On this rainy day in Tunica, Presidents' Day, I've been reflecting on our recent elections and wondering if the Founding Fathers would have approved of what went on in Tunica County this past spring, summer and fall. I think they would have been appalled. I'm appalled and disgusted.
Let's review: As we all know, in the spring, 3 candidates who did not qualify but tried to gain access to our ballot. When they weren't successful, they went to court. Why would they do that and who was behind their actions?
Why were there so many people running? Most had not shown an interest in our government and quite frankly, haven't shown up for a Board of Supervisors' Meeting even until today. Did they really think they were qualified? Did they just want the money? Were they being encouraged by some other person?
I've written extensively about the Boykin candidacy. I'm waiting for Attorney General Jim Hood to do his job.
What I want to focus on tonight is what happened in our Circuit Court on 2 Feb 2016 with Judge Henry Lackey presiding. Please remember I was not in attendance but I have 4 sources who have all told me the same story. Some have asked me why I didn't attend on 2 Feb 2016. The answer: After Judge Lackey's diatribe from the bench on 22 Sep 2016, I have lost all faith in judges in MS. On 2 Feb 2016, I did not want to subject myself to what I consider outrageous behavior from a judge.
Apparently, from what I am being told, Judge Lackey did not behave any better on 2 Feb 2016, than he did on 22 Sep 2016. I think that on 2 Feb as on 22 Sep, Judge Lackey had his mind made up as to how he was going to rule. To the best of my knowledge, I don't think Judge Lackey ever looked at the evidence in the Boykin case. And yet he ruled. This is not what our Country is about but apparently this is how things go in Tunica County, MS.
From what I am being told, when Mildred Conley was on the stand, Judge Lackey stood up and leaned over her. If this is true, this is a form of intimidation.
From what I'm being told, when Mildred Conley asked the Judge if he was Judge Lackey, he said no.
I believe I have now gotten an answer as to why Craig Jones was not placed on the Primary Ballot. That is because his case was in litigation and that decision was not rendered until late Aug. The Primary was on 4 Aug which made it impossible to put Jones on the ballot.
Then comes the 26 Oct 2016, Judge Lackey Court Order invalidating the Primary Election.
This Court Order is File Stamped 2 Nov 2016, which is one day before the General Election.
There is no doubt that the File Stamped date one day before our General Election interrupted the voting in Beat 5. This order said there was going to be a Special Election. Hmmm, and now I am questioning if this Court Order was insurance that Billy Pegram would be the Supervisor from Beat 5.
Because the Governor did not set a date for this Special Election just adds more questions in my mind. Was the Court Order put in place to insure there would be a Special Election if McKinley Daley won and no Special Election if Billy Pegram won?
Isn't it strange that I got 11 votes and Daley lost by 11 votes? Maybe a coincidence; maybe not. This is a strange place when it comes to elections.
There is a final thought to this rambling post. And that is the Democratic Caucus last Saturday. I really expected some of our more vocal citizens to show up at Precinct 4...Tunica Library. It seems to me you want to do a lot of complaining about the DEC but I didn't see one of your big mouths stepping up to volunteer. Some of you have said some nasty things about Members of the DEC. You need to apologize. These people have been through one heck of a mess. Those who are guilty of creating this mess are the 3 candidates who attempted to get on our Ballot when they did not qualify. The DEC membership stood up against their unlawful behavior but you couldn't even volunteer to stand up for what is right.
Therefore: SHUT THE HECK UP.
PS:
1. See "Follow-up to Gov. Bryant Post" 2 Dec 2015.
2. If any of what I have stated is factually wrong, please don't hesitate to speak up.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Thursday, February 4, 2016
UPDATE: 14 FEB 2016: From the Tunica Times
Referring to the article "Circuit judge ends long ordeal over county board seat" reported by Meg Coker; 5 Feb 2016 issue.
Page 8: "...according to Circuit Clerk records, no payments have been made towards the$15,000 in sanctions placed on the DEC in October". (Actually, it was September.)
This is not true. $6,000 was taken from one member's account, monies have been taken from member's paychecks and individual members have taken money to the Circuit Clerk.
Who is responsible for this false statement? The Tunica Times or the Circuit Clerk?
UPDATE: 5 FEB 2016: 8p
I asked for a copy and this is what I received. This letter is from Sharon Granberry Reynolds. It is on her stationary and contains her signature at the bottom.
In case you can't read the picture on whatever devise you are using, this is what the letter says:
"January 22, 2016
Dear Judge Lackey,
I have received information that Mrs. Jacqueline Dishmon-Boykin has been paid in full on the Cause No. 2015-0027. The Democratic Executive Committee is now asking to be released from all garnishments.
Sincerely,
Sharon G. Reynolds"
I have other information but let's just let this sink in awhile.
UPDATE: 11 FEB 2016
Now, let's look at the whole paragraph. I am going to number the sentences for comments.
"Littleton asked if Conley's sanctions would be in addition to the previous sanctions placed on the DEC. (1) Lackey asked if it had been paid. (2) Conley said it had. (3) But according to Circuit Clerk records, no payments have been made towards the $15,000 in sanctions placed on the DEC in October. (4) Lackey said this was another contempt."
1. Since I was not in attendance, I asked 4 individuals who were there if Sharon Reynolds was there. The response was yes. I then asked what did she say when Lackey asked if the sanctions had been paid. Each and every one of the 4 individuals said Reynolds said yes, they have been paid in full.
2. See the above letter to Judge Lackey from Sharon Reynolds.
3. Actually, this was on 22 September 2015. This is a total falsehood by the reporter as the letter states, as Reynolds stated in Court, as Conley said in Court and as I have stated previously on this blog.
4. Did Lackey really say this after Reynolds stated yes they have been paid in full?
I am so tired of spending my time trying to give the readers the truth. I have quilting and knitting and cooking to do. Why are we having to put up with the spreading of these lies? And what is the purpose of not telling the truth?
UPDATE: 14 FEB 2016:
So, this is an email I received from the reporter of the article I am discussing in this post.
Feb 11 at 10:19 PM
Page 8: "...according to Circuit Clerk records, no payments have been made towards the$15,000 in sanctions placed on the DEC in October". (Actually, it was September.)
This is not true. $6,000 was taken from one member's account, monies have been taken from member's paychecks and individual members have taken money to the Circuit Clerk.
Who is responsible for this false statement? The Tunica Times or the Circuit Clerk?
UPDATE: 5 FEB 2016: 8p
I asked for a copy and this is what I received. This letter is from Sharon Granberry Reynolds. It is on her stationary and contains her signature at the bottom.
In case you can't read the picture on whatever devise you are using, this is what the letter says:
"January 22, 2016
Dear Judge Lackey,
I have received information that Mrs. Jacqueline Dishmon-Boykin has been paid in full on the Cause No. 2015-0027. The Democratic Executive Committee is now asking to be released from all garnishments.
Sincerely,
Sharon G. Reynolds"
I have other information but let's just let this sink in awhile.
UPDATE: 11 FEB 2016
Now, let's look at the whole paragraph. I am going to number the sentences for comments.
"Littleton asked if Conley's sanctions would be in addition to the previous sanctions placed on the DEC. (1) Lackey asked if it had been paid. (2) Conley said it had. (3) But according to Circuit Clerk records, no payments have been made towards the $15,000 in sanctions placed on the DEC in October. (4) Lackey said this was another contempt."
1. Since I was not in attendance, I asked 4 individuals who were there if Sharon Reynolds was there. The response was yes. I then asked what did she say when Lackey asked if the sanctions had been paid. Each and every one of the 4 individuals said Reynolds said yes, they have been paid in full.
2. See the above letter to Judge Lackey from Sharon Reynolds.
4. Did Lackey really say this after Reynolds stated yes they have been paid in full?
I am so tired of spending my time trying to give the readers the truth. I have quilting and knitting and cooking to do. Why are we having to put up with the spreading of these lies? And what is the purpose of not telling the truth?
UPDATE: 14 FEB 2016:
So, this is an email I received from the reporter of the article I am discussing in this post.
I've heard that you are inquiring about the information provided in my Feb. 5 article on Judge Lackey's decision. In the future, should you have a question, please ask me directly. I do not read your blog.
These are the judgement rolls in the Tunica County Circuit Clerk's office and these photos were taken on Wednesday, Feb 3.
If the debt has been satisfied, it was not recorded here.
Thanks so much,
Meg Coker
Here is my answer. No, I will not ask you directly. You are a reporter and you need to get your facts straight before going to print. Since you say you don't read this blog, could you tell me who has been copying various posts?
In the future, if you see something on this blog that you would like to comment on, do so and I promise to publish your comment(s) as long as you use your own name and don't us bad language.
Now, along with this email, the reporter included a picture of the Judgement Book page that showed the entry of the Judgement against the DEC for Jacqueline Dishmon-Boykin. The date entered in the Judgement Book is 9 Oct 2015. However, this reporter was in the Courtroom on 22 Sep 2015 when Judge Lackey sanctioned the DEC for not putting Boykin on the ballot. The reporter was sitting in the same row as I was sitting, at the end and next to Mark Hudson. So, she knows that what Judge Lackey stated was not true. She and every last one of us knows that Boykin was on the Primary Ballot of 4 Aug 2015 and she won that election. And yet the sanctions.
Further, it has been reported to me by 4 individuals that this reporter was in the room when Judge Lackey asked if the DEC sanctions had been paid. I am told that the Circuit Clerk responded yes, they have been paid in full.
What good is it to take a picture of the Judgement Book? None. This reporter had already heard the Circuit Clerk's response to the question because she was there. What doesn't she understand about "paid-in-full"? Why did she write the article as she did? Who knows.
These are the judgement rolls in the Tunica County Circuit Clerk's office and these photos were taken on Wednesday, Feb 3.
If the debt has been satisfied, it was not recorded here.
Thanks so much,
Meg Coker
Here is my answer. No, I will not ask you directly. You are a reporter and you need to get your facts straight before going to print. Since you say you don't read this blog, could you tell me who has been copying various posts?
In the future, if you see something on this blog that you would like to comment on, do so and I promise to publish your comment(s) as long as you use your own name and don't us bad language.
Now, along with this email, the reporter included a picture of the Judgement Book page that showed the entry of the Judgement against the DEC for Jacqueline Dishmon-Boykin. The date entered in the Judgement Book is 9 Oct 2015. However, this reporter was in the Courtroom on 22 Sep 2015 when Judge Lackey sanctioned the DEC for not putting Boykin on the ballot. The reporter was sitting in the same row as I was sitting, at the end and next to Mark Hudson. So, she knows that what Judge Lackey stated was not true. She and every last one of us knows that Boykin was on the Primary Ballot of 4 Aug 2015 and she won that election. And yet the sanctions.
Further, it has been reported to me by 4 individuals that this reporter was in the room when Judge Lackey asked if the DEC sanctions had been paid. I am told that the Circuit Clerk responded yes, they have been paid in full.
What good is it to take a picture of the Judgement Book? None. This reporter had already heard the Circuit Clerk's response to the question because she was there. What doesn't she understand about "paid-in-full"? Why did she write the article as she did? Who knows.
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
About last night...
At the Board of Supervisors' Meeting last night, the Sheriff's Department was again in attendance with their camera. This time, the camera was trained on the Board. The Officer doing the filming was wearing a shirt that read "INVESTIGATIONS".
Right before the meeting, I spoke with James Dunn about this. Isn't this harassment or at the very least a misappropriation of the public's money?
Right before the meeting, I spoke with James Dunn about this. Isn't this harassment or at the very least a misappropriation of the public's money?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)