The long awaited "update" on the persecution of
Billy Phillips, former Chief-of-Police in Gallaway, Tennessee, is presented
here in this article written by Dennis D. Cantrel, a SgtMaj in the U.S. Marine
Corps. Cantrel knows Phillips to be an
honest man who is not afraid to speak out against injustice. Even though Americans have been subjected to
a multiple of presidential administrations that support the General and
Complete Disarmament Law (Public Law 87-297), Phillips has not hesitated to
speak out against the disarmament law and lend his support to the people under
the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
Phillips' belief is that Americans have an inherent right to keep and
bear arms.
When I first made his acquaintance, Phillips told me that
'it means trouble' for a Chief-of-Police to speak out against federal intention
to prohibit all citizens from owning firearms.
He has also rightly criticized the changes that were made in the law
enforcement system of the states by the federal group known as the "Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration" (LEAA). Phillips has affirmed that
control of law enforcement is a power, which rightfully belongs to each state,
rather than under federal seizure, where it is now.
These
views have made Phillips a target so that no other police officer or department
will publicly dare to assert similar beliefs.
It has been reported that they are using the district attorney's office
as a weapon to bring down individual members of law enforcement that will not
submit to their agenda. It leaves me
wondering if this case has a connection to one of the five methods advocated in
the Houlihan Plan for collapsing our Constitutional government. Pages from the Houlihan Plan ("The
Politics Of Change in Local Government Reform") and a commentary,
which precedes it, can be found on this Website.
April 8th, 2008
As one begins to read into this Letter to
the Editor/News Release, one might be inclined to initially conclude that the
word “PERSECUTION” is mistakenly misused in place of the word “PROSECUTION” in
the title above. Such is not the case, the substitution is not a mistake as far
as the author is concerned. As for the readers, after reading and considering
all of the content, I suspect that a great number of readers will agree with
the choice to use the term “PERSECUTION.” Additionally, readers who, in the
future, find themselves selected to be on a Grand Jury or a Jury within the
jurisdiction of District Attorney General D. Michael Dunavant may very
appropriately find themselves much more guarded and cautious of any testimony offered
by General Dunavant, any of his Staff, or any other person potentially falling
under the coercive scope of his authority. I am just a dumb old retired Marine
Infantry Grunt with no particular expertise in the legal profession. Therefore,
in order to avoid any misunderstanding by the reader, I am compelled by reason
to define the two above terms as I have applied them herein.
My common, average guy, understanding of
the purposes and functions of prosecutors and investigators is that they, upon
having probable cause to do so, investigate to establish that a crime has been
committed. If they determine that a crime has been committed, they then proceed
to conduct a thorough, professional, impartial, ethical investigation aimed at
discovering all of the facts that can be uncovered regarding the crime. This
includes not only discovering all of the incriminating evidence that can be
discovered in support of some preconceived theory of the crime, but it also
includes discovering all of the exculpatory evidence as well. When such an
investigation establishes that there is probable cause to believe that a
particular person or particular persons committed the crime, and that the
weight of the evidence is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,
then they then proceed to charge such person(s) with the crime. They then
proceed, within the limits of the law, to aggressively seek to convict the
alleged offender(s) in a proper court of law—this fair and unbiased pursuit of
the truth then leads to a just conclusion that I call a “PROSECUTION.”
On the other hand, any process or
investigation or attempt in or out of a proper court of law by prosecutors
and/or investigators to simply single out a person to charge with a crime and
then focus their efforts on discovering only incriminating evidence against the
person singled out, while deliberately avoiding the discovery and/or disclosure
of exculpatory evidence, I call a “PERSECUTION.” Some signs [tells] of such a
persecution are uncharacteristic and/or unprofessional actions [exceeding a frequency beyond
“very rare”] such as avoiding any attempts to corroborate the
testimony of witnesses, and/or a failure to properly locate and secure physical
evidence, and/or avoiding the discovery of documents which might prove [or
disprove] guilt and/or any other actions whatsoever that tend to obscure the
truth regarding the actual guilt of the accused.
The “tells” of what I, above, call
“persecution” are not at all rare in the below related cases against Billy
Phillips although they should be. On the contrary, they are everywhere and
there are far too many to simply dismiss them as mere oversight or even
unintentional negligence.
The
Stolen Engines
General Dunavant first indicted Mr. Billy
Phillips for felony theft of two high performance Chevrolet crate engines and
for Official Misconduct. Simply put, General Dunavant alleges that these two
engines were gifts from a Chevrolet dealership to the City of Gallaway and that
Billy Phillips acting under the authority of his office as Chief of Police
diverted receipt of the engines to himself for his own personal gain. The trial
ended in a hung jury. Why?
The case was absurd on its face. Neither
the City of Gallaway nor the Chevrolet Dealership filed a complaint alleging
any unlawful conduct by Mr. Phillips. General Dunavant initiated the
investigation without such a complaint based on false and misleading
information provided by persons who had no standing to file a complaint of
their own. Gallaway City Officials have no recollection of the city having ever
sought ownership of such engines and no correspondence or other documents from
the dealership to indicate that they ever sought or received such engines, nor
would they have had a need for such engines. Additionally, the dealership could
not produce any correspondence, receipts or other documents of their own or
from the City of Gallaway that offered proof that such a transaction between
them and the City of Gallaway ever occurred.
Take note of this “tell,” this absence of
any official documents from either the City of Gallaway or the Chevrolet
Dealership that would prove General Dunavant’s charges. If the charges were
true, there should have been numerous documents to support those charges. This
same kind of odd lack of supporting documents in the prosecution’s endless
persecution of Billy Phillips will occur frequently throughout this narrative.
Billy Phillips, then Chief of Police,
sought and acquired the engines as a private citizen acting in support of a
Gallaway youth group and in support of other community projects. One engine was
placed in a dragster that was built at Arlington Automotive in connection with
a local youth group. It was still there at the time of the trial. Chief
Phillips sold the other engine to
another person and the proceeds were donated to a construction project in
Gallaway intended to benefit the public. Mr. Phillips did not profit or
otherwise personally benefit from either of the engines nor did he ever intend
to profit from them. The dealership didn’t want the engines back, nor did they
seek reimbursement for them, and the City of Gallaway makes no claim on the
engines—they never asked for the engines.
The remainder of General Dunavant’s case
is based on a telephone
interview between a Special Agent Jack Van Hooser and Mr. Bennie Green,
the purchaser of the above mentioned other engine. According to Agent Van
Hooser’s telephone interview,
“…Green
met with Phillips and took him a check for $5500.00, but Phillips would not
accept the check, only cash. Green returned with cash and paid for the motor.
Green thought it was unusual that Phillips would not take a check because they
were friends, and Green had done a lot of work for Phillips and the City of
Gallaway as a volunteer. Phillips and Green went to the home of a friend of
Phillips where the motor was stored and picked the motor up…”
There were and are two problems with this
part of General Dunavant’s case. First of all [as will quickly become
apparent], any competent investigator and even most incompetent investigators
know that witnesses can sometimes be unreliable without even intending to be
so. Consequently, whenever possible, it is standard practice for investigators
to try to corroborate their witnesses statements. It would have been very easy
for Agent Van Hooser to check on Mr. Green’s statement by checking Mr. Green’s
bank records, but he, allegedly, did not do so [another tell?].
Perhaps Agent Van Hooser deliberately
neglected to corroborate Mr. Green’s telling of events. After all, Mr.
Phillips’ alleged refusal to accept a check and his alleged insistence on cash
both imply a guilty act—implies that he was seeking to avoid a paper trail of
his crime.
Fortunately, Mr. Phillips managed to
discover a copy of the supposedly
non-existent check that Mr. Green used to pay him for the engine—the
check that Agent van Hooser should have discovered in his [?unbiased, thorough,
professional?] investigation. The check is from Mr. Green’s bank account and is
made out to Billy Phillips for the amount of $5700.00. The memo note on it
indicates that it was for the purchase of a crate engine. Consequently, Mr.
Green was not only mistaken about how he paid for the engine, but he also had
to “imagine” an entire round trip back to the bank to get the cash and then
back to Mr. Phillips to pay him the cash. Unless Mr. Green was benefiting
greatly from a recent ingestion of some powerful hallucinogen at the time of
Agent Van Hooser’s “investigative telephone interview,” I find it impossible to
believe that Mr. Green imaged such a round trip. Yet, at the same time, I find
it impossible to believe that Mr. Green would have invented such a false
statement on his own, for doing so, would only put him in potential jeopardy of
perjury. The only way that it makes sense for Mr. Green to make such a false
statement would be if he were “encouraged” to do so under duress. [Tell?]
The trial ended in a mistrial due to a
hung jury. General Dunavant’s office
will retry Billy Phillips on the alleged theft of the crate engines again on
April 23rd, 2008.
The
False Indictments
Just days prior to Billy Phillips’ trial
for the alleged theft of the above noted crate engines, General Dunavant’s
office successfully sought four additional indictments against Mr. Phillips
involving firearms and a radar gun and they then expeditiously informed the press of those
indictments. Coincidentally, the TBI
Agent, Special Agent David Harmon, who presented the charges to the Grand Jury,
proceeded almost immediately after the Grand Jury hearing to the Gallaway
Police Department to “investigate” the charges for which he had just
obtained indictments! Coincidentally,
Chief Collins, upon predictably checking readily available records and
documents that had been available throughout General Dunavant’s investigation,
informed the Agent that he had just committed perjury before the Grand Jury.
Chief Collins provided the agent with documents proving that the firearms
related charges against Mr. Phillips were false and the agent was appropriately
shocked and dismayed. General Dunavant or a member of his staff dutifully went
before the appropriate judge and had the charges dismissed. Coincidently, General Dunavant did not expeditiously
inform the press of his errors or of the dismissed charges. Coincidentally, General Dunavant
managed to get the press to report false damaging indictments about illegal
handling of firearms before Mr. Phillips’ trial began. [Another Tell?]
Usually investigators first investigate,
confirm, and secure their
evidence, before they seek
indictments rather than the other way around. Although General Dunavant and his
investigators did eventually take possession of and establish a chain of
custody on the above mentioned radar gun, they conveniently did not bother to confirm and secure the firearms or any of the other evidence prior to
seeking their indictments.
Allegedly, the firearms related false
indictments were based on a Report of an Investigative Audit of the City of
Gallaway. The Investigative Audit Report is, generally, not actual evidence by
itself. It is simply a report of evidence discovered. The actual evidence lies
within the documents upon which the report is based. All of the documents
available at the time of the audit were made available to the auditors
including the documents that Chief Collins showed to the TBI agent to prove
that the firearms indictments were false. The source documents, on the firearms
in question, identifying from whom the Gallaway Police Department acquired the
firearms proves that the alleged crimes did not even occur. These documents
were provided for the auditors to review and copies were provided of all
documents requested by them. In the unlikely event that the auditors failed to
provide copies of the actual evidence to General Dunavant, that is simply no
excuse for obtaining false indictments against a person and reporting those
indictments to the public—especially a person about to be tried on other
charges. The source documents have been readily available to General Dunavant
and his investigators throughout the many months prior to and following the
audit, as well as after the Audit Report was released. General Dunavant knew that the check discovered by Mr. Phillips, that wasn’t supposed to exist, had destroyed the credibility of the
engine buyer as a witness in a case that was within days of going to trial.
The coincidences
noted above are deliberate coincidences
and the errors made by General Dunavant and his Staff were deliberately
orchestrated errors designed to try to publicly damage Mr. Phillips just prior
to trial on the weak engine theft charges. The coincidental failure of General Dunavant to promptly inform the
press of the error serves only to substantiate this conclusion. It was easy for
them to predict that, if someone coincidentally
showed up promptly at the Gallaway Police Department after the Grand Jury, they
would coincidentally discover their
error and coincidentally have to get
the charges dismissed—but, of course, it would coincidentally, conveniently, and unfortunately be too late to stop
the press.
Investigating and validating the charges
after obtaining the Grand Jury Indictments instead of before seeking such
indictments? I suppose the Three Stooges might do things in that order. The
only reason, in this case, for such a strange, aberrant reverse process of
obtaining the indictment first and investigating second is self-evident. Had
Agent Harmon sought the so-called evidence against Mr. Phillips regarding the
firearms related charges prior to obtaining the indictments, he would have been
made aware in advance that the firearms charges were false. Consequently, it
would have been impossible to deliberately seek false, damaging indictments
against Mr. Phillips prior to the already pending trial and then explain them away
after the damage to Mr. Phillips had already been accomplished.
The
Indictments Regarding the Theft of a Radar Gun
As mentioned above, along with the false
indictments, Mr. Phillips was also indicted on charges involving the alleged
theft of a Radar Gun. It was alleged that Piperton Mayor Chambers, City
Commissioner Scott Thomas, and Piperton Chief of Police Carl Hendricks
presented a radar gun to Gallaway Chief of Police Billy Phillips as a gift to
the City of Gallaway in appreciation for Gallaway’s assistance and support in
helping Piperton establish a Police Department. It was also alleged that this
radar gun was purchased with a personal credit card by Commissioner Scott
Thomas. It was further alleged that Chief Phillips falsely claimed that the gift
had been presented to him in appreciation for his efforts to assist Piperton
and that he, consequently, profited illegally by selling the radar gun. This
gift was presented to Chief Phillips in private, behind the closed doors of
Chief Phillips’ office. No other Gallaway Officials were present, nor did
Piperton notify them that such a gift was to be presented.
An auditor reported that it seemed to him
that the gift of a radar gun would be more appropriate as a gift to a City as
opposed to a gift to a Chief of Police. Frankly, considering the circumstances,
my opinion is the exact opposite of the auditor’s. The gift was presented
privately behind closed doors in the Police Department to Chief Phillips
without the prior knowledge of any other Gallaway Officials and without the
prior public approval of the Piperton City Commission. If the gift had actually
been intended as a gift of appreciation from the City of Piperton to the City
of Gallaway, the errant involved Piperton Officials would have obtained proper
prior approval to present the gift on behalf of Piperton and they would have
presented it publicly at an appropriate Gallaway public meeting and/or public
award ceremony. Additionally, they would have found a gift or an award more
appropriate to present to a city. Although the gift of a hand held radar gun to
a police officer or police department seems reasonably appropriate, as a gift
to a city, it would seem to be a really dumb choice.
At the same time that the above gift was
presented to Chief Phillips, Piperton Mayor Chambers and Commissioner Scott
Thomas, without the proper prior approval of the Piperton City Commission,
decided to try to modify a contract established between and approved by both
the Piperton and Gallaway City Commissions. Upon informing Chief Phillips of
their decision, Chief Phillips informed them that neither he nor they had the
authority to modify such an agreement without the prior approval of their
respective City Commissions. Thereafter the relationship between the Gallaway Police
Department and the City of Piperton rapidly disintegrated.
Once again there was a conspicuous
absence of documentation to prove the charges. The prosecutors offered no
documentation whatsoever as evidence in support of their charges because,
although there were documents available, they disproved the claim that the
radar gun was purchased by Commissioner Scott Thomas. It appears that it was
important to the prosecution to present their case in a manner that indicated
that Commissioner Scott Thomas had purchased the radar gun as a private
citizen. It seems that the prosecution wanted to avoid disclosing some possible
Sunshine Law violations and misconduct problems regarding their witnesses. The
decision to give the radar gun to the City of Gallaway was not made at a public
Piperton City Commissioners meeting nor was it approved at such a meeting. Had
Commissioner Scott Thomas actually purchased the radar gun as a private citizen
then that fact would probably have adequately mitigated the Sunshine Law violations
and other possible misconduct credibility problems that existed with the
prosecution’s witnesses.
It is completely impossible to believe
that General Dunavant and his staff did not seek any proof of purchase and/or
proof of ownership documents and/or check the credit card records of
Commissioner Scott Thomas regarding the purchase of the radar gun prior to
seeking an indictment. The very idea that they would somehow inadvertently
overlook the very obvious course of action to seek supporting documentation to
help prove their case is absolutely absurd. Proof of ownership is crucial in
establishing whether or not a theft has even been committed. It is obvious from
the documents provided with this letter that, not only did Commissioner Scott
Thomas not purchase the radar gun as was alleged, but that falsifying pen
changes were made to COMMSERV invoice
#149869 in an effort to create the false appearance that Commissioner
Thomas had made the purchase. It is very clear from Piperton Police Department
check number 1103 that Commissioner Scott Thomas did not pay for the radar gun.
The check pays $699.00 to COMMSERV and in the lower left corner it refers to invoice #149869 which is the
invoice for the purchase of the radar gun allegedly stolen by Billy Phillips.
These above mentioned documents were obtained by the defense from Piperton City
Hall just before trial because they were noticeably absent from the discovery
provided by the prosecution. The prosecution had to know of these documents and
they deliberately withheld them from the defense. The prosecution also
certainly knew that Commissioner Scott Thomas did not purchase the radar gun.
Nevertheless, the prosecution allowed him to get on the stand and commit
perjury by testifying that he purchased the radar gun with his credit card.
Additionally, Mayor Chambers and Commissioner Scott Thomas also certainly had
to know about the above documents. Finally, can anyone actually believe that
Commissioner Scott Thomas did not know that he was committing perjury when he
testified that he paid for the radar gun? [way too many tells?]
Billy Phillips was acquitted
by a jury of all charges regarding
the radar gun.
In the aftermath of the trial, General
Dunavant and TBI continue to stupidly act as if they actually believe that the
radar gun belongs to the City of Gallaway. After the trial, Agent David Harmon
sent a letter to the City of Gallaway requesting that they retrieve their radar
gun within 30 days or the radar gun would be destroyed. Current Gallaway Police
Chief Christine Ashcraft, who was unfamiliar with any of the details
surrounding the radar gun, retrieved the radar gun from TBI. Consequently, for
the time being, it is not going to be destroyed. Nevertheless, until such time
as the Piperton City Commission properly and legally approves and documents the
transfer of ownership of the radar gun from the City of Piperton to the City of
Gallaway, the radar gun remains the indisputable property of the citizens of
Piperton. Furthermore it is wrongful and unlawful for General Dunavant and
Special Agent Harmon to deprive the citizens of Piperton of their lawfully
obtained property by “awarding” that property to the City of Gallaway.
There have been far too many slip-ups,
too many unprofessional breaches of established investigative procedures, and
too many negligent lapses in due diligence focused on one defendant [Billy
Phillips] by General Dunavant, his staff, and TBI to simply conclude that they
were just honest mistakes and/or human error. For some insane reason General
Dunavant is determined to abuse the power of his office for as long as it takes
to destroy Billy Phillips. Left unchecked, I think that General Dunavant will
continue to concoct charges against Billy Phillips, such as those noted herein,
until he either convicts Billy Phillips or bankrupts him.
In addition to all of the above, which I
would briefly describe as gross prosecutorial misconduct and malicious
prosecution, General Dunavant has, during the same timeframe as covered above,
not only tried to further damage Billy Phillips by lying to the media about
Billy Phillips having multiple prior felony convictions, he has also
communicated that same lie to the Mayor of Gallaway. Additionally, in a letter
to the Board of Professional Responsibility dated October 15th,
2007, on paper with the letterhead of his elected office, General Dunavant
stated that the Police Officer Standards and Training Commission [POST
Commission] informed him that Billy Phillips “…had prior disqualifying felony
convictions…” General Dunavant is fully capable of checking the criminal
history of Billy Phillips and is, therefore, fully aware that Billy Phillips
has never been convicted of a felony—or did he neglect to double check his
facts in this matter as well?
I was not at all surprised by the recent
storm of media stories about the filing of a motion accusing District Attorney
General Michael Dunavant of threatening to indict Selmer, TN Chief of Police
Burks for testifying at a bond hearing for indicted drag racer, Troy Critchley.
I had prior knowledge of similar conduct by General Dunavant. In the same
letter to the Board of Professional Responsibility noted in the above
paragraph, General Dunavant accused Jason Collins, the new Gallaway Chief of
Police, of misconduct before the court in Billy Phillips’ first trial on the
alleged theft of the crate engines. General Dunavant’s allegations were
completely lacking of any substance or specificity. He alleged that Chief
Collins sat directly behind Phillips and, that during breaks and at other times
Chief Collins was seen at defense counsel table with Phillips, and that Chief
Collins took further steps to assist and collaborate with the defense during
trial. He further stated that it was unbecoming of a Chief of Police to assist
those who violate the law. Apparently General Dunavant has deluded himself into
believing that it is he, rather than the courts and juries, who decide who has
actually violated the law.
If Generals Dunavant and Dycus really
believed that they had a legitimate concern about Chief Collins’ conduct before
the court, then they would have had a duty as officers of the court to bring
their legitimate concerns to the attention of the judge during the trial. They
obviously either neglected their duty to present their concerns to the judge
or, if they did, the judge apparently found no merit in their concerns. If the
judge had, I am absolutely certain that the judge would have, at the least, had
the bailiff remove Chief Collins from his court.
Additionally, General Dunavant stated
that it was disturbing to him that Chief Collins testified before the POST
Commission on behalf of and in defense of Phillips. Chief Collins’ testimony
before the POST Commission is a matter of record. He testified, primarily, to
the state of the Gallaway Police Personel Files that he had previously reviewed
at Chief Phillips request. Chief Collins testified truthfully before the POST
Commission and his testimony was unchallenged. He did not testify on behalf of
or in defense of Mr. Phillips nor did he do the opposite. He simply testified
truthfully, without regard for who it helped or hurt, which was his only
concern and his only duty before that committee.
Think about it! In his above
mentioned letter and in his recently reported treatment of Chief Burks in
Selmer, General Dunavant is, by his conduct and attitudes, implicitly and
coercively issuing an edict under the authority of his office that essentially
states that no police officer in his jurisdiction should testify truthfully on
behalf of or in defense of an accused fellow officer or any other defendant.
Apparently General Dunavant cannot trust any police officer who would be
disloyal to him by being loyal to the truth.
When a police officer or any
other citizen brought before the court, or any officer of the court including a
prosecutor or defense attorney, or before any other fact finding body that can
compel testimony under threat of perjury, then said police officer or other
citizen is bound to only one loyalty and that loyalty is to the truth. Any
statement, conduct, or action by General Dunavant in his official capacity that
might tend to impede, or to obstruction, or to discourage said loyalty to the
truth before the court can only be regarded as Official Misconduct or worse.
I have done my best to
provide as much supporting documentation as possible and to fairly and properly
interpret the same. My resources are very limited. Please be aware that the
content of this letter is intended only as an expression of my opinion and nothing
more. In Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem, “A Psalm of Life,” he writes “In
the world’s broad field of battle, in the bivouac of Life, be not like dumb
driven cattle! be a hero in the strife!” This was a plea from Longfellow to
humanity. He is essentially saying, don’t be a slave to popular opinion, and
don’t let the government, or society, or anyone, or anything else “tell” you
what to think. Instead, learn to think for yourself. I can do no better than he
in telling you not to believe what I have written simply because I have written
it and I believe it.
In spite of everything that I believe and that I have written herein, I, nevertheless, sincerely harbor a small hope that, at the end of a diligent search for the truth and the discovery of, as Paul Harvey would say, “the rest of the story;” and, after a thorough review of all of the evidence both inculpatory and exculpatory; the whole truth will, not only exonerate General Dunavant of any misconduct, but that it will also serve to both condone and applaud the actions and conduct of General Dunavant and his office. We don’t need a Nifong sort of episode here in our own back yard, but, at the same time, if we have one, we cannot simply turn away and ignore it.
Respectfully offered as fruit
for thought regarding various potential misconducts of District Attorney
General D. Michael Dunavant of the 25th Judicial District.
Dennis D. Cantrel
SgtMaj. USMC (retired)
(Watch for more
articles to come regarding the unfair treatment of Police Chief Billy Phillips)
