Corrupt Cop wants back in...

[The Watcher]

summary

Maybe Pete's focus in this thread was the local newspaper, and it's lack (in Panama Pete's view, I don't have enough information to have an opinion on that subject) of coverage of the issue. The media issue seems pertinent to the SoWal community, imho.

You seem to have hit the mark. But, in addition, here is a quick summary for you.

A few years ago, then City Marshal, Ray Burgess, got caught in an act of dishonesty, unethical behavior. A brave whistle blower (admin.) and wife of a WCSO Supervisor, brought forward charges that Burgess was operating in an unethical manner. (It should be noted that it is common knowledge that prior to this current DFS Leadership, the DFS PD was quite the laughing stock of law enforcement. Remember, the child molester caught on MSMBC "to catch a predator". He had worked there along with other "questionable" officers. As I understand, they are gone now.)

Anyway, Burgess was investigated and removed from office by the Governor, Charlie Crist. An FDLE Agent was also relieved of his duties with the State over the activity (altering a State Document). Most people know of the altering situation, but they do not know about the other incident investigated and ruled on by the Ethics Commission. That is what is of interest. Burgess was also found to have had an employee (unk) falsify overtime sheets, thus, getting false overtime checks (this is theft of public funds people). The money was then pocketed by Burgess. I think this is the point the papers have failed to report. They did print articles years ago, but now, here is the election and citizens have a right to be informed. I do not know why the paper chooses not to run a story, maybe they will. THEY (HERALD) CHOSE TO RUN A NEGATIVE AD AGAINST TOM COOPER IN THE SHERIFFS ELECTION. THAT STORY WAS NOTHING COMPARED TO BURGESS'...;-)

What is interesting is that these Ethics Violations, Burgess' arrest and subsquent plea deal are factual and public record. Not rumor like the various DUI's bought off with several thousand dollars, arrest warrants that vanished, shady handling of evidence (weapons, drugs) and the various other horror stories that come out of the previous Burgess Tenure.

The other interesting fact is that Burgess no longer has his Florida State Law Enforcement Certification, required by law to be a law enforcement officer. How can he be the Chief of Police? I have heard that his is "a nice guy", so maybe he is qualified.

w

 

[The Watcher]

Correction

I must correct myself. In my last post, I cited that the Herald reported negatively on T. Cooper in the last Sheriff's Election, that was misinformation, it was the SUN, another local paper, that ran the ariticle, which also has yet to report the FACTS on this Burgess Character.

My appology to the Herald. I am hoping they will cover this story indepth.

w

 

[The A-list]

Ray made an error in judgement, but I wouldn't call him corupt. He made a mistake, he admitted it, and now he wants another chance. I see nothing wrong with him running again.

He was a very popular Chief, and I suspect he probably will be again.;-)

He just didn't make an error. Fraud is fraud.

 

[WCcitizens]

Who cares

Does anyone care that a criminal is running for the Chief of Police in DFS? Do you? We just got rid of a terrible sheriff last year. Morris is arrested on federal charges and you all want to banter about where a proper forum is to discuss Ray Burgess and his lack of ability, integrity and morals.

Why do you have your panties in such a wad over Ray running? It's real simple if you live in the city vote against him. If you don't get over it.

I don't live in the city, therefore I can't vote one way or the other. I will say that I know Ray and think he'll do a fine job if he gets elected.

I'll also say that if Mark gets elected he'll do a fine job. I don't really care one way or the other, but I think you have an alterior motive in why you're crying so much about Ray running.

It's simple......he qualified to run, therefore he can. If you don't like it, vote against him, otherwise get a life.

 

[Panama Pete]

Since posting a string a few weeks ago, I must say that I am surprised and concerned as to the little attention it has received on this blog. Political Issues were at one time, important to this community, especially those involving Law Enforcement.

I, as an educated voter, base my choices on fact, not emotion. I do not select candidates based on how long I have known a candidate and that my mother?s grandma?s grandma knew someone?s family from the ?old days?. Facts are important in making these decisions; I believe that they are the most important thing.

I also believe that the media and journalists have an obligation to report these facts, not spin them or avoid them. Why is it that the NW FL Daily News, a paper from Ft. Walton Beach, has covered Ray Burgess and his moral, ethical and legal troubles, yet our ?local? papers have Failed to report the facts? Is there an agenda there? Does one or both support this candidate? Where is the journalistic integrity?

Let me be one to provide you with facts, not emotion.

Complaint No. 05-110 State of Florida, In re. Ray Neal Burgess/Respondent, states:
The Respondent (Burgess) had violated Section 112.313(6) Florida Statues in two instances.

1) ?by using his position as Chief of Police of DFS to falsify FDLE officer certification records.
(This is FRAUD, Do we want someone who would ?falsify records? in a position of authority, let alone that of law enforcement?) What else would they ?falsify??

2) ?by misusing his position to solicit a subordinate officer to increase the officer?s over time hours claimed, at to allow (Burgess) to pocket the unearned overtime pay.
(This is THEFT, Theft of the citizens of DFS tax money. It is also Fraud, falsely reporting earnings. This is the same premise that Charlie Morris used to commit his Federal Crimes. What else has this candidate stolen? Maybe the Feds need to come to DFS.)

The Complaint goes on to outline other issues surrounding this candidate and their business practices. Anyone with commonsense can see, based on FACTS stated above, this man is a CRIMINAL. He can try to spin what he did any way he wants, most criminals all attempt to justify their crimes. After further investigation, it is also no surprise to me that this candidate has campaign signs in the yards of residents who are convicted felons/criminals.

As for my agenda, it is simple. Ensure quality law enforcement in our area, out those who commit fraud while in public office and provide facts to citizens when our media will not. Wake up and educate yourselves.

Why do you have your panties in such a wad over Ray running? It's real simple if you live in the city vote against him. If you don't get over it.

I don't live in the city, therefore I can't vote one way or the other. I will say that I know Ray and think he'll do a fine job if he gets elected.

I'll also say that if Mark gets elected he'll do a fine job. I don't really care one way or the other, but I think you have an alterior motive in why you're crying so much about Ray running.

It's simple......he qualified to run, therefore he can. If you don't like it, vote against him, otherwise get a life.

As for answering your "alterior motive" reference, please see above as I posted my Agenda a while back. Nothing to hide here.;-)

Thank you for replying to my post, as you make my point for me with your flowing text. All you can say is "get over it" and "get a life", which may be vaild points to some, but you avoid the real issue. That of taking a STAND.

Something that all citizens who give a damn need to start doing, taking a stand and saying "enough" No more corrupt public officials. If all citizens of Walton County were like you and thought everything was simple and didn't care that a convicted criminal is running to be the head of a local law enforcement agency, we'd still have Ralph Johnson as a Sheriff. It wouldn't be long till the Feds crossed the county line from Okaloosa to Walton to see what was going on. Maybe they still will.:shock:

If you choose to not care, that is your right to do so. But, don't waste other's time commenting on something you don't care about and then try to imply something about me that I already posted up front (ie. Agenda). If you wish to be productive, you'll provide me with facts, as I have provided you, not with snide comments about panties...

 

[The Watcher]

Panty

It looks like you have touched a nerve Pete.

I don't understand why individuals choose to voice their opposition to someone stating facts and then turn their post into an attempt to sling a personal attack at the one who created the post in the first place, completely failing to realize the valid point one has brought to the table for discussion. (nice run on hun?)

From reading the post by WC, it would seem to me that they don't want to "rock the boat" or upset either side, seeing as that they probably have a vested interest in keeping both candidates happy. This is understandable, but then why not just stay off the thread? It's not like you (or anyone posting) have made false statements, negative personal comments, or the like about this very interesting candidate. Just the FACTS, just the FACTS.

Since your post, I have started to "Watch" again and what I have found is quite interesting. Nothing I'd say I'd call FACT just yet, but we're working on that...;-)

Thx,

W

 

[Oath]

Its Simple...

Why do you have your panties in such a wad over Ray running? It's real simple if you live in the city vote against him. If you don't get over it.

I don't live in the city, therefore I can't vote one way or the other. I will say that I know Ray and think he'll do a fine job if he gets elected.

I'll also say that if Mark gets elected he'll do a fine job. I don't really care one way or the other, but I think you have an alterior motive in why you're crying so much about Ray running.

It's simple......he qualified to run, therefore he can. If you don't like it, vote against him, otherwise get a life.

"It's smiple..."

This narrow level of thinking is amazing to me.

Based on the facts presented (let's assume they are all just that, facts), this logic would say that "because you can, one should do".

Just because someone can "qualify" apparently means they are Qualified.

To qualify for an election, in this case, City Marshal, one needs to file and pay the fee. As I understand it, that's it, that is it. "SIMPLE" right?

The pressing question is this; Which Candidate is actually QUALIFIED, not meaing "I paid the fee, etc." I mean what qualifications does one have to be considered for this position?

I would look at the following when asking that question:

Experience (is the person Cerified as a Law Enforcement Officer, what specific training does one have?)

Education (can the person understand and work with a budget, speak to the public/media, etc.)

Leadership (does the person have the RESPECT of their peers and subordinates. Are they willing to make people better at their jobs, or just keep them stagnant, never moving upwards?)

Integrity (telling the Truth when no one is watching, telling the truth when people are watching is Honesty)

Morals (set of beliefs, "capable of making the distinction between right and wrong in conduct")

I could go on, but you all get the idea. Based on Facts provided, it would seem to me that Burgess falls far short on his Qualifications, although he did qualify... So I guess it really is Simple, isn't it?

 

[WhoDat1]

"It's smiple..."

This narrow level of thinking is amazing to me.

Based on the facts presented (let's assume they are all just that, facts), this logic would say that "because you can, one should do".

Just because someone can "qualify" apparently means they are Qualified.

To qualify for an election, in this case, City Marshal, one needs to file and pay the fee. As I understand it, that's it, that is it. "SIMPLE" right?

The pressing question is this; Which Candidate is actually QUALIFIED, not meaing "I paid the fee, etc." I mean what qualifications does one have to be considered for this position?

I would look at the following when asking that question:

Experience (is the person Cerified as a Law Enforcement Officer, what specific training does one have?)

Education (can the person understand and work with a budget, speak to the public/media, etc.)

Leadership (does the person have the RESPECT of their peers and subordinates. Are they willing to make people better at their jobs, or just keep them stagnant, never moving upwards?)

Integrity (telling the Truth when no one is watching, telling the truth when people are watching is Honesty)

Morals (set of beliefs, "capable of making the distinction between right and wrong in conduct")

I could go on, but you all get the idea. Based on Facts provided, it would seem to me that Burgess falls far short on his Qualifications, although he did qualify... So I guess it really is Simple, isn't it?

I don't know anything about this election. I do not live in DeFuniak Springs, so its the business of those voters up there to "hash" this out.

I just wanted to tell you that I liked that part of your post about honesty and integrity! Very Cool!;-)

 

[The Watcher]

What's the difference here???

If anyone is interested...

What is the difference with what is going on in Okaloosa County and what WENT ON in DeFuniak Springs P.D. under Ray Burgess? Facts have been presented via Florida State Ethics Documentation finding Burgess had a subordinate falsify overtime records, gererating fraudulent overtime checks. The checks were then kicked back to Burgess, who is said to have pocketed the cash. (Reading the recent article from NWFL News, what is the difference? Aside from the scale of the illegal activity and the fact that the Feds are heading up the investigation, instead of the FDLE, really, what is the difference?)

I am very pleased to see that Okaloosa County has risen up in disgust over this corruption. I can only hope that others see the similarities that exist in both of these cases and speak up. Walton County faces enough challenges right now and we do not need corrupt officials involved in any level of government or law enforcement.

If anyone feels different, I really enjoy attempting to understand your thought process.

be seeing u,

w
=======================================================
Two fired at Sheriff's Office (with INVESTIGATION)

Comments 144 | Recommend 19
Chief Deputy Michael Coup and Assistant Director of Information Technology David Yacks terminated for "unbecoming conduct," alleged violations of state law


April 2, 2009 - 3:32 PM
Tom McLaughlin
Daily News
Michael Coup, chief deputy of the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office under Sheriff Charlie Morris, was terminated Thursday.
So was David Yacks, the sheriff's chief assistant of information technology.

Interim Sheriff Ed Spooner announced that both men had been fired following an internal investigation into their conduct during the time they worked for Morris, who is presently suspended and facing federal criminal charges.
Spooner said Sheriff's Office personnel had been informed of the firings Thursday afternoon.

The State Attorney's Office, which is investigating the Sheriff's Office, has been notified of the findings of the internal investigation, Spooner said.
"I'm sure we'll probably hear from them tomorrow," he said.
The Sheriff's Office investigation discovered that Yacks was in Las Vegas with Morris on Feb. 27 when Morris was taken into custody on a criminal complaint alleging fraud, theft and money laundering.
Yacks is the brother of Teresa Adams, the former administrative director for the Sheriff's Office. She was arrested on the same day as Morris, also for fraud, theft and money laundering.
Investigators found Yacks had received performance bonuses totaling over $89,000 in less than a year, the Sheriffs' Office said, and returned some portion of that bonus money to Morris in kick backs.
Yacks received seven bonuses between Feb. 29, 2008 and Jan. 16 of this year, Spooner said, and he should have asked questions.
"When you get that many bonuses in that period of time and you're asked to give money back and pay for plane tickets, clearly there's a situation where you're required to respond," Spooner said. "A reasonable prudent person would know there is something out of the ordinary with those things."
The report on Coup states he, too, admitted receiving a bonus from Morris and returning some portion of that bonus to Morris.
Coup said Thursday the request from the sheriff to return a portion of a bonus was made "one time and one time only" in 2006.
"I characterized it as unusual," Coup said. "He seemed distressed."

More than $5,000 in cash was found in Coup's desk on the day the FBI came into the Sheriff's Office to arrest Adams and begin an investigation.
The investigation found that Coup showed "a lack of supervisory responsibility" because he was aware Morris was getting kickbacks from bonuses he provided to Coup and other employees.
Spooner said he was "disappointed" by what the internal investigation turned up on Coup.
"With a person in that position there's an expectation and a responsibility to take action when you see something like that going on, and that just didn't happen," Spooner said. "You're duty bound to perform follow up, even if it could cost you your job."
The report said Coup knew that Randall Holcombe, Morris' assistant director of administrative services, had enlisted inmate help to assist Morris' wife, Barbara Morris, with her estate sale business.
Holcombe's position with the Sheriff's Office was eliminated March 4.

It said Coup knew Morris was using Sheriff's Office employees to work at Morris' home in Shalimar.
The report said Coup accepted a $7,000 cash bonus and spent $1,100 on himself.
Coup said the cash bonus "was given to me by the sheriff, who I quizzed, and later I talked to Terry Adams about it."
"I never knew that was proceeds from any kick back scheme," he said. "I never willingly accepted any money associated with Charlie Morris for any kick back scheme."
The report said Coup informed investigators that he had "quizzed" Adams about the $7,000 bonus.

The report concludes Coup may have violated a state statute that no public officer may "accept compensation, payment, or thing of value when such public officer ... knows, or, with the exercise of reasonable care, should know that it was given to influence a vote or other action in which the officer ... was expected to participate in his or her official capacity."
The Coup investigative report states that Sheriff's Office Majs. Mark Schniepp and Larry Donaldson also received bonuses from Morris and that the sheriff had requested a portion of those bonuses be returned to Adams.

It said Schniepp went to Coup for "assistance with the (bonus) matter."
"There is no indication that Chief Deputy Coup took any action in regards to this information other than to tell Schniepp that he had also been asked to return a portion of a bonus in the past," the report states.
Coup said his version of the story concerning Schniepp's revelation varies from the major's version.
"There's a dispute between their version and my version," he said. "There's a dispute between what they said to me and what I said they said to me."
When asked if he thought giving a portion of a bonus back to the sheriff or his administrative director was a violation of law or unethical, Coup said "he did not and that the bonuses were between the employee receiving it and the sheriff," the investigative report said.
The Sheriff's Office report compiled on Yacks said he too might have violated state statutes forbidding unauthorized compensation.
Yacks, the report said, arranged trips to Las Vegas for Morris, including a September trip to celebrate Morris' re-election.

He told investigators that he made three trips to Las Vegas in 2008 and another one in 2009. He told them he arranged, "under orders from Sheriff Morris" to send others on trips to Las Vegas.
He said he put the trips on his American Express Card to collect sky miles and was reimbursed with bonuses from Morris.
Yacks told investigators he paid $1,600 apiece for six first-class tickets to Las Vegas for the September 2008 trip and was reimbursed $8,000. He gave $2,000 of that back to Morris, the investigative report revealed.
In February of 2009, the report said, Yacks arranged for another former Sheriff's Office employee, then-Chief of Staff Sabra Thornton, to fly to Las Vegas.
He told investigators he originally booked Thornton in coach seating, but had her upgraded to first class at the request of the sheriff.
Yacks described Morris to investigators as a "father figure" the report said.
Asked if he thought using bonus money to pay for trips to Las Vegas was appropriate, Yacks said "he never asked for the bonuses and that he respected Sheriff Morris as the top law enforcement officer in the county."
He told investigators he'd asked his sister, Adams, if the bonuses were appropriate and she said that they were.
The Sheriff's Office found Yacks "obeyed an order that he knew, or should have known, would require him to commit an illegal act."
It found "Yacks failed to comply with laws ordinances, rules and the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Florida."
The report concluded that the actions of both Coup and Yacks "adversely affects the moral(e), operations, or efficiency of the agency and has a tendency to adversely affect, lower, or destroy public respect and confidence in the Office of the Sheriff."
Spooner said "I don't see anything at this point," based on the internal investigations already conducted, that could result in further disciplinary action within the Sheriff's Office.
He said Schniepp and Donaldson aren't being investigated.
He added, however, that an audit report conducted by the accounting firm of Carr, Riggs and Ingram, which should be released next week, would undoubtedly spawn more internal investigations at the Sheriff's Office

 

[scooterbug44]

How is it that they were able to pay an employee more than $89k in bonuses w/o worrying about anyone noticing? Where is the oversight for the budget?