Crime/Court
Denied Another Continuance, Commonwealth Nol Prosses Charges Related to Claimed Self-Defense Struggle With Former Brother-in-Law
The five-month saga of a county man who lost his federal top secret clearance third-party contractor’s job after being arrested on multiple charges related to his producing a handgun he was licensed to carry during a March 13th physical altercation on his home property in the Apple Mountain West subdivision with his former brother-in-law, appears to finally have ended — probably.
On Thursday, August 3rd, with the Commonwealth again unable to produce or even contact the alleged victim, Wesley Martin, Warren County General District Court Judge Christopher Collins denied Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Samantha Meadows motion for another continuance in its case against John Morgan.
Following Judge Collins ruling against the prosecution motion to continue the hearing to another date in an attempt to produce the alleged victim and likely only Commonwealth eye-witness, prosecutor Meadows made the motion to nol pros (dismiss) the charges against the defendant. Morgan was charged with three class 1 misdemeanors: Brandishing a Firearm, Reckless Handling of a Firearm, Assault and Battery, and one class 6 felony charge of Strangulation. It should be noted that the gun did discharge once during the struggle for its possession, but no one was shot.
It was noted that should the Commonwealth re-establish contact with the alleged victim, Mr. Martin, it could, if so desired, refile the charges by direct indictment to the grand jury. So, as stated above — “Probably” resolved.
How probable? — Let’s explore some background on the circumstances surrounding the March 13 struggle between John Morgan and his sister’s former husband, Wesley Martin. The physical struggle, which grew out of a verbal disagreement, occurred when Wesley Martin was returning his daughter, who is under the age of 10, to Morgan’s 22 hours late after a court-established every third-weekend visitation.
Morgan explained that he and his wife Jen have custody of his sister and Martin’s daughter, and the daughter’s half-brother due to his brother-in-law and his sister, who is now Martin’s estranged wife, illegal drug use, and other related social instability and legal issues. According to Morgan, the escalating argument began after he informed his brother-in-law he would not be allowed back on the property for any visitation pickups until the court had ruled on the day-late return of the girl on March 13. Morgan asserts that led to Martin escalating the verbal disagreement and becoming increasingly physical in backing the larger Morgan up to a post on his front porch.
“We do have full custody of my niece and nephew. We have been visited by child services here in Warren County, and they found no issues. The custody case was in Frederick County, which is where my sister lives. We have three children of our own that live with us as well as two more that are college age and live outside the home,” Morgan told Royal Examiner in bringing his situation to our attention prior to a July 5 hearing. “The Frederick County social services has been involved for almost a year now and has visited our home and interviewed us multiple times, verifying our home is a safe and good environment for the children. We have worked extensively with them to provide a wonderful home for the kids.”
Following the August 2 nol pros of the charges during his conversation with this reporter, Morgan addressed the custody situation and how it arose. “It’s sad that some people will see us as taking (the children) from their parents, but we didn’t. The parents could not take care of them or raise them properly, and the State found that issue, we didn’t … We simply took them into our home following the State ruling, keeping them out of foster care,” Morgan observed of the alternative to the children’s uncle and aunt taking them in.
As to his assertions about Martin’s legal problems, Morgan produced a five-page rap sheet from multiple jurisdictions with dates from 2013 through 2023, including 10 illegal drug charges involving possession and intent to manufacture schedule 1 and 2 drugs; 8 charges including assault & battery, assault & battery of a family member, violation of a protective order, enter property with intent to assault or do damage; among other charges including grand and petty larceny, and 21 traffic charges, including operating without a permit, circumventing an ignition system locking system, DWI (drugs) second offense, improper and erratic driving.
In arguing against the continuance of the July 5 hearing to August 2nd, defense counsel Joseph Pricone pointed to his client’s ongoing employment dilemma hinging on the resolution of these charges. That dilemma is a direct result of the charges brought against him related to this incident. Initially, Morgan was transferred to a job not requiring his existing top-secret clearance, a clearance he eventually lost, along with his job, due to these charges filed against him.
“I’m very glad that this seems to be over. I have no hard feelings to law enforcement. I certainly still stand behind law enforcement a hundred percent, I support law enforcement for what they do, and I’m grateful for the things they do. I know mistakes happen. It’s sad I had to fall victim to that,” he said outside the courthouse following the August 2nd nol pros of the charges.
Morgan observed that the responding deputies first speaking with his former brother-in-law at the foot of his property may have impacted how they perceived events transpiring. “I believe so,” he said, leading to our observation about the impact of the size differential between him and Martin, 6-5 to 5-11, with a considerable weight disparity in Morgan’s favor, as noted in the arresting officer’s written report, which will be addressed below.
A big guy and a gun
As to the four charges against him, Morgan asserts that he was acting in self-defense in what evolved into a physical struggle for possession of his semi-automatic Smith & Wesson .45 caliber handgun he has a conceal/carry permit for and was carrying at the time of the March 13 incident with Martin. Citing physical health issues with blood pressure/heart, and his back, Morgan said he told Martin if he did not back off from his physical pressure exerted on Morgan’s front porch after the girl was placed inside with her nieces, nephews, and half-brother, he would pull his gun and use it if necessary. Morgan reported that during the struggle for the gun, it did discharge but away from any person or the residence as he tried to assure if it fired, it would not be in the direction of people, even Martin, he decided as the struggle progressed, or an occupied structure.
But having threatened to pull his gun and shoot Martin if necessary, Morgan wrote in his statement on the incident: “He told me to go ahead and pressed into me; I then proceeded to pull my pistol and place it to his head. He again did not back up and did not retreat, instead got more confrontational. I asked or told him multiple times to leave, and back away, and still, he refused.” Morgan’s wife, who made the initial 911 call for law enforcement assistance, remained outside the residence and, to our knowledge, is the only third-party witness to the altercation and struggle between the two men.
When Warren County Sheriff’s Office deputies arrived at the Morgans’ home after first encountering Wesley Martin at the edge of that property, it was John Morgan who was handcuffed due to his admitted pulling of the handgun. As noted above, he is licensed to carry and was carrying at the time of the altercation. However, he was not charged till the next day when arresting Deputy Paul Bernd acquired direct indictments against Morgan from the Magistrate’s Office on the above-cited three misdemeanors and one felony strangulation charge.
In his written account of the incident, WCSO Deputy Bernd wrote: “MORGAN asserted that, during the argument and physical altercation, before he produced his firearm, MARTIN was holding him against a post on his front porch. MORGAN claimed he was unable to retreat from MARTIN during this time, which is what caused MORGAN to believe he would be justified in producing his firearm. It should be noted that MORGAN is approximately 6′ 5″ and 280 pounds, whereas MARTIN is approximately 5′ 8″ and 170 pounds.”
Officer Bernd does acknowledge Morgan’s reference to health conditions impacting him during the incident but appears skeptical: “The accused also asserted he has health conditions, namely related to his heart and back, which caused him to fear MARTIN would overpower him during the physical altercation. The accused, however, never mentioned feeling as though he was going to lose consciousness, nor did he ever mention that MARTIN had any weapons or any other means to gain the upper hand during the physical altercation. In fact, it was MORGAN who was able to subdue MARTIN in a ‘choke’ hold at the end of the physical altercation and not the other way around.”
Morgan did say his heart rate and blood pressure flared up during the altercation leading to an ambulance being sent “as my heart and blood pressure were out of control.” However, he added that he was able to steady himself with the incident over and authorities on the scene and signed off on not needing emergency medical transport from the scene.
Morgan prepared the written account referenced above of his perception of the incident for his employer, which he told the Royal Examiner became his “official statement” on the incident. It reads in part, “Using the gun, I started to push him away, and he went for my firearm. We then engaged as he was fighting me for the gun. I kept the gun pointed away from my wife and house so that if it was discharged, it would not be toward individuals. The gun did go off, and no one was injured. I took this opportunity as it startled Mr. Martin to put him on his back as he was still fighting me for the gun. Using my right hand to secure the gun, with him grabbing at it with both of his hands, I took my left arm and put it in his neck to subdue him and hold him down.
“Once he was out of breath, I was able to push him away safely and keep control of my firearm and told him to leave again. At this point, he did leave while still threatening me, and we waited in the road in front of our house for the sheriff’s department to arrive.
“Once they arrived, I was placed in handcuffs. They took his statement, and when the deputy came to me, he only asked how someone my size was in fear for their life.”
Crime/Court
McDonald Criminal Convictions Sentencing Hearing, Part 2, Set for Late May
In the wake of the April 9, Part One Sentencing Hearing of former Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Executive Director Jennifer McDonald, the website court calendar of the 10th Western District of Virginia has finally posted a date for Part Two of that hearing. That date is Wednesday, May 29, 2024, on the 10 a.m. docket in the Harrisonburg federal courthouse where McDonald was convicted of 30 criminal counts related to the FR-WC EDA “financial scandal” circa 2014 to 2018. Those who have followed that story since it began unraveling, including on these pages from the fall of 2016 to late 2018, will recall an estimated $26-million in EDA assets was moved to unauthorized or what is now believed to be fraudulently presented uses. Trial testimony indicated McDonald moving about $6.5 million to her personal use unauthorized by the then EDA Board of Directors.
As reported in our coverage of that April 9 hearing, Part Two will hear Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon’s rulings on a number of objections filed by both the prosecution and defense counsels to the precedence of evidence submitted by the other side in written summaries to the court leading up to the April 9th start of McDonald’s sentencing hearing. Also argued on April 9 were “Forfeiture” of defendant McDonald assets, “Restitution”, and “Special Conditions” being sought at sentencing from both the prosecution and defense. While Judge Dillon ruled on a number of these objections on April 9, she took some under advisement, seeking written support from both sides to their motions arguments.
In addition to those rulings, prosecution and defense counsel are expected to make final arguments in support of their sentencing proposals, and Judge Dillon will set a date for Part Three of the Sentencing Hearing. Part Three is when the 47-year-old McDonald is anticipated to find out the court’s ruling on arguments for relative leniency to prison sentencing guidelines, six years, by her legal team versus the prosecution’s high-end request. The prosecution is seeking a 22-year sentence with 24 months sought for an Aggravated Identity Theft conviction of McDonald regarding the use of Truc “Curt” Tran’s name in one involved “financial scandal” real estate transaction, tacked on to a total of 240 months (20 years) being sought on McDonald’s other 29 convictions on fraud and money laundering counts.
Crime/Court
Major Online Child Protection Operation Nets Arrest in Warren County
In a crackdown on internet crimes against children, the Warren County Sheriff’s Office, in collaboration with the Northern Virginia/DC Metro Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force, has announced the arrest of Steven C. Sherman, a 57-year-old man from Inwood, WV. This arrest is part of a broader effort to combat the online solicitation of minors in the region.
The operation, which began covertly on February 28, 2024, involved undercover officers posing as minors online to identify and apprehend individuals attempting to exploit children. Mr. Sherman reportedly initiated unsolicited contact with an investigator who was posing as a juvenile under the age of 15. Over the course of their communications, he allegedly requested lewd photos and engaged in the transmission of obscene materials, believing he was interacting with a young girl.
On April 16, 2024, following a detailed investigation and with the assistance of the Berkeley County Sheriff’s Office, Mr. Sherman was arrested without incident and is currently held at the Eastern Regional Jail. Facing serious charges for his actions, he appeared before a magistrate and was ordered to be held without bond, pending extradition to Virginia. His court date is May 9, 2024, at the Warren County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.
The Warren County Sheriff’s Office has expressed gratitude towards the Berkeley County Sheriff’s Office for their support in the operation and emphasized the importance of inter-agency cooperation in tackling such critical issues. The community is also encouraged to come forward with any information related to soliciting or exploiting minors by contacting Criminal Investigations Sergeant M.R. Ramey at (540) 635-7100 or via email at mramey@warrencountysheriff.org.
This case highlights the ongoing risks and challenges posed by online interactions and the importance of vigilance in protecting vulnerable populations, especially children, from exploitation. The Warren County Sheriff’s Office remains committed to fighting against internet crimes targeting children and urges the public to report any suspicious activities.
As this case progresses, the community hopes for a resolution that reinforces the safety and security of its children and serves as a deterrent to others who might exploit the internet’s anonymity for harmful purposes.
Crime/Court
Warren County Sheriff’s Office Cracks Down on Online Crimes Against Children
In a move to protect children from online predators, the Warren County Sheriff’s Office has made a notable arrest following a proactive undercover operation aimed at the online solicitation of minors. This operation took place in the Warren County and Front Royal areas, showcasing the department’s commitment to safeguarding the community’s vulnerable youth.
The operation came to a head on Wednesday, March 27, 2024, when Samuel Funkhouser, a 33-year-old man from Romney, West Virginia, reached out to an undercover investigator posing as a juvenile under 15. During their communication, Funkhouser requested inappropriate photos and content, believing he was interacting with a young girl. He also sent obscene materials to the investigator, some of which included illegal content involving bestiality. This unsolicited and disturbing interaction was initiated entirely by Funkhouser, leading to swift actions by law enforcement.
The investigative team, part of the Northern Virginia/DC Metro (NOVA/DC) Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force, coordinated by the Virginia State Police, worked diligently to identify and locate Funkhouser. On April 10, 2024, they executed their arrest with the support of the Hampshire County Sheriff’s Office. Funkhouser was apprehended without incident and is now held at the Potomac Highlands Regional Jail. He faces a court date on May 15, 2024, with no bond offered due to the severity of the charges.
The Warren County Sheriff’s Office urges the community to remain vigilant and report any suspicious activities concerning the exploitation of minors. Investigator C.J. McDaniel, who can be contacted at (540) 635-7100 or cmcdaniel@warrencountysheriff.org, is leading the call for community support to bring further perpetrators to justice.
This case highlights the critical importance of inter-agency collaboration, as the Hampshire County Sheriff’s Office played a vital role in the successful capture of Funkhouser. The Warren County Sheriff’s Office extends its gratitude to all partners involved in this operation and remains steadfast in its resolve to combat internet crimes against children. The community is encouraged to stay informed and engaged in protecting every child from the dangers of online predators.
Crime/Court
Two Former Warren County Deputies Indicted for Murder in 2022 Death of Elderly Man Following Traffic Stop
Two former deputies of the Warren County Sheriff’s Office, Zachary Fadley, 31, and Tyler Poe, 27, have been indicted on murder charges relating to the April 2022 death of 77-year-old Ralph C. Ennis. This decision comes after an incident following a traffic stop in Front Royal, Virginia, where Ennis, who was reportedly suffering from dementia, was tackled and subsequently died.
The Virginia State Police announced these indictments this week, noting that the incident began when deputies observed Ennis driving erratically on Route 522. The situation escalated after a short pursuit, ending in a parking lot where the confrontation occurred.
According to police reports, Ennis appeared confused during the encounter. Family members have indicated that he was suffering from dementia at the time. After being tackled and restrained by the deputies, Ennis was hospitalized with a severe head wound and died in hospice two weeks later. While the state medical examiner initially cited natural causes related to Alzheimer’s complications as the cause of death, the actions of the deputies led to further investigation.
Last year, both deputies were also indicted on charges of malicious and unlawful wounding, with those cases still pending. These latest indicators introduce more severe allegations, indicating a shift in the prosecutorial approach to the case. Fadley and Poe were arraigned this Monday and released on bond.
This case highlights ongoing concerns regarding law enforcement interactions with vulnerable populations, particularly the elderly and those with mental health issues. It also raises questions about the use of force and the responsibilities of law enforcement to handle such situations with greater care and understanding. The trials for the original charges have been delayed, and the community is closely watching to see how justice will be served in this tragic incident.
FRPD Dash Cam – Ralph Ennis
FRPD Body Cam – Ralph Ennis
Crime/Court
Mark Egger’s $5,000 Civil Defamation Case Against Stevi and Cameron Hubbard Dismissed – But is That The End?
After counsel Jeremiah Egger rested the plaintiff’s case in his client, and father, Mark Egger’s $5,000 civil defamation suit against Stevi Hubbard and her daughter Cameron Thursday morning in Warren County General District Court, defense counsel Phillip Griffin rose to argue for dismissal of the civil claims action. Griffin told Judge Christopher E. Collins there was not enough substantive evidence presented by the plaintiff to continue the civil, small claims court case.
In addition to a preponderance of personal opinions on what the photo-shopped graphic at the center of the defamation claim presented, as well as the submission of plaintiff exhibits without the presence of the authors of that evidence related to the criminal investigation undertaken at the request of plaintiff Egger or his witnesses, defense counsel zeroed in on his key point. That point was no plaintiff evidence submitted of document-able damages suffered by Mark Egger as a result of the Hubbards’ believed circulation of a photo-shopped graphic of Egger in a light-colored, hooded robe.
Plaintiff Mark Egger and several other plaintiff witnesses described the superimposed garb as a “KKK” robe. Egger’s civil claim for $5,000 in damages was based on the circulation of the graphic on vehicles parked at a Samuels Public Library Board of Directors meeting in 2023 during the CleanUp Samuels Library (CSL) movement to remove LGBTQ-themed books from the library, particularly its children’s section. Both Egger and the Hubbards were involved in that library material dispute on opposing sides, Egger for removal, the Hubbards in support of maintaining the LGBTQ-themed material under guidelines established by library staff and board of directors members.
After hearing both sides argue for or against dismissal, Judge Collins recessed court for what he estimated as a 10-minute break to ponder what he had heard and relevant case law precedents. Fifteen minutes later he returned to court and granted the defense’s dismissal motion, citing a lack of any evidence of financial or personal harm to the plaintiff as a result of the Hubbards alleged actions surrounding circulation of the photo-shopped graphic of Egger.
Referencing plaintiff witness testimony in response to questions about how the flyer placed on Library parking lot car windshields during a Library Board of Directors meeting attended by both Egger and the Hubbards impacted their perception of Egger, Judge Collins observed, “All I heard was ‘If I didn’t know Mr. Egger, maybe’ — I’ve seen no evidence this flyer harmed his reputation.” The judge also noted that “I may have lost some sleep over this” did not meet the case law damages standard.
As previously reported surrounding earlier hearings in the case last year, Mark Egger claimed the circulated graphic he attributed to the Hubbards portrayed him as a KKK-dressed person, implying violent support of anti-black racism. Such a portrayal had negatively impacted his personal credibility and possibly cost him lost piano students due to the racist caricature, Egger asserted.
However, the Hubbards said and presented graphic support that the robed outfit superimposed on an image of Mark Egger, rather than a KKK reference, was of a hooded “Capirote” uniform once more commonly donned by European Catholics, particularly in Spanish areas, as part of an Easter season repentance for one’s sins ritual dating back as far as the Spanish Inquisition era. Egger, like many in the CSL movement, is a self-identified Catholic with background connections to Christendom College and/or St. John the Baptist Catholic Church in Front Royal.
In fact, defense cross-examination questions: “You were involved with the Clean Up Samuels effort for some time, weren’t you?” (“Not true” Egger quickly replied) and “You’re a member of the Catholic Church?” both brought objections from plaintiff counsel, as to relevance.
After the judge’s ruling for dismissal while leaving the courtroom, plaintiff Mark Egger, who has declined to speak to this reporter following earlier hearings, handed me a printed note, saying, “This is my comment.” Appearing to address the above-referenced CSL Samuels Library book removal controversy he had appeared to support in public comments to elected bodies, that piece of paper read: “There is no such thing as ‘transgender’. A boy cannot become a girl, and a girl cannot become a boy.”
On the defense side, Stevi and Cameron Hubbard let their attorney, Phillip Griffin, speak for them. “We’re glad that the judge made the proper decision and we’re relieved, the Hubbards have been under a fair amount of stress for the last nine months or so, since this originated,” Griffin observed. Defense counsel also addressed potential follow-up actions in the wake of Judge Collins dismissal of the civil claims against his clients.
“The Virginia Code says that if you are successful in defending a 1st Amendment case, which is a defamation of character, freedom of speech-type case, that you may recover all your attorneys fees. And so we are going to decide when and where the appropriate time to make that request is. It’s clear that the judge did not want to address that issue today. So, we’ll have to come back on another date,” Griffin explained.
It was asked if that implied additional litigation related to this case. “So, the judge made the comment that if you accuse somebody of a crime and it turns out they didn’t do it, then you can get opened up to a defamation case. And as you heard from the evidence, there was a request that a law enforcement investigation be opened up directed towards the Hubbards, both of them,” Griffin noted, adding, “And that’s something we’ll consider when we make the claim for attorney’s fees.”
Crime/Court
Part 1 of 3-Part McDonald Sentencing Hearing Draws Judicial Request for Written Support of Motions Arguments Taken Under Advisement
In the first of what is now forecast to be a three-part sentencing hearing for former Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Director Jennifer McDonald, Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon heard arguments from federal prosecutors and federal court-appointed defense attorneys on several aspects of the evidence to be presented during this sentencing hearing. That evidence included what we counted as 30 “Objections”, largely from the defense side, to the precedence of evidence submitted by the other side in written summaries to the court leading up to Tuesday’s Phase One start of McDonald’s sentencing. Also argued were “Forfeiture” of her assets, “Restitution”, and “Special Conditions” being sought at sentencing from both the prosecution and defense. While Judge Dillon ruled on a number of these objections, she took some under advisement, seeking written support from both sides to their motions. She then estimated a one-week break to review submitted material prior to starting Part Two of the sentencing hearing, and the setting of a date for Part Three when the 47-year-old McDonald is anticipated to find out the court’s ruling on arguments for relative leniency (6 years) by her legal team, versus 22 years near the top end of sentencing guidelines by federal prosecutors.
One correction from our sentencing preview story, the prosecution is seeking a 22-year sentence, not 24 years, still near the upper sentencing ranges, with the 24-months sought for Aggravated Identity Theft by McDonald against Truc “Curt” Tran tacked on to a total of 240 months (20 years) on McDonald’s other 29 convictions on fraud and money laundering counts.
That Judge Dillon has taken a firm hold of the context of this sentencing hearing on McDonald’s 30 criminal convictions related to the unauthorized and/or fraudulent use and movement of EDA assets estimated in the millions of dollars was her opening the hearing at 9 a.m. April 9, with the observation, “We’re here for Part One” of the sentencing hearing. Near the end of the sentencing hearing’s Part One around 3:15 p.m. Tuesday afternoon, the judge noted she was taking arguments on the Restitution aspect “under advisement”.
In addition to the prosecution and defense counsels arguments upholding their side of the case law on their motions for lesser or harsher sentencing of McDonald, three witnesses were heard from on April 9. They were recently retired Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Board of Directors Chairman Scott Jenkins, Cherry Bekaert financial investigator Scott McKay, and former FR-WC EDA Administrative Assistant to Jennifer McDonald, Michelle “Missy” Henry. All three were called by the prosecution. In turn they illustrated various economic, financial, and personal impacts of McDonald’s now-convicted-of financial crimes.
First called, Scott Jenkins, not only described the current financial insolvency of the FR-WC EDA in the wake of the estimated $26-million “financial scandal” during McDonald’s leadership during which she is believed to have diverted $6.5 million to her personal benefit, but also a rise in mistrust between the involved municipal entities, the Town of Front Royal and Warren County’s elected, decision-making bodies, and both municipalities’ co-founded over half a century ago quasi-governmental institution, the FR-WC EDA. That distrust arose in great part, Jenkins described, from the Town of Front Royal pulling out from its 34% share of the cost of the EDA-overseen construction of Leach Run Parkway within the town limits, as well as other arguments against shared liability for EDA “financial scandal” losses.
One might note that those lack of shared liability arguments came despite the Town’s proactive involvement in enabling EDA financial scandal era projects, most notably the ITFederal $10-million loan now believed to have been acquired under false pretenses orchestrated by McDonald, and some believe then-Sixth District of Virginia U.S. Congressman Bob Goodlatte. Goodlatte, who in 2017 pushed an initiative to remove third-party ethical oversight of the U.S. Congress, trumpeted ITFederal as a great economic development partner for this community. It appeared that partnership would be built on myriad federal contracts totaling $140-million, that it turned out ITFederal only had the opportunity to bid on.
Michelle Henry described her friendship and long-time co-worker status with McDonald dating to 2012, and the impact of being associated with the financial improprieties from that administrative assistant’s relationship to McDonald. She described being called to her home where she was arrested in 2019 and shackled in front of a young grandchild, and then spending 30 days in jail after losing her job on the presumption of being involved in McDonald’s now convicted-of crimes. Asked if it affected her, Henry replied, “It changed everything about me … Everything about me is different. Everything I viewed about people,” she said, adding that for a time she couldn’t hold a job — “I couldn’t think straight,” she said. She noted a community-wide assumption of guilt and hostility directed, not only toward McDonald, but her way as well after she was arrested. The charges against Henry were eventually dropped, as they were against most, if not all, locally charged believed co-conspirators due to local prosecutors running up against speedy trial statutes and then change of venue moves.
Henry and defense counsel sparred over Henry’s description of being “found innocent” criminally and civilly versus having the charges dropped and not refiled. In opening its cross examination of Henry defense counsel posed these questions: “Jennifer McDonald didn’t arrest you? Jennifer McDonald didn’t file charges against you?” to make the point that Henry’s negative experience was not generated by their client, but rather by the legal and law enforcement systems reaction to the EDA “financial scandal” investigation.
Perhaps Henry’s most tellingly emotional comment began about an unnamed friend: “I spoke at my best friend’s funeral. This isn’t far from that,” she said of her testimony at Part One of the now three-phased McDonald sentencing hearing.
Cherry Bekaert financial investigator Scott McKay sparred with lead defense counsel Andrea Harris on a dizzying array of financial transactions uncovered by his company’s review of several years of EDA financial transactions and annual audits once suspicions began to surface. This line of cross examination helped reveal part of the defense’s strategy in seeking a lesser sentence, as McDonald’s attorneys noted a lack of due diligence oversight of McDonald’s EDA transactions from all levels of involved entities. That included the appointed EDA board of directors and the two municipal elected bodies that appointed that EDA board. It may be noted that the Town voluntarily gave up EDA board appointment authority in 2012 after being relieved of operational funding responsibility of the EDA as part of another effort not to double tax town citizens for services provided county-wide, as they are citizens of both the town and county.
But that was then, this is now. Stay tuned as Parts Two and Three of the latest chapter of what has evolved into this community’s own soap opera, crime drama, continue to play out in the federal courthouse in Harrisonburg, Virginia, in the coming week or weeks.