Friday, June 09, 2006

FL State Attorney Steve Meadows hires Guy Tunnell

The national media appears to have lost interest in the story, but it's still an issue in the FL Panhandle. First, it took a court order for the FDLE to release the videotapes of the beating of Martin Anderson by drill instructors at the Bay County Sheriff's Boot Camp, and then there were those untoward remarks by then FDLE Commissioner Tunnell just before his resignation regarding some black civil rights leaders. Now there's criticism of State Attorney Steve Meadows (a Democrat) hiring former FDLE top cop Guy Tunnell (a Republican). While Tunnell and some other public officials may have had some problems with emails, Meadows didn't. He deleted them. He thought that the server in Tallahasse would retain them. Besides, he doesn't type and didn't have that many emails.

Although not related in any way, I remember the sudden and unexpected resignation of FDLE Director of Investigation Jamie McLaughlin. The TALLAHASSEE DEMOCRAT described McLaughlin as "the cop who policed the police." Tunnell was on the job as FDLE Commissioner for only 8 months at the time. According to an FDLE Executive Investigation's report, McLaughlin may have been guilty of what could be considered a form of sexual harassment. At any rate, no criminal charges were filed.

Besides suggesting that I supply my state attorney with any evidence of illegal FDLE electronic surveillance, Gov. Bush forwarded copies of my communtications to FDLE Commissioner Tunnell. I also filed verifiable complaints with Tunnell, but never received any replies. After SA Steve Meadows didn't reply to my first letter and evidence, I sent him a second follow-up letter. Meadows didn't reply to that one, either. By Florida statute, Tunnell was required to investigate my charges against Florida law enforcement officers. I guess State Attorneys get to pick and chose not only what they investigate, but who they hire. I've pasted in a copy of my second letter to FL State Attorney Steve Meadows below.



CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT # 7004 2510 0001 0583 6352

June 18, 2005

The Honorable Steve Meadows
State Attorney’s Office
P.O. Box 1040
Panama City, FL 32402

Dear State Attorney Meadows,

I’m disappointed that I still haven’t received a reply to my May 13, 2005 letter (copy enclosed). It was a reasonable request inquiring as to what sort of evidence you would consider necessary to investigate my charges. My credibility isn’t the issue; however, the FDLE’s credibility is, especially in light of the deal that they cut with drug dealers to cover-up their official misconduct. Two US Presidents, one US VP, numerous US Reps and Senators, and a Pentagon Judge Advocate General have all found me credible regarding other matters. Gov. Jeb Bush finds me credible regarding this one. As I wrote in my earlier letter, three electronic surveillance experts all confirmed the presence of illegal law enforcement surveillance devices, yet refused to supply signed written reports of their findings. You don’t have to be a state prosecutor to know that some official authority threatened or tampered with all those expert witnesses.

So why haven’t I at least received the courtesy of a reply from your office? Is it because of the deal that the FDLE cut with the drug dealers to cover up this scandal? It’s an open secret in the community here and may help explain why so many of the Sheriff’s drug arrests have been kicked out of court. I’ve enclosed a copy of an email from one of the parties involved, which tends to support my version of events. Is this evidence? Is this email sufficient for your office to investigate my charges? The late night FDLE helicop-ter visit plays a central although embarrassing role in this fiasco. The pretext was to apprehend my neighbor who escaped earlier in the day with 3.5 lbs of drugs. However, he hadn’t returned home that evening and the FDLE knew it. The actual purpose was to provoke a violent confrontation with me. I’m sure that you do not condone these tactics, so the question now arises: Is there any accountability?

The party involved mistakenly blames me in the enclosed email for “…making our life a living hell…I didn’t, but rather law enforcement did. I witnessed one such example myself. On Monday morning, Jan. 3, 2005, around 9:15 a.m., I observed a deputy driving very slowly south down Will Lee Road. About a minute or two later, I saw my neighbor drive by behind the deputy and turn into his yard across the road. Shortly afterwards I saw the same deputy return driving north up Will Lee Road pass my neighbor’s house. No sooner than the deputy had passed by, I heard a female hollering from my neighbor’s sister-in-law’s home across the road from him, “I saw that! I saw that!” My neighbor was hollering back and they both appeared extremely agitated. In my opinion, that was a blatant attempt to provoke my neighbor, who others have told me has a volatile temper. But why? A deal’s a deal, isn’t it?

What can I expect as a result of this letter? More threats? More slander and defamation in an attempt to discredit me, thereby discrediting my charges? Is the purpose of Florida law enforcement to use their official position to cover-up their misconduct?

I’ve never authorized anyone to be my representative or given anyone my P.O.A. If you have any questions, talk to me directly.


Sincerely,


Joe Keegan

1 comment:

JoseLuis Vega said...

re: Jeb Bush and the FDLE, Mr. Keegan could you contact me at mtdata@mailinator.com. I will give you my personal email for private use when I hear from you. This is my email for use on blogs so I don't get spammed at my real address.

JL Vega