Thomas A. Rich was an anonymous blogger on www.fbcjaxwatchdog.blogspot.com who complained to other parishioners about such things as First Baptist Church Pastor Mac Brunson’s huge $300,000 salary, his construction of a lavish office for himself, and his putting his wife on the payroll. The church turned to Detective Robert Hinson who not only works for the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office but is on the payroll of the church. Hinson allegedly opened a criminal investigation that identified Rich and then informed the church. Rich and his wife were promptly banned from the church.
Hinson secured a subpoena from the State Attorney’s Office to force Google Inc. to reveal Rich’s name. Since the blogger never made any threat, it was clear that there was no crime. It is unclear why the State’s Attorney’s office would approve such a subpoena. The prosecutors approved a highly invasive subpoena based on the undefined allegation of “possible criminal overtones.” Hinson reportedly also investigated other bloggers: http://www.tiffanycroft.blogspot.com and http://www.newbbcopenforum.blogspot.com.
The church insists that some mail was stolen and the blogs were a bit too intense and angry. However, there is no reason to assume that a critic is also a thief and no such charges were ever brought against any of the bloggers.
When no criminal charges were brought, Rich’s name was revealed to the church. Rich has now filed a formal complaint over the incident. Nevertheless, Undersheriff Frank Mackesy sees no conflict or problem in Hinson’s role. insisting that “The detective hasn’t done anything wrong.” Hmmm, a detective opens up an investigation into bloggers complaining about church corruption while in the employee of that church. The names of those bloggers are then released to the church and Mackesy sees no problem and can clear the detective without further investigation. Machesy (right)
was recently honored for his service, giving some of his background here.
Furthermore, Mackesy says that it was appropriate to reveal the identities of the bloggers even though no crime was found. Indeed. Machesy stated “I’d be disappointed in the detective if [he] didn’t do it.” So Machesy seems to believe that it is the job of the police to identify and reveal critics of churches. He seems utterly unconcerned about the free speech issues raised by Hinson’s act or the use of a government office for sectarian interests.
Brunson himself seems to believe that Rich was expressly mentioned in the biblical passage that “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of god.” Whatever the chances of Rich to enter the Kingdom of God, he (or his wife apparently) has little chance of entering the First Baptist Church. The good reverend has said that Rich exhibits an “obsessive compulsive problem” and is “not very stable at all . . . What you’re dealing with is a sociopath.” That last part could be the basis of a possible defamation against Brunson.
Rich has so interesting options ranging from lawsuits against the police, church, and Brunson himself. At a minimum, such a lawsuit might have a laudable effect of instilling a degree of caution and circumspection in this department. Even if the investigation was justified (which seems highly debatable), it is astonishing that the police would use a subpoena to deny a blogger anonymity and then turn over that information to a church for his ridicule and banishment within a church.
For the full story, click here.
I just had a bad bad thought. Could the Sheriff’s Department get our names and address because we are saying that this Just ain’t right?
Oh by the way, on an unrelated related topic:
Federal court halts deportation of Demjanjukht, now this guy was really just following Orders, if it is in fact him.
Does anyone know about the crush of the Ukrainian’s by the Nazi Staff It was and is still horrble.
Under what stretch of imagination could Brunson be called a Man of God acting in this manner? It is galling that someone with a Divinity Degree, or other religious certification should be assumed to be a cut above average. This could only be the situation in the minds of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Department in not understanding the violation of basic rights they were tasked to do by this “Reverend.”
As Yankee stated above:
“Because institutions like organized religion attract certain personality types, mostly authoritarians, who crave rigid rules and social control with the threat of violence or ostracism for disobedience. It’s not about religion, it’s about control/power.”
That could also be said regarding some LEO’s and their Departments. It goes a long way towards explaining the curious actions of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office. May Mr.Rich’s coffers become full and an explanation provided to the voters of Jacksonville as to why they’re about to lose a large sum of money paid out due to misuse of government offices.
mespo727272,
Monell is for municipalities, not for counties. Don’t ask me why the Supremes carved out that exception, but they did.
Take note of what Mike Appleton said: “This will cost the church and the state a bunch of money, and it should.”
What is interesting in this case is that when private parties conspire or act along with state officials those private parties are also liable.
What would be interesting is whether the church at large is included, or only the pastor and other actors individually.
Praise the Lord that churches are tax exempt, so they can afford to pay their pastors $300k and hire detectives.
Dredd:
“This is possibly a case for a 42 USC sec. 1983 action where a private party or parties worked with a governmental entity to deprive individuals of their constitutional rights under color of state law.”
***********
Don’t think we have a Monell state policy or custom here. At least I hope not!
We are not dealing with geniuses here. Pastor Brunson and Detective Hinson have handed Mr. Rich a lawsuit on a silver platter. The ratification of Detective Hinson’s actions by his superiors is merely icing on the cake. This will cost the church and the state a bunch of money, and it should.
You all just watch the Kilpatrick vs Skytel litigation in Michigan. In this matter it is alledged that both sides must be given NOTICE. Here is a blurb out of the article and the link follows. I say that this will have a chilling effect on Discovery as it relates to Family Law Matters. I do not think that this case has much muster but it has traps all abound:
“My client’s constitutional rights have been violated in the worst of ways, and we are merely seeking justice. We aren’t asking for any favoritism, we just want justice,” Gary continued.
He has alleged that a federal law — the Stored Communications Act — bars the release of any messages unless the sender and receivers are given prior notice. . . .
“The text messages were contained in a lengthy court filing by prosecutors where they argued that the text messages were sent by the former mayor.
Kilpatrick had maintained in fighting their release that he was not the person who sent them and also that they should not be released because doing so would violate attorney-client privil ege as well as spousal privilege.”
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090310/METRO/903100434/1409/METRO
Mespo,
I have said it before, but it fits here again. Why does it seem that fervent religous beliefs always seem to merge into hypocrisy and anti-religious activity?
Because institutions like organized religion attract certain personality types, mostly authoritarians, who crave rigid rules and social control with the threat of violence or ostracism for disobedience. It’s not about religion, it’s about control/power.
If anyone wants to know the words of any religion just read the cooresponding text. Read the bible yourself, save all that tithe money.
This is possibly a case for a 42 USC sec. 1983 action where a private party or parties worked with a governmental entity to deprive individuals of their constitutional rights under color of state law.
It would at least make the sheriff understand that he, his deputies, and the county can be held liable for damages, etc. for unconstitutional behaviour.
rafflaw,
You are a good hearted person and I hope you guys managed to kick some pastoral butt last night!
Bron,
Personally I think George Carlin’s take on the matter is insightful. Since it’s Carlin we should all probably assume that it’s not safe for work, small children, or the religious.
Me don’t wanna go to that church. It is worse than a cult, Do we now sign Happy Songs, pass the punch and wait for Leo Lyons?
I hear my phone ringing…..
Well said Bron. I have a meeting tomorrow for a foundation board that I am on and the pastor of the church school who is the beneficiary of our foundation and I know we are going to get pressured to turn our assets over to the Bishop instead of staying independent from the diocese. I just hope I can express my shock that the pastor would want to defy the wishes of all of the people who donated the money on the belief that the foundation was separate from the diocese. Just like Pastor Mac Brunson in this posting, the pastor tomorrow night will probably not have good Christian values in his heart. I hope he can prove me wrong. I apologize for the mini-rant, but this topic hit home.
Raf:
Because man will truly be free when the “entrails of the last priest are used to strangle the last dictator”.
If God is the repository of individual liberty and man’s liberty is ordained by God he who has the ear of god is ruler of us all.
I believe Mr. Jefferson should have mentioned that mans rights flow not from God but from mans nature as a rational animal. That man as a rational animal must live in freedom, it is our nature. Notice how men become irrational when forced to live in totalitarian states.
Mespo,
I have said it before, but it fits here again. Why does it seem that fervent religous beliefs always seem to merge into hypocrisy and anti-religious activity?
“Furthermore, Mackesy says that it was appropriate to reveal the identities of the bloggers even though no crime was found. Indeed. Machesy stated “I’d be disappointed in the detective if [he] didn’t do it.” So Machesy seems to believe that it is the job of the police to identify and reveal critics of churches”
*********************
When you’re a theocrat, why should you care that critics of the Church are silenced/ The level of ignorance about basic freedoms in this Country is truly astounding. There seems no shortage of fools south of the Mason-Dixon.
Hans ‘n Josh,
The reading all depends on where and how your personal emphases are read into the sentence.
They ripped off Scientology. Going after your critics with everything you’ve got, legal and otherwise, is a time honored tradition in the church and politics. In addition to the suits that should be filed, I dearly hope Xenu will let them know that this type of action has been copywrited by his church and should not be used without permission and a hefty fee. The powerful have no compuction about attacking their enemies–especially when their enemies are raising legitimate questions. Cartman showed the way with his trike and billyclub–“Are you questioning my authoriti?
Yeah, I tried not to laugh at that, but I did anyhow. I’m so juvenile. Oh well.
I don’t think that bit about his wife says quite what you intended it to say.