On September 15, 2014 Justice Served (JS) posted their first Facebook status. Who is Justice Served? It’s simply one person who was heavily involved in the #FightForGK movement, who watched it fail and thought he could do a better job at spinning the facts than Jake Brydon did. Justice Served is a man by the name of Doug Douglas.
While I have my own opinions of why Jake Brydon has decided to take on the leading role to free a child rapist, I’m quite unclear why Doug is doing this. Even he admits that he doesn’t know why he’s defending Kelley other than that he’s just acting on a gut impulse. I for one am thankful our legal system relies on facts.
JS was formed as a front for the GK Movement, passing itself off as a separate movement designed to ensure that justice prevails in Williamson County. Though Douglas repeatedly states that the page is not a Greg Kelley page, its clear intent is to give more legitimacy to the legal aspects of obtaining a new trial for Kelley. The few random posts regarding other cases on the JS page are merely tossed out there in an attempt to convince you that their focus is not solely on the Greg Kelley case.
As the first task of this newly formed community of one, JS creates a petition to get Sgt. Dailey fired. A copy of the petition can be found here.
Douglas states on his page that he is disappointed at the low number of signatures he’s received, but delivers the petition anyway along with the following email. To use JS words, the emails on this blog have not been edited or parsed in any way.
From: Justice Served [mailto:email@example.com] Sent: Monday, December 01, 2014 4:21 PM To: Mayor Matt Powell; Brenda Eivens; PD General Inbox Subject: Petition Delivered
Mayor Powell / Ms. Eivens / Chief Mannix,
Earlier today, you received a petition signed by hundreds of concerned citizens requesting the immediate termination of Sergeant Chris Dailey from the Cedar Park Police Department.
Let me start by saying that I appreciate the work that police officers provide for our city and for the individuals who comprise it. I believe that in the vast majority of cases, officers and investigators act with courage, honor and integrity. However, there are also times when rules, protocols, best practices, and even laws are not followed. In those cases, I think we can all agree that the trust and confidence of the citizens is greatly diminished.
Sadly, Sergeant Dailey had one of those times where he chose to ignore departmental policies and protocols, and quite possibly broke the law by deleting emails pertaining to an open investigation and case. None of this is argumentative – he admitted to these things while on the stand and under oath. He even admitted immediately after breaking these policies that he felt like he just messed up the case. In other words, he messed up. He knew he messed up. He went knowingly moved forward anyway, ignoring policies and laws.
It can safely be assumed that if the emails that were deleted supported his cause, they wouldn’t have been deleted but used to strengthen the case he was building. By deleting those emails, it has caused considerable doubt, reasonable doubt, on the outcome of his investigation. Deleting emails is the same as withholding evidence from the defense, and we can ask Michael Morton what kind of impact that can have on a case.
One could reasonably assume that if an investigator neglected to interview the defendant, neglected to interview the other individuals who were present where a crime supposedly occurred, deleted emails between himself and Child Protective Services, broke established protocols for the department by interviewing a child himself instead of allowing a trained professional do that, admits under oath to asking leading questions of that child…it is reasonable that some type of disciplinary action would occur regarding that investigator. Unbelievably though, Investigator Dailey was promoted to Sergeant Dailey shortly after all of these incidents.
What precedent has now been set for the rest of the police force when they look at Sergeant Dailey? Can they now decide on their own what the outcome of an investigation will be? Can they unilaterally decide which policies and protocols and laws they wish to follow and which ones they can choose to ignore? Can they then expect promotions after making these decisions because it worked out so well for one of their peers?
At this point, any simple reprimand would be seen as trying to satisfy an outcry from a community group, likely with a wink and a nod internally indicating that something had to be done – but nothing too serious. So that leaves us with a decision based on integrity, character, and not tolerating any wrongdoing by anyone on the force. Termination is the correct response for what has occurred here. His work has been praised recently, enough so to be promoted. A strong message must be sent. After all, we are talking about the person who led internal investigations when another officer was accused of misconduct. He should certainly know what was right and what was lawful.
We hope to hear your thoughts on this matter soon. The media has not been contacted at this point. We hope that this can be resolved quickly. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Justice Served – Williamson County
Chief Mannix’s response follows:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Sean Mannix <Sean.Mannix@cedarparktexas.gov> wrote:
To All Concerned,
I am in receipt of the Change.org petition submitted by the Justice Served Facebook page and the associated emails asking for the termination of Sergeant Chris Dailey. I will reference those materials, as well as other material posted on the referenced Facebook page, to give the readers of that blog spot accurate information that they may not otherwise have exposure to.
It appears that the issues of concern to the author of the petition and blog are then Detective Dailey’s testimony, the deletion of emails and associated content, child interview concerns, focus on Kelley, the lack of a pre-arrest interview of the defendant, and Detective Dailey’s promotion to sergeant. I will address each of the blog’s concerns as well as correct some gross misinformation posted on the blog. At face value it appears that the concerns listed are a regurgitation of a failed defense strategy. It is the job of the defense to convince a jury that a case is flawed and Ms. Cumming’s is a good attorney. Ultimately the jury decides the validity of the defense case.
Sergeant Dailey’s Testimony:
On July 10 of this year I read the same Austin American Statesman article that the blog references as their source material regarding Dailey’s testimony. I was concerned by the content and immediately ordered a review of Dailey’s entire testimony. I also took the extraordinary step of debriefing this case with the District Attorney’s Office. As you are aware, testimony in a criminal trial is a multi-part process that includes a direct examination, cross examination, re-direct, etc. Dailey was on the stand for hours and was subject to questioning by both the defense and prosecution during that time. While the newspaper captured a very small portion of Dailey’s testimony in which he primarily answered “correct” to questions presented by the defense, they did not report on his other hours of testimony that clarified his actions. A review of the entirety of Dailey’s testimony revealed no violation of policy or law.
Email Content and Deletion:
The content of the emails was never missing as all emails were memorialized in the reports generated by CPPD and CPS. The following are the applicable excerpts from both reports detailing the content of all emails generated in this case. There were four from Dailey to CPS and three from CPS to Dailey for a total of 7. Far fewer than the 100 plus used to push the petition.
7/19/13 – I sent an email to Det. Dailey with the Cedar Park Police Department asking if the alleged victim is going to receive a CAC interview. Source: CPS Report.
7/24/13 – I received an email from Det. Dailey that stated: I got the suspect identified as Gregory Raymond Kelly (his date of birth and address). When I schedule an interview I will let you know. Source: CPS report.
7/29/13 – I sent an email to Det. Dailey asking for an update on his case or if he has made any contact with Greg. Source: CPS report.
7/29/13 – I received an email from Det. Dailey stating that he will be contacting Greg Kelley tomorrow to try to set up a time for an interview. He said he would let me know when an interview is scheduled. Source: CPS report.
7/31/13 – I received an email from Det. Dailey. He stated that he called Greg Kelley, phone number ###-###-####, and left him a message. Det. Dailey then received a phone call from Mr. Kelley’s attorney, Patricia Cummings, phone number ###-###-####. Det. Dailey left a message for Ms. Cummings. Det. Dailey believes that Mr. Kelley will not speak with him now that he has retained an attorney. He will let me know if the attorney allows Mr. Kelley to speak with him. Source: CPS report.
8/13/13 – I received an email from Det. Dailey stating that (child sex assault survivor’s name) is scheduled for a CAC interview on Wednesday, August 21, at 10:00am at the Child Advocacy Center in Georgetown, TX. Source: CPS report.
8/13/13 – On 8/13/13 I received an e-mail from Inv. Bradley in reference to a child by the name of (child sex assault survivor’s name). Inv. Bradley stated that she had not had a chance to interview (child sex assault survivor’s name) and asked if I wanted to schedule a forensic interview. I did schedule a forensic interview for (child sex assault survivor’s name)at the Williamson County Children’s Advocacy Center. On the same date Inv. Bradley sent me her report. The report is attached to the case file. Source: CPPD report.
All emails were found to be transitory information used to create the actual investigative documents which are the investigative reports themselves. The referenced CPS report was found to be a public document subject to retention policy and was in fact retained and attached to the police report. All information was supplemented into the appropriate investigative documents and no policy or law was violated. I am now requiring detectives to retain even transitory information until a case is adjudicated to prevent future occurrences of this defense strategy.
Child Interview Concerns:
I have previously covered this ground in an email to my troops and nothing has changed since that time, below is an excerpt from that email:
You all saw Detective Dailey take a beating by the Defense with no coverage of his testimony to the Prosecution. A picture was painted that he did something improper by entering the interview room and asking the child to tell them what the child had told his mother. This was irregular, but not improper. In a perfect world the child would have been subject to a deep forensic interview, but at the time the CAC had lost their only staff member qualified for such interviews. We have a luxury of having a child advocacy center available to us. Many investigators around the country do not have access to these resources and are forced to do the child interviews themselves. While that is not ideal, it is anything but improper.
In a review of the interview in question Dailey was directive as opposed to leading in what amounted to be, tell us what you told your Mom. He did immediately realize that his directive interview, instead of an extended forensic interview, would give the defense fodder for judicial theater, which proved true. Mr. Kelley was not convicted on any offense involving the child in this interview.
Focus on Kelley:
Also previously covered in my previous email, below is an excerpt:
No other suspects were sought and the investigation stayed focused on Kelley because that is how a proper investigation is conducted in all cases in which the perpetrator is known to the victim and positively named and identified as the assailant. When a small child makes an honest outcry that somebody molested them and named their known attacker it would be gross incompetence to try to take them down a different path. The Kelley supporters have evolved from an earlier position that the kids made up their stories, to a more modified explanation that one of them was likely exposed to sexual abuse at the hands of another. This is very twisted logic to believe that a child is intellectually developed enough to articulate the most horrific thing they have been the victim of, but not intellectually developed enough to recognize the known perpetrator that they are exposed to daily. Never in the investigation was there another “Greg” or another “Greg’s room” living or located at that house…
The Lack of a Pre-Arrest Interview:
In addition to the above email excerpts, the following excerpt comes from the police report:
8/7/13 – I received a phone call from the suspect’s attorney Patricia Cummings. She stated that the suspect would not be interviewed.
Enough said, he exercised his right to stay silent until he told his story in court where he was found to not be credible.
Detective Dailey’s Promotion to Sergeant:
Our promotional process is governed by Civil Service Law per Chapter 143 of the Local Government Code and local Civil Service rules. Sergeant Dailey went through a competitive written test and assessment center by an outside contractor and excelled. In short he earned his promotion and any conspiracy theory stating it was a reward is simply a lie and not possible through law and process.
Other Misinformation on the Justice Served Blog:
In preparing this response I did review the blog and found that in pushing the petition there were a few posts stating, as fact, that there were over 100 emails in this case. This is simply made up. I also saw a post of a conversation that I supposedly had with some unnamed person, stating that I could not answer why I believe Mr. Kelley is guilty. No person has ever asked me that question without getting a full answer, so the blog author was either given bad information or just made it up.
To be clear, my short answer to that question would be that having access to the outcry statements, interviews and testimony of the first child survivor and the outcry statement and interview of the second child survivor, I believe the children. I also believe in our judicial system of trial by jury and know that the twelve good people of Williamson County, that heard this case, were given all information available to the prosecution and defense and concluded guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If asked for a more detailed response, I would talk about the nuances of the statements that no four year old would know, or be able to make up, such as the description of lotion being used in the molestation of both kids. I do not believe for a second that a four year old child can imagine a connection between lotion and sexual activity or the masturbation habits of a young man. I would also point out that Mr. Kelley proved himself dishonest with claims of heroic service to our country, claiming to be a returning Marine Sniper, which seriously damaged his credibility. I would also point to post conviction information that reaffirms my belief, such as one of the children crying when he learned Mr. Kelley was going to jail, believing he should go to jail also because he did the bad thing with Greg. I would also point out that asking for a sentencing deal and waiving all rights to appeal are not consistent with an innocent man believing he had a flawed trial. Lastly, I would point out that evidence Kelley seeks to obtain a new trial with directly contradicts his own testimony and post-conviction interviews of his relationship with the children.
These are my personal thoughts and I do not seek to change your mind about yours.
Petitions in General:
In general petitions are flawed instruments as they relate to personnel complaints, as there is the potential that they are opinion based, often pushed with false information, and may obtain false and duplicate signatures, all of which are reflected in this petition. On 10/28/14 this blog stated that “We need a minimum of 500-1000 people to sign that petition in order for it to have any chance of being considered.” This is not true, as there is tremendous value in just one person pointing out misconduct when it exists. Organizationally, we will always do the right thing regardless of whether it is a single person complaint or 10,000 people signing a document.
In closing, I truly feel for the friends and family of Mr. Kelley who cannot bring themselves to believe that he could do such a thing. This is a very painful time for them. I have had to watch people suffer the same disbelief many times over the last thirty years, to include cases involving cops, priests, coaches and others who were not capable of such a thing to those close to them. At the same time, there are adult leaders in an activist movement, associated with this case, that have never attempted to seek the truth and have been pushing a fantastical account of the trial. While I find their actions irresponsible and damaging to the child survivors of sexual assault, I respect their 1st Amendment right to voice their opinion.
I have reviewed the issues brought forward in your petition and found no violations of policy or law in Sergeant Dailey’s handling of this case. He simply did his job, nothing more, nothing less. Please share this email with whomever you wish and no response is needed.
Sean M. Mannix
Chief of Police
Cedar Park Police Department
To me, the Chief’s response puts an end to each and every concern from the JS and FFGK movements, backing each up with fact. He even points out additional misinformation that is posted on the JS site. If you read the “About” section of the JS page, it states that if they are made aware of false information posted on their page, they will remove it. But 16 days after they are made aware of false information by Chief Mannix, they have yet to remove any of it from the page.
As a side note in reference to the deleted emails, Mannix refers to them as “transitory” information. Here is the definition of such documents:
Just a few hours after Chief Mannix emails his response to JS, Douglas, unable to accept the bitter pill he’s been given, sends the following reply.
From: Justice Served [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 5:07 PM To: Sean Mannix Cc: Mayor Matt Powell; Brenda Eivens; PD General Inbox Subject: Re: Petition Delivered
I appreciate the time you committed to crafting your response, and for addressing some of the concerns that we raised. I have posted your complete response on the Justice Served page for our followers to read. I do not edit or parse the information provided to them and feel it is important for them to see what is provided.
You mentioned in your response that you have been doing this line of work for more than 30 years. Just a personal question here…is it typical for a person who has been convicted of Super Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child to have 10,000 people send a petition to the Attorney General and Governor asking them to take a closer look…or for a group like mine to gain close to 1000 followers in a couple of month’s time months after the verdict came down? I know for me personally, and for many that I have spoken with, I have never gotten involved in anything like this before. I mean, I just always assumed that if they jury finds someone guilty that they absolutely must be right (but we know that wrongful convictions do take place). I cannot stand those who harm kids. They repulse me. But in Greg Kelley’s case, I didn’t know him. He’s not a family member. He wasn’t a friend of mine. I had never met him, but something in my gut just kept saying that something isn’t right here. Then I heard hundreds of others say the same things. If this isn’t typical, then why – in your opinion – have so many people who have no ties to him whatsoever gotten so deeply involved in his case? Jana Duty speculated that is was because he was a tall, dark, handsome football star – none of those things appeal to me and really found that response quite irresponsible and juvenile.
Sir, I genuinely do appreciate your time on this. Honestly, I still have questions that are unanswered and that I find quite troubling. Some of the information that you felt might have been made up or misunderstood – I asked Greg Kelley directly about. It wasn’t a rumor mill type situation. I went straight to the source.
The bigger question remains…If the public’s trust has been diminished through these actions, do you just let that trust lack, or is the more beneficial action to do something to show that you are listening and want to regain that trust? And sometimes that’s unfair to the person at the center of it all. Coaches get fired all the time even though his team suffered numerous injuries and he couldn’t field his best team. Brushing aside the concerns of so many citizens might not be the best move – referring to them as a cult was not helpful but stirred the pot further – or dismissing their opinions without a chance to be address them shuts down future communication between both sides. What, if anything, can be done to regain the trust of the people who are under your care?
Again, I sincerely appreciate the response. My concerns still remain nonetheless. I am open to ideas that you might have on how we move forward from here. The very last thing that I would ever want is to see anything escalate like what we see on our newscasts these days. I believe that we can disagree but remain professional and respectful.
Did you catch the not-so-subtle threats Douglas tosses out? He alludes to current media events, most likely referring to Ferguson. And don’t miss Douglas’s defense regarding the misinformation he’s been posting. He says he went “straight to the source” by asking Greg Kelley himself…Greg Kelley, who lied under oath.
The following is an exerpt from the State’s response to a motion for a new trial:
Chief Mannix’s response to JS:
From: Sean Mannix Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 6:08 PM To: ‘Justice Served’ Cc: Mayor Matt Powell; Brenda Eivens; PD General Inbox Subject: RE: Petition Delivered
No, I do not find the petitions and associated signatures to be unusual. Change.org is full of criminal justice petitions carrying far more than 10,000 signatures proclaiming innocence of a person, unfair sentence, police brutality, etc. I did find the pre-trial bake sales and post-trial church festival unusual.
You are better qualified than me to speak to the reasons for following, as you are following your gut. I will respectfully choose to remain with the facts and not offer speculation to the motivations of individuals. I do know that they have been subject to a good deal of misinformation through a robust social media campaign and I do not care to speculate the source.
As far as trust goes, we simply do the right thing and we have a great deal of trust in our community. I am highly visible in our community and am constantly reminded by our citizens how much they appreciate our officers, generally accompanied by contact stories that make me proud. We do not discipline around opinion as that is simply pandering. While a group of folks have decided to view Sergeant Dailey as a villain because they want a do-over, many, many more view him as an outstanding investigator who has made a real difference in the lives of violent crimes victims. You likely see it differently through exposure to a cell of folks that will forever believe Mr. Kelley is a victim. There is nothing I can do to change their minds nor do I seek to. We have not brushed aside the concerns of anybody, but instead simply provide them the accurate information to make informed decisions.
Of course when employees are in violation of actual policies, they must be held accountable as evidenced by three different officers I have dismissed over the course of several months (one resigned in lieu of termination).
The Cedar Park Police Department prides itself in keeping this community safe and will continue that course. Let’s try to make this my last email to this page, on this issue, as running the police department and our current endeavors requires my attention.
A few days later Mannix sends a follow-up email to JS, trying once again to get accurate information into the hands of these people.
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Sean Mannix <Sean.Mannix@cedarparktexas.gov> wrote:
In re-reading your email back to me I noted that you stated that still have questions that are unanswered. Since everything I have seen in the petition and associated documents has a genesis with the Fight for GK group, I am providing you with answers to each of the concerns listed on their web site. Whether you agree with the information, or not, I hope it at least addresses any questions that are lingering for you. The attached Word document has the concerns of that group with my responses in bold italics.
Ironically, I tried to get all of this information to the group by offering to meet with Pastor Bob Brydon in an email dated 7/31/14, as his church was preparing to hold a festival in support of Mr. Kelley. He declined and that meeting was never held. Since that time nobody from that group has asked me for the information and I have developed the opinion that they are avoiding any information that does not support their narrative. Sad really, to let emotional drive trump collecting all available information for their following. A copy of that email is available upon request.
I believe I have now addressed all of the questions that this group has publicly posed.
Along with the email, Mannix includes a document containing point-by-point, factual information in response to the bulleted items on the FightForGK site here .
The Chief’s response are in italics below:
“When the initial accusation was made by the child, there was no specific day/time stated when this supposedly occurred.”
4 year old children generally do not have the capacity to give a specific date and time when events occur.
“The parents of the child, after hearing their son make these accusations, continued to take their son back to the home day care where this allegedly occurred. Greg was still living there while they continued to bring their son in.”
The first child sexual assault survivor made an outcry to his mother on 7/13/13. The daycare owner reported to CPPD that Greg Kelley moved out in May of 2013 and she reported to CPS that he moved in June 2013.
“After an extended period of time, the parents finally went to the police to report this accusation.”
The parents of the first survivor made a police report 5 days after the outcry.
“Upon hearing this accusation, the Cedar Park Police Department never investigated Greg Kelley. There was no questioning. There was no interrogation. Simply an arrest and then his trial.”
An investigation was conducted. Greg Kelley was called by the investigator on 7/30/13 and a message was left on his voicemail. Greg Kelley never returned the phone call and on 8/7/14 the investigator received a call from Greg Kelley’s attorney stating that he would not be interviewed by the police. In other words, we respected his rights. He did get to tell his side of the story in his trial, which is the judicial phase in which the jury gets to weigh all evidence and statements in their deliberations. They found the child credible and did not buy Mr. Kelley’s story.
“The police also never went to the home day care to investigate. No questioning. No interrogations. The owner of the home day care was not interviewed.”
CPS and law enforcement do joint investigations in regards to child abuse. CPS investigated the day care. On 8/8/13 the investigator interviewed the day care owner.
“There were 10 teenage boys that were living at this home day care during this time frame. None of them were questioned or interrogated.”
Greg Kelley was identified by both survivors as the abuser.
“The investigator assigned to Greg’s case decided not to use a specially trained counselor to speak with the child to get his story. Instead he decided to do this questioning himself without following best practice guidelines. Some of those include: Questioning the boy one time, capturing it on video, and being done.”
This was done with the first child sexual assault survivor. The second survivor had a forensic interview done and did not make an outcry. After that interview information came out the second survivor had made an outcry to his mother in reference to being sexually abused by Greg Kelley. An extended forensic interview was scheduled for the second survivor but had had to be cancelled due to the advocacy center losing the only trained person in this interview technique. A second forensic interview was conducted and after the interview the investigator and CPS interviewed the child to get the details that he told to his mother. Mr. Kelley was not convicted on any crimes associated with the second child.
“There was no building a rapport with the child (admitted this under oath).”
The first part of a forensic interview includes rapport building. The investigator did not do a forensic interview.
“He wore his gun into the interview with a young child.”
It is not common practice to remove firearms when conducting interviews.
“The detective admitted under oath to asking leading questions to the child in order to get the desired answers.”
The investigator asked directive questions in order for the 2nd survivor to tell what he told his mother about being molested.
“Detective admitted under oath to deleting all emails between himself and the counselor assigned to work with the young boy. This is a violation of the Police Department policy as well.”
The investigator did delete e-mails but noted the applicable content in his supplements and put e-mailed attachments in the report. Transitory information is required to be retained until its purpose is fulfilled and in this case that purpose was supplementation to the investigative reports, which was done. No policy violation.
“There was no evidence. There were no witnesses. Just the accusation of a young boy.”
This movement seems to be having a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that the outcry witness statements, the survivor’s statements, the child interviews, and the eyewitness survivor testimony in court are not only evidence, but very powerful evidence.
There are 2 survivors both with similar outcries both indicating that Greg Kelley sexually molested them. Because of the age of the survivors they are not capable of making up stories like this. When one did not support his outcry during his trial testimony Mr. Kelley was cleared of those charges as that is how the system works.
“The prosecutor had said that there wasn’t enough there to go to court without a second accuser. Suddenly a second accuser came forward. During the trial though, the second accuser took the stand and said that Greg never touched him. The judge dropped the charges from this accuser.”
The case was staffed with the prosecutor on 8/7/13 before the second survivor came forward. The prosecutor advised to get a warrant and a warrant was issued. The statement that there wasn’t enough without a second accuser is simply made up.
“The Cedar Park Police Chief came out in media reports before the trial and proclaimed that Greg is guilty.”
My exact quote was as follows; “I’m glad to live in a country where innocence is presumed until guilt is determined by a court. I will also add I do not believe there is a cabal of 4-year-olds out there making up stories about this gentleman.” I meant it then and I believe it now.
“The jury was hung after 10+ hours of deliberation. They sent word to the judge that they were hung. The judge gave them two options: 1) Go back and deliberate further, OR 2) He would sequester the jury for the night and they could begin deliberations again the next day. The jury went back to deliberate and within 10 minutes they changed their votes and found him guilty.”
None of us were in the jury room and we have no idea what the substance of their discussions were, other than finding Mr. Kelley guilty as charged.
“Before the trial ever began, Greg was offered a plea deal from the prosecution to have 10 years probation, no prison time, community service, and register as a sex offender. Greg turned down this plea citing that he could not say that he did something he didn’t do.”
Greg Kelley did not immediately turn down this plea deal. He did not give his answer until a day later and after consulting with his family. It was his right to proceed with a trial by jury.
“Once he was proclaimed as guilty, another plea deal was offered to give him the minimum 25 year mandatory sentence, no parole, waive his right to an appeal, and register as a sex offender after he is released from prison. He was given 5 minutes to decide to take this or risk having a life sentence from the jury. He accepted this plea deal as justice had let him down the day before and not wanting to risk it happening again the next day.”
Mr. Kelley asked for the sentencing plea deal and did not sign it until the following afternoon, having plenty of time to think and consult with his attorney. If the trial was flawed his attorney would have likely advised him to preserve his right to appeal, which may or may not have happened in this case.
Unbelievably, after that response Douglas still has questions.
From: Justice Served [mailto:email@example.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:31 PM To: Sean Mannix Subject: Re: FW: Petition Delivered
I appreciate the details that you have provided in the Word document. I did post them unparsed and unedited to the Justice Served page this evening. But I also countered a few of your thoughts with other follow-up thoughts or questions that were sparked from your notes. I’ve included them below in an effort to make it easier for you to find and read.
Chief Mannix, the petition was not about the guilt or innocence of Greg Kelley. It was solely about the manner and level that his investigation was conducted and it caused concern in many of us. Justice Served is not a Greg Kelley page on Facebook…apart from the petition, very little is even said regarding him on our page. Our goal is to assure that each and every person who is accused of a crime has a full and fair investigation and trial. I wholeheartedly want the guilty to be found guilty and to serve out their sentence, but I also want the manner in which they have had the case made against them to follow protocols, rules, and laws and to make sure the right person is the one who serves out a sentence. Cases like Michael Morton and others – we both can agree – should never happen and it’s tragic when they do occur. I get that this case is trickier because there is no DNA evidence or other witnesses who can verify the accusation – which is all the more reason why the investigation and trial need to be handled with careful attention to established protocols.
I think, apart from this case, you and I would get along well. I have nothing personally against you…or even the detective. I would ask the same questions of any chief or investigator if this had happened under their watch.
ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS FROM JUSTICE SERVED…
SM: 4 year old children generally do not have the capacity to give a specific date and time when events occur.
JS: We agree. Presumably professionals in the field of the investigation of child abuse also understand that children so young cannot be specific as to date and time. Yet investigators did make an effort to generally determine date and time. In this case, the State chose April 15th and the State’s theory at trial was that the abuse occurred at naptime in the afternoon. So you believe abuse happened on some afternoon in the late Spring. Is that right?
SM: The first child sexual assault survivor made an outcry to his mother on 7/13/13. The daycare owner reported to CPPD that Greg Kelley moved out in May of 2013 and she reported to CPS that he moved in June 2013. The parents of the first survivor made a police report 5 days after the outcry.
JS: Greg Kelley moved out of the home by June 11, 2013. Yet the child made an outcry a month later, July 13, 2013 about abuse that the State believes occurred weeks or months earlier. The fact that the parents contemplated for almost a week before reporting their child’s outcry is a completely different question, not raised here. The question raised is why during the time period between December, 2012 and July, 2013 was there absolutely no sign of any abuse and no outcry of abuse?
SM: The investigator did delete e-mails but noted the applicable content in his supplements and put e-mailed attachments in the report. Transitory information is required to be retained until its purpose is fulfilled and in this case that purpose was supplementation to the investigative reports, which was done. No policy violation.
JS: You indicated that there were only 7 emails that were deleted. Assuming that there were no others in addition to those 7, how many replies went back and forth on each of those 7? 1 reply each makes a total of 14 emails. 2 replies would be 21…and so on.
SM: Greg Kelley was identified by both survivors as the abuser.
JS: How was he identified? Did they look at pictures of him and point him out? If so, were other pictures of other teenage boys who spent time in the home given as an option for them to select from? Did they refer to their abuser as “Boss?” Isn’t it true that more than one person in the house was referred to as “Boss?” Was it by name? If so, this would have taken place after the parents of the child met with the day care owner for more than 2 hours before contacting the police. Is it possible that this is when they first heard the name “Greg Kelley” before going to see you?
SM: An investigation was conducted. Greg Kelley was called by the investigator on 7/30/13 and a message was left on his voicemail. Greg Kelley never returned the phone call and on 8/7/14 the investigator received a call from Greg Kelley’s attorney stating that he would not be interviewed by the police. In other words, we respected his rights. He did get to tell his side of the story in his trial, which is the judicial phase in which the jury gets to weigh all evidence and statements in their deliberations. They found the child credible and did not buy Mr. Kelley’s story.
JS: Your response suggests that had you interviewed Greg Kelley and believed him to be innocent, you would not have sought his arrest. Is this true? Were your investigators that doubtful about the child’s accusation? Non-governmental lawyers tend to think that your real purpose in an “interview” was merely to develop remarks which could later be used at trial against a suspect you were already convinced was guilty. If people believe your office did nothing to investigate, they are wrong. But people doubt the adequacy of your investigation. You did nothing more than ask for an interview you knew most lawyers would not permit. There are many other ways to come to know Greg Kelley than in a police interview. You’ve admitted to doing nothing to investigate other inhabitants of that household. Many people were and are available for insight into Greg Kelley’s character, none of which reflects anything remotely similar to the portrait of a teenaged molester of toddlers used to convince some jurors (not 12) of his guilt. Few if any were interviewed.
Chief Mannix, we are left to wonder if the same limited investigation would have commenced had a respected public figure – say, yourself or Jana Duty or the Mayor – been accused by a 4 year old child. Would any of you have been interviewed about any of the rest of you? At what point do you disbelieve a child’s outcry?
Mannix’s final response:
From: Sean Mannix Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 3:01 PM To: ‘Justice Served’ Cc: COMMANDSTAFF; Christopher Dailey; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org‘; ‘email@example.com‘; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org‘; ‘email@example.com‘ Subject: RE: FW: Petition Delivered
One would have to be very naïve to not recognize the genesis of this Facebook in the GK activist movement and the continued nexus to that movement. In fact, that is precisely why I am communicating with an anonymous blogger instead of a named human being that would likely be easily identified as being active in that movement. I have been shown several screen shots of many posts that migrated from the Fight For GK Facebook page to yours. Some within minutes or hours of their initial posting. It’s OK for you to be involved with more than one Facebook page but please don’t insult my intelligence.
I believe Justice Served is a guy at a keyboard, with a blog, that counts mouse clicks as hard support. If you are really making an attempt to honor your own statement; “We tell you what information we have received, regardless of if it helps or harms our efforts” I would suggest that you post the entire content of all of our emails on the page.
I sent you factual information that debunks the entire false script of the GK support movement. Do with it what you will, continue lying, correct it, counter it with actual facts or come up with a new conspiracy. Frankly, I have no interest in how you proceed as I’ve got a police department to run.
For answers to your newly developed questions check the court records because I have no interest in an eternal debate of an adjudicated case. I will, however, answer your last question regarding the disbelief of a child’s outcry, because I found it disturbing. NEVER. That is when I stop believing these children. At the life stage of these boys, with the detailed information in their outcries, and the information contained in statements, testimony, the information passed on to the parents and counselors and the obvious pain of these families, I and this department will always stand with these survivors.
You stated in an email to me that people who hurt children repulse you, yet you engage in behavior that continues the victimization of these kids. I was At an event today that gave me the opportunity to hear one of the mothers tell her family’s story to a packed room and it was both heartbreaking and uplifting. Through the pain they have found strength and are forging ahead, all the while knowing that her child will carry this heavy burden through life. Those are the people that count right now, not those that are armed with a newspaper clipping, a gut feeling and a false script. And they are the ones worthy of any future communication that I have on this issue.
Every man sets his own parameters for what his conscience can bear. My moral compass is well calibrated and I hope you can say the same without any doubt. If you ever wish to contact me as a human being, please feel free to do so, but I am finished communicating with a Facebook page.
Sorry, I know that was a childish response, but what else can you say after that email? There’s really nothing else to be said, it’s all been laid out clear as day.
I hope that these blogs have helped you see the truth regarding the Greg Kelley case and the movement to free him. I believe the email documentation that I have posted from Bob Brydon, Jake Brydon, and Doug Douglas all show the extreme effort that Chief Mannix went to in an attempt to get the accurate, factual information into the hands of the FightForGK members. Their refusal to receive the facts and their continued effort to recruit members to their cult using information they’ve been repeatedly told is inaccurate points to the overall dishonesty of these leaders. They are blatantly and deliberately lying.
I have no respect for a leader who refuses to seek the actual truth, which is that Greg Kelley sexually assaulted two little boys. And though the GRK Foundation has shifted their line of communication to lead us to believe they are simply collecting meals for the needy, make no mistake their ultimate goal is the freedom of a child rapist.
This is from their FB page:
Their “About” section of the Facebook page includes a link to a website containing their goals:
And when you follow that link here, you’ll find where any donation you make will likely go to legal fees for Kelley’s defense:
You now have the facts of the case which prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Greg Kelley is guilty. You also have the facts that the GK and JS movements are one and the same and that those leaders are deliberately lying in order to recruit support. Also, there is absolutely no evidence that Greg Kelley ever performed any type of community service before his incarceration so it’s not possible to carry out Greg’s “heart and vision” when there never was one, so don’t be fooled by a turkey dinner.
If you’re supporting this cause, you’re supporting the wrong cause. Go “Unlike” the JS and GRKF pages and allow the movement to fade into oblivion where it belongs. Restore the faith in our community so that others can feel safe speaking out against sexual assault without fear of public backlash. And most importantly of all, let this movement die so that these two precious little boys may live in peace.
*Edit Note: As of January 8, 2015, the Justice Served Facebook page has been removed. It is speculated that the page was removed by the owner, Doug Douglas.