Total Pageviews

Friday, June 16, 2017

Oh! The tangled webs Ana weaves

Blogger Comments:

Reading the Decatur Daily article today it appears that Yet Again, Sheriff Ana Franklin cannot keep her mouth shut.

My! My! My! Ana got the money from an investor in the Title Mart to pay back the inmate food funds.  Really, Ana, you got the money from a Title Mart investor?  Since Ana's cousin Greg was part owner of the Title Marts, would that investor be ex-boyfriend Steven Ziaja? We have posted this for weeks.  Tell us something we don't know.  Not only can Ana not keep her mouth shut but neither can the others involved in this debacle.  Now that Ana paid the $150,000.00 back to the inmate food funds she removed from her "retirement" or one of the other lies she told, what happened to the $10,000.00 that Ana also removed from the inmate food funds on the same day she wrote the counter check for the 150K?  Was that a gift for Ana as a bonus, or was it used to pay her "Billable Attorney"?  

We the citizens are paying for all of the mess that Sheriff Ana Franklin has gotten herself into.  We are paying for Barney Lovelace to get Franklin out of the messes that are all self-inflicted wounds.  Those wounds do not just affect Franklin, they affect me, you, the employees of the sheriff's office, the county employees, the county commission, and how the sheriff's office interacts with outside agencies.  The outside sheriffs' offices must think Ana is as stupid as a keystone cop.  A certified nut that can't conduct her own business within the county.  

Why would a sheriff claim that outside investigators are investigating the whistleblowers and that outside prosecutors will be prosecuting the whistleblowers?  Why would you do that? Because Ana Franklin is a habitual liar.  Franklin will continue telling lies until we vote her out of office.  Why should we the citizens continue to pay the cost of doing business with a sheriff who is a liar, thief, has not performed her duties with honesty, integrity, loyalty, and morally?  Why are we paying an attorney who once bragged that he was getting rich off of this sheriff in an open hallway during a deposition for his client?   One of many that the sheriff has been the subject of.

The last paragraph of the article is as follows:  "Franklin said Thursday one of the investors in the business had repaid her the $150,000 she had tied up in bankruptcy and that she had relinquished her claim in the bankruptcy to the investor."

Judge approves jail food settlement

  • By Evan Belanger Staff Writer
A federal judge found Morgan County Sheriff Ana Franklin in contempt of court Thursday, fining her $1,000 for violating a federal court order while simultaneously striking the provision of the 2009 order he said she violated.
The ruling effectively approved a settlement deal proposed by opposing attorneys in the months-long legal dispute over Franklin’s withdrawal of $160,000 from an inmate food account.
In his order, District Judge Abdul Kallon wrote that Franklin should be held in civil contempt and imposed a “nominal monetary sanction.”
He did not impose a coercive sanction, such as jail time, because Franklin had already returned the money by the time the motion for contempt was filed.
In keeping with a proposed order, filed Tuesday by attorneys for Franklin and the Southern Center for Human Rights, which represented inmates at the jail, Kallon granted Franklin’s motion to strike language from the 2009 court order that specifically bars the sheriff from using inmate food money provided by the state for anything other than feeding inmates.
A 1939 state law allows most Alabama sheriffs to personally keep leftover food money.
The court order barring that activity in Morgan County was established after Franklin’s predecessor, Greg Bartlett, was held in contempt and jailed overnight in 2009 for failing to provide adequate nutrition while legally pocketing about $212,000 from the food fund over a three-year period.
Franklin said Thursday she was pleased the Southern Center and the court had acknowledged there were no current or ongoing violations at the jail.
"Whether I have a consent decree or I didn't have a consent decree, we would treat people in the right way," she said. "That's what my goal was from the time I became sheriff, and I'm very pleased that I'm in acknowledgement of from the court and the Southern Center that is exactly what we've done."
Franklin said she did not knowingly violate the provision and had always been advised that only an earlier 2001 court order applied to her. That order, which also has to do with the appropriate treatment of inmates, makes no such declaration about the use of food money.
Franklin emphasized the earlier order had never been violated. She said she had never personally touched the food money aside from her attempt to recoup some of it through an investment.
Asked if she would ever use the money as Bartlett had, she said, "I will manage the inmate food account as required by the Alabama statute and continue to do what I feel like I need to do to try and maintain the adequate feeding of inmates."
For now, she said, there is no money to keep, saying she put $26,600 of her own money into the food fund to cover shortfalls in 2015 and 2016 and that she had thus far lost $38,0000 in 2017.
Franklin said she agreed to the settlement that admitted she was in contempt out of respect for the the authority of the court.
"I do respect the authority of the court, and I understand that, inadvertently, we may have missed a step in there somewhere administratively," she said.
Sarah Geraghty, attorney for the Southern Center, which represented inmates in the dispute, said Wednesday that they conceded Franklin's motion to strike the language from the court order, because the legal standard to prove the provision should remain in place was “exceedingly high.”
The plaintiffs would have had to prove that Franklin or other jail officials were aware of jail conditions that posed a significant risk to inmates, that they deliberately ignored it, and that the violation was current and ongoing, she said.
Other provisions of the court order remain intact.
“We will continue to monitor the conditions of the jail, and we will be monitoring them even more closely in light of the termination of the provision in question,” Geraghty said after the ruling Thursday.
Franklin declined to say whether she would move to strike other portions of the consent decree in the future.
According to the Southern Center’s motion to hold Franklin in contempt, Franklin removed $160,000 from the jail’s food account via two cashier’s checks on June 5, 2015, and refused to provide documentation for what she had done with the money.
Franklin said she invested the money in a used-car dealership as a short-term loan to recoup $21,000 she lost from the jail food account when expenses exceeded revenue.
The dealership declared bankruptcy last year. Court records show Franklin has returned the money to the jail account.
Franklin said Thursday one of the investors in the business had repaid her the $150,000 she had tied up in bankruptcy and that she had relinquished her claim in the bankruptcy to the investor.

No comments:

Post a Comment