clung to the steering wheel, because he was surprised and frightened. When Kusek was unable to drag Fowler from the jeep, he demanded Depew's assistance. Depew, however, refused to interfere in any manner.


After a short while, several other officers arrived at the scene. One officer held Depew at gunpoint while he was handcuffed. Other officers helped Kusek drag Fowler from the vehicle. Then, Fowler was thrown to the ground and beaten by the officers before he was handcuffed. Depew was taken directly to jail, while Fowler was taken to a hospital for blood tests.


Plaintiffs subsequently filed these actions against the city and other parties. Plaintiffs alleged that their civil rights were violated due to the use of excessive or unreasonable force by the city's police officers. Liability was asserted against the city based on allegations that the mayor and city council had knowingly established a policy or custom of police misconduct. During trial, the evidence revealed several prior incidents of police misconduct. The evidence also indicated that the city failed to train, supervise, and discipline its police officers as required.


Ms. Donini testified that she had been harassed and forcibly placed in a police car by the city's officers during their apprehension of a suspect on her property in 1981. When she complained of a violation of her rights, she was informed that she had no rights. Moreover, her complaints were largely ignored by the mayor and council members. In fact, the city commended the officers for their actions.


Ms. Crumbley, a council member since 1979, testified that the council was aware of the Donini incident and another incident involving Michael Dixon. Mr. Dixon had also initiated a lawsuit alleging police brutality. Crumbley denied that the officers acted improperly, and maintained that these cases were settled merely to preserve peace in the community.


Mr. Dyals, a council member since 1980 and former chairman of the police subcommittee, stated that he was unaware of any investigation or disciplinary measures regarding the Donini or Dixon matters. Similarly, when questioned about another incident involving David Chaney, he could not remember any investigation regarding the matter.3


Councilman Saunders initially testified that no action had been taken by the council in the Donini and Dixon matters; however, he later testified that the Donini matter had been investigated. He stated that the council concluded that the officers had acted correctly. He also admitted that no action had been taken to alter police policy.


Additional evidence indicated that other complaints of police misconduct existed. Officer Ring remembered a complaint involving Officer Murray, but could not recall the details. Similarly, Officer Wiggins, a former training officer, was disciplined when he struck a handcuffed prisoner for no apparent reason.


The evidence relating to the lack of proper training, supervision, and discipline consisted of various personnel evaluation reports, employee warning reports, directives promulgated by Chief Keele, and the testimony of various witnesses. For example, Officer Ring was never disciplined other than by verbal reprimand although he had been cited for poor and improper work on many occasions. Similarly, while Officers Halley and Kaser were known to be hot tempered, both officers remained on patrol duty.


Chief Keele admitted that he had disciplinary problems with his officers. Nevertheless, he did little to rectify the problem. In fact, he stated, "At six bucks an hour, you take what you can get."


While the parties presented conflicting evidence, testimony indicated that the officers received inadequate training concerning the use of force in any given situation and when the use of deadly force was proper. Officer Sanders testified that no instructions on this subject were issued by the department. Moreover, Sanders candidly stated that excessive force was used against Fowler, but that it was nothing that he had not seen before.


The evidence also demonstrated that officers had little incentive to learn the policy and directives of the police department. If an officer failed an examination on the department's policy and directives, he remained in the same position, with the same duties, and he received the same wages. His sole penalty was that he was not promoted to a higher rank.


The mayor and council showed no inclination to change police policy. In fact, while the mayor and council members were aware of prior complaints of excessive force, they continued to assert that the department's supervision was satisfactory and that the officers were doing a good job.


At the conclusion of plaintiff's case, defendants moved for a directed verdict. The motion was denied. After the jury returned a verdict against the city, defendants moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Finding the evidence sufficient to support plaintiffs' claims, the district judge denied this motion as well.II


The City of St. Marys contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict which was based on a finding of custom or policy on the part of the city resulting in plaintiffs' injuries. When considering the sufficiency of the evidence, this court must consider the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs and give them the benefit of all inferences which the evidence supports. This court must affirm unless it is convinced that there is a complete absence of probative evidence supporting the verdict or that the evidence so overwhelmingly supports the city that reasonable men in the exercise of impartial judgment could not render a verdict against it.


Section 1983 generally makes every person liable for conduct which deprives any citizen of the United States of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1982). For purposes of this statute, municipalities are persons. Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). Section 1983 provides a fault-based analysis for imposing municipal liability; therefore, plaintiffs must establish that the city was the person who caused them to be subjected to their deprivation. To establish a policy or custom, it is generally necessary to show a persistent and wide-spread practice. Moreover, actual or constructive knowledge of such customs must be attributed to the governing body of the municipality. Normally random acts or isolated incidents are insufficient to establish a custom or policy. Bennett v. City of Slidell, 728 F.2d 762, on rehearing, 735 F.2d 861 (5th Cir.1984) (en banc). However, the custom need not receive formal approval. Monell, 436 U.S. at 691, 98 S.Ct. at 2036.


In this case, while the city provided rules and regulations for the operation of its police department, these rules were violated on numerous occasions. The city, however, failed to rectify the situation. The evidence revealed several incidents involving the use of unreasonable and excessive force by police officers. Therefore, the city had knowledge of improper police conduct, but failed to take proper remedial action. The continued failure of the city to prevent known constitutional violations by its police force is precisely the type of informal policy or custom that is actionable under section 1983. See Herrera v. Valentine, 653 F.2d 1220, 1224 (8th Cir.1981); See also Turpin v. Mailet, 619 F.2d 196 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1016, 101 S.Ct. 577, 66 L.Ed.2d 475 (1980).



Appellant maintains that plaintiffs failed to state a claim under section 1983, because they had an adequate remedy under state law and were not denied due process. Plaintiffs can pursue claims for false imprisonment, false arrest, and assault and battery in state court. Since state law provides plaintiffs with these post-deprivation remedies, appellant asserts that plaintiffs have received all the process which they are due under the Fourteenth Amendment.


Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 101 S.Ct. 1908, 68 L.Ed.2d 420 (1981) is the starting point for discussion. Parratt involved a section 1983 suit for damages of $23.50 brought by an inmate for the negligent deprivation of property without due process of law. The court concluded that the due process clause was not violated because plaintiff had an adequate state remedy. A pre-deprivation hearing was not practical and a post-deprivation hearing was available. Id. at 543, 101 S.Ct. at 1916. The court emphasized the need for this result. Otherwise, every injury caused by a state official under color of law would constitute a due process violation and would be actionable under section 1983. Id. at 544, 101 S.Ct. at 1917. Justices Stewart and Powell concurred, because they did not believe the claim rose to the level of a deprivation of property under the Constitution. Id. 544, 546, 101 S.Ct. 1917, 1918. Justices White and Blackmun emphasized that the opinion was limited to deprivations of property and did not encompass deprivations of life or liberty. Id. at 545, 101 S.Ct. at (White and Blackmun concurring).


In Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 104 S.Ct. 3194, 82 L.Ed.2d 393 (1984), the court dealt with an intentional deprivation of property through an unauthorized act by a state employee. The court extended the holding in Parratt to include intentional deprivations of property where it was impractical to hold a pre-deprivation hearing and where an adequate state remedy existed. The court's holding, however, was based on the fact that the action was unauthorized.


We reasoned that where a loss of property is occasioned by a random, unauthorized act by a state employee, rather than by an established state procedure, the state cannot predict when the loss will occur.


Id. 104 S.Ct. at 3203. The Court reasoned that while the action was under color of law, the unauthorized acts were beyond the control of the state. The Court then discussed Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 102 S.Ct. 1148, 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). In Logan, the court reaffirmed Parratt but distinguished it.


We specifically distinguished the case from Parratt by noting that "Parratt ... was dealing with a ... 'random and unauthorized act by a state employee ... [and was] not a result of some established state procedure.' " Parratt, we said, "was not designed to reach ... a situation" where the deprivation is the result of an established state procedure.


Hudson, 104 S.Ct. at 3203 n. 13 (footnotes omitted).


Gilmere v. City of Atlanta, 737 F.2d 894 (11th Cir.1984), rev'd, 774 F.2d 1495 (11th Cir.1985) (en banc) is the critical Eleventh Circuit decision regarding this issue. In Gilmere, plaintiff's decedent was killed by police officers during arrest. The court ruled that the state survivor tort remedy was all the process that was due because the conduct was random and unauthorized, and a pre-deprivation hearing was impractical. The court then extended the holdings of Parratt and Hudson to include negligent and intentional deprivations of liberty. The court avoided ruling on whether the same result would have been proper for a violation of substantive due process. In fact, the court specifically stated:


Thus our holding today is in line with Duncan v. Poythress, 657 F.2d 691, 704 (5th Cir.1981) where the plaintiff's claim was held to be not barred by Parratt because it was based on the substantive due process right to vote. Additionally, the acts of the police here, although most unfortunate, did not "offend those canons of decency and fairness which express the notions of English-speaking peoples even toward those charged with the most heinous offense" or "shock the conscience," so as to violate the substantive due process guarantees "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."


Id. at 910 (citations omitted).

Upon rehearing, the court stated:


We accepted this case for en banc consideration primarily to determine whether Parratt v. Taylor precludes a claim by his administratrix under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 because state tort law provides a comparable remedy.


Gilmere, at 1496 (citations omitted). The court concluded that plaintiff's action was not barred.


Having thus found that the scope of Parratt is necessarily limited by both the legislative history of section 1983 and the Supreme Court's own pronouncements, we perceive at least two alternative constitutional theories ... on which this plaintiff may predicate her section 1983 claim for relief against the police officers.


Id. at 1499.


In Gilmere, the court articulated two theories which allow injured parties to bring actions pursuant to section 1983 regardless of whether an adequate state remedy was available. First, an individual can maintain a section 1983 action whenever the government's conduct violates substantive due process. Id. at 1501. Similarly, an individual can bring a section 1983 action based upon Fourth Amendment violations. Id. at 1502.


Here, the jury determined that the City of St. Marys had implicitly ratified a custom or policy permitting the police to use excessive force against its citizens. The use of "excessive" force in making an arrest constitutes an unreasonable seizure. Therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to maintain a section 1983 action in spite of the existence of any state remedies.4



The evidence was far from overwhelming, but it was sufficient to support the jury's verdict. The jury was entitled to draw all reasonable inferences from the evidence and evaluate the credibility of the witnesses. The evidence revealed sufficient prior incidents where the police had used excessive force to put the city on notice. Yet, the city failed to take proper remedial action. This evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the city's officials implicitly ratified a custom which resulted in plaintiffs' injuries. Based on this evidence, the plaintiffs are entitled to maintain a section 1983 action in federal court regardless of the existence of any state remedy. Thus, we AFFIRM.


Honorable C. Clyde Atkins, Senior U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, sitting by designation


Plaintiffs did not appeal from verdicts for all other defendants nor contest the amount of the award


Appellant also maintains that the pendent state law claims are barred under Georgia statutes. However, a recent case, Toombs County, Georgia v. O'Neal, 254 Ga. 390, 330 S.E.2d 95 (1985) has settled this issue. The defense of sovereign immunity is waived to the extent of the municipality's liability insurance coverage. Id. Neither Acker v. City of Elberton, 176 Ga.App. 580, 336 S.E.2d 842 (1985) nor any of the cases cited therein are relevant. The implied holding of Acker is that a municipality is not liable for the torts of police officers under a theory of respondeat superior. No such limitation on liability exists, however, when the officer's conduct is based on a city's custom utilizing excessive force to control its residents


The Chaney incident was not explored during the trial because the court refused to allow certain witnesses, including a former St. Marys police officer, to testify. This incident also involved allegations of police brutality


Gilmere identifies the proper balancing tests which will guide parties in the future. See id. at 1501-02. In this case, these tests are obviously satisfied, so there is no need to remand the case


Saint Marys False Police Report!!

 Someone please explain why Richard Riggle was the one that talked to the nurses, Yet his name is nowhere on this report, except to approve it?

Hamlett remember you and me and my wife, were not the only people in the room together. EMT was there too. They saw you in the room with me, so how can you talk to me and the nurses at the same time?

This is currently under investigation by the same agency. Amazing how they can police themselves.

If they can get who talked to who right, then what else is wrong?

What was added or deleted from statements?

I know the two sentences at the bottom was not my statement, that was made up by Hamlett. Riggle refused to allow me to make a statement.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Skipping To Richard Riggle, Friend or Foe?

This man, A St. Marys Police Officer publicly supports this man

or at least he did, until Bob hid that info from you

A former St Marys cop who posted on a face book page to stop sexual predators:
"What do you mean then we have nowhere to go!!!hahaha! ..."

See Bob you were not asking another cop where do we go next.

You were calling yourself a sexual predator!!

And St. Marys cop Riggle still supports you!!

Monday, July 11, 2011

Stupid is as stupid does!

Bob Godley and all his friends call me stupid all the time. Then why do they accuse me of doing such high tech things?

First, I was accused of hacking the blog 4 the badge. You all remember that blog don’t you? That was a pro-Smith blog that like to trash both Jay and myself.

Second, I was accused of hacking former Camden County native Trip Casey’s blog about Gregory being a one term Sheriff. Even though it is plain as day they he (Trip) had taken the blog down, as his website displays the same message mine did for months.

Third, I stole government documents pertaining to Bob’s looking at porn on government computers. That’s right folks, now I have hacked into the Navy’s computers.

And I also stole his P.O.S.T. file as well.

Then, when I requested a lie detector test, Godley and friends said that I would be able to fake the test, thus causing a different result than not telling the truth!

Me, me of all people able to fake a lie detector test!!!!

And finally I hacked Bob’s facebook page!


Hey Bob, take your computer to the GBI and ask them to show were the hack to place! Then take me to court, as that would open up your entire computer to investigations. I wonder what would be found?

Now, this is the credit these people give to a stupid person, he is able to hack anyone’s computer in Camden County, not to mention the government. Able to steal classified information form the Navy and P.O.S.T.

And this same stupid person is able to fake a lie detector test!!!!

Now really Bob who looks stupid?

And page two of Bob’s friends list.

Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Did City Officials Pass Information To Bob?

Last week I emailed the St. Marys City Council, The Chief Of Police, and The Mayor. I informed them of the fact that Bob Godley had some interesting friends on his face book page.

Well low and behold just a day later Bob hides his friends from public view. Amazing isn't it.


While I was in jail Bob started a thread on Topix remember about me and my wife going to jail, remember?

Once I was bailed out, I immediately insisted on an internal investigation into the St. Marys PD on my arrest and Bob's involvement. As soon as I pointed out Bob's post to the SMPD all Bob's posts were removed.


Godley For Sheriff 2012

A lot of talk is going on about Bob running for Sheriff.

Who would vote for him?


Perhaps a BAD APPLE or two.



They won't even defend him in public using their real names.

Well wait just a few more days and his FRIENDS LIST from Facebook will be posted.

See those who don't want you to know they



Georgia Transparency Headlines

The Parents Have Declared War

The Parents Have Declared War

Get On The Open Government Band Wagon

"Honorable and righteous men do not fear the exercise of liberty."

Important Information

U.S. Attorney's Office in Savannah, Georgia.

Mr. James D. DurhamAssistant U. S. Attorney
100 Bull Street Suite 201
Savannah, Georgia 31401
912 652 4422

Office of the Attorney General Of Georgia
Attorney General, Thurbert Baker
Office of the Attorney General
40 Capitol Square,
SWAtlanta, Ga 30334
(404) 656-3300

Open Records Violations
Stephan Ritter

Report Bad Cops
Police Complaint Center
We put ourselves on the line in pursuit of equal justice

State Board of Pardons and Paroles
2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive,
SE Suite 458, Balcony Level, East Tower
Atlanta, Georgia 30334-4909
Telephone: (404) 657-9350

Office of the Governor,
Georgia State Capitol,
Atlanta, GA 30334
Office Phone: 404-656-1776

Please Call Judge Williams

Tell her to throw out the plea deal in the Perry case,

And grant him a new fair trial.


From the Blog:

Anonymous said...
I just spoke with a lady that had called Judge Williams number to ask for Dennis Perry's plea be thrown out and to grant him a new trial. Guess what? As soon as Dennis' name was mentioned, the secretary or whoever she was got very cold and told the lady she would have to send the judge a fax or write her a letter. AND THEN SHE WOULDN'T GIVE HER THE FAX NUMBER!! She was told she would have to write a letter..which the lady has done. Does that tell you there is something wrong with this case? You people in Camden County better wake up and smell the roses before you find yourself in the same position that Dennis is in. He isn't asking to be released. Just for a FAIR trial!!

Search The Real School Police