 |
|
Dougherty County Probate Court Judge Leisa Blount, center, is flanked by attorneys Maurice King Jr., left, and Pete Donaldson. Blount, charged in March with terroristic threats and violation of oath by an officer, is seeking a speedy disposition of her case.Staff Photo: Alan Mauldin |
The issue revolves around the employee entering Judge Leisa Blount’s office on two occasions after office hours when she was working alone in her office. Blount expressed her fear about the behavior of the employee, who apparently did not have any duties in the building at the time, to the Dougherty County Sheriff’s Office and county staff.
Maurice King Jr. and Pete Donaldson, who are representing Blount, told reporters on Tuesday that the elements of the case do not merit a criminal indictment and that the charges should be dismissed.
The two Albany attorneys appeared with Blount, who has continued working since charges of terroristic threats and violation of oath by a public officer were filed in late March, at a news conference at King’s office.
The case has been referred to the office of District Attorney Brad Shealey of the Southern Judicial Circuit based in Valdosta for investigation.
“This is not a case that meets any criteria that would suggest any violation of any criminal (statute),” Donaldson said of the charges, which were filed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation after the case was referred to the agency by Dougherty County Sheriff Kevin Sproul. “We are asking the district attorney in Valdosta to move this case along.”
Blount is not filing a civil suit in the matter or seeking damages, but is looking to settle the matter, which should not have resulted in the filing of criminal charges in the first place, Donaldson said.
As a judge, Blount has been placed in a kind of legal limbo because grand jury sessions mostly have been suspended for more than a year, the attorneys said, and it is imperative that she clear her name to continue to enjoy the confidence of the public she serves.
“(People) of Dougherty County have a right to know the courts are being operated properly,” Donaldson said. “As long as this case is out there, there is a cloud in the air. We would like to remove that.”
The attorneys also pointed to an investigation by the state Judicial Qualifications Commission, which investigates complaints against judges.
After reviewing surveillance videos and witness statements obtained by law enforcement, the agency wrote that its panel “has concluded that the institution of disciplinary action is not warranted at this time.” It added that no action will be taken unless new or additional information comes forward.
In an affidavit filed in the criminal case, Blount described the two incidents involving the county Facilities Management Department employee. On around Jan. 25, 2021, the employee used a master key to enter the back door of the Probate Court offices. The employee had no cleaning supplies or cart for removing trash, was not assigned to clean the area and had never entered the Probate Court area to turn out lights since Blount had been serving as judge in April 2020, the affidavit said.
When questioned by Blount, the employee said he was in the building to turn out the lights and did not exit when she told him that she turns off the lights when she leaves, according to the affidavit. He eventually left when she picked up her cellphone. Blount was told by county staff that the employee was not assigned to perform any tasks in the Probate Court offices after hours.
On March 10, at about 5:53 p.m. the employee used a master key to enter the back door of the offices again, Blount said in the affidavit. Blount went to the door of her chambers and asked the employee twice why he was in the office, but he did not answer.
Blount sent emails, included in the court filing, about the incidents and had a meeting with representatives from the sheriff’s office and the county. During that meeting, she asked Chief Deputy Sheriff Terron Hayes for permission to bring her pistol into the courthouse for protection.
She told Hayes that she has weapons training in which she was instructed that a weapon is not to be used to scare or injure but in circumstances in which their use is required to be aimed at the target’s head or chest. For that reason, she did not carry a weapon because she did not want to have to use it, Blount wrote.
“She said, ‘I will protect myself,’” Donaldson said “Somehow that has been turned into a terroristic threat.”
Blount
never brought a weapon into the building, although judges are
authorized to possess a weapon inside a courthouse and no permission is
required from the sheriff. The maintenance employee was not present
during the discussion with Hayes, the affidavit said. He did not file a
complaint in the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment