Crime/Court
Roles of McDonald, EDA Board & Goodlatte described at EDA hearing
The level of authority given former Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Executive Director Jennifer McDonald to pursue client contact leads and a consequent lack of oversight from her board of directors was a primary issue in testimony and closing arguments on Friday, May 31.
In fact, some professional tension was palpable between McDonald defense counsel Jay McDannell and lead EDA attorney Cullen Seltzer as they summarized the cases they had presented over 2-1/2 days leading to closing arguments beginning at 12:45 p.m., Friday afternoon. The result of that third and final day of the EDA civil suit motions hearing was previously reported in Royal Examiner, below:
Some McDonald assets frozen, jointly-owned exempted in EDA civil case
In beginning his rebuttal to the plaintiff attorney’s closing statement McDannell referenced what he termed “vitriolic attacks on my client”. They were attacks he said he had tried not to respond in kind to – “That ends today” he told the court.
And he wasn’t kidding – McDonald’s attorney called the plaintiff case “craven and stupid” adding, “They put the cart before the horse” in an attempt to cover what he called “a failed filing” of the EDA $17.6 million civil action against nine defendants alleged to have engaged with McDonald in a wide, if compartmentalized conspiracy to embezzle or misdirect millions of dollars in EDA assets.
“The largest claim is a breach of contract claim for a contract that has never been breached – and it is against someone else,” McDannell noted of the $10 million loan the EDA secured from United Bank for ITFederal LLC and its CEO Truc “Curt” Tran.
In fact, a significant portion of former EDA board member Ron Llewellyn’s testimony, which was by far the lengthiest of four current or former board members called to testify Friday, addressed the process and rationale in acquiring that loan.
A nine-year board member prior to his resignation effective March 23, Llewellyn told the court that the ITFederal project “was considerably different than any other project we ever worked on … We were all excited about the first Brownfield site project,” Llewellyn noted of the first commercial client drawn to a planned 147-acre business park on the former 467-acre Avtex federal Superfund site in the Town of Front Royal.
Llewellyn testified he had concerns about the project early on due to an inability to find any substantive information about the company and its alleged $140-million or so in annual federal government contracts online. However, he noted that the EDA’s executive director always assured him she had verified the validity of the information about ITFederal and its government contracts.
“Did you ask how she verified it?” McDannell pressed Llewellyn on cross examination.
“No, not precisely,” Llewellyn admitted.
“Maybe because it was brought to us by the congressman due diligence wasn’t done. I couldn’t find anything online but Jennifer always had an explanation, I thought was through the congressman,” Llewellyn said.
“So it got credibility from Congressman Goodlatte – what would you say the impact of that was?” McDonald’s attorney asked.
“More than it should have,” Llewellyn testified about three-and-a-half to four years down the road from then U.S. Congressman Robert Goodlatte’s championing of ITFederal in 2014-2015 as a $40-million investor who would bring 600-plus high-paying tech jobs to this community.
In fact, Llewellyn recalled a conversation with Goodlatte at the October 2015 ITFederal ribbon-cutting here launching the idea of a $10 million loan to Tran’s company. Llewellyn said he, McDonald, then-EDA Board members Patty Wines, who was board chair, and Jim Eastham who was in banking professionally, were in the group with whom Goodlatte first broached the ITFederal loan idea.
Llewellyn testified that McDonald reported back that when first offered the loan, Tran had balked. However, the EDA decided to continue pursuing the loan after Goodlatte explained he wanted to be able to promote the Avtex Brownfield site “to other prospects by saying, ‘We not only got you this nice piece of land but financing for your project too’.
“So Jennifer went back to Tran and explained that Goodlatte said it needed to be done anyway (whether he needed it or not), and he says, ‘Okay’,” Llewellyn said of the process he recalled achieving the ITFederal bank loan.
What Llewellyn didn’t explain, and wasn’t really asked to at this hearing level, was why the EDA board would agree to extend a 30-year payback on a $10-million loan to Tran that the EDA has a 7-year balloon payment due to First Bank & Trust of Abington on. For you non-bankers out there, on the surface, those conflicting schedules mean the EDA must pay the loan back to the bank in full after seven years, while Tran has another 23 years to pay the balance on the $10 million back to the EDA. Talk about economic development working for YOU!
However, EDA Attorney Dan Whitten explained to Royal Examiner that the EDA has the option of renegotiating the monthly amount of Tran’s payback; and will likely attempt to refinance its loan payment to First Bank & Trust after those seven years. So if things go well the EDA may be able to continue to have Tran’s payments cover the cost of a refinanced bank loan. Whitten said the discrepancy likely occurred because the EDA-Tran terms were signed in September 2015 when the Town bridge loan was made to the EDA, and the EDA-First Bank & Trust terms were signed three months later when the bank loan was realized in December 2015.
And on the bright side, as Town Councilman Eugene Tewalt likes local media to stress, the Town of Front Royal DID get its twice-extended to three-months $10-million “bridge loan” to the EDA and Tran back in full when the loan through First Bank & Trust of Abingdon was accomplished. However as we also recall, the Town did lose out on two months of interest totaling around $8,000 because the term of the “bridge loan” was supposed to be a month and the bridge loan arrangement only included one month’s payment equal to what the Town had been collecting in monthly interest on those $10-million dollars in an investment account.
But back to the civil litigation hearing’s closing arguments of May 31, 2019: citing EDA “board failings of oversight” McDannell told the court of his clients’ culpability, “Her actions are attributable to them – not that she did everything right, but did she misunderstand the authority her board had given her?” McDannell asked rhetorically with a clear indication of his thoughts on an answer.
However in the plaintiff’s closing statement delivered first, Seltzer pointed to the testimony of the four former and current EDA board members heard that day. They were asked in to testify about Defense Exhibit 8 offered the previous day to illustrate board approval of a McDonald purchase of up to $2.5 million for potential use as an industrial cattle farm operation by a Tran company, Front Royal Farms LLC. Testimony indicated the planned Tran operation would produce beef to be sold in the Far East, particularly to Vietnam, Tran’s native country.
Former EDA Treasurer William Biggs, current Vice-Chairman Bruce Drummond, current Front Royal Vice-Mayor William Sealock, and Llewellyn all testified that they had not previously seen the Closed Session, Confidential Resolution authorizing McDonald to spend up to $2.5 million on a property for the cattle ranch land purchase on Trans’ behalf. That was the defense exhibit EDA Attorney Dan Whitten described during his Thursday testimony as a “fabricated document” produced by McDonald.
All four past and present EDA board members said Friday that while it appeared their signatures were on the document, they had not previously seen that particular resolution. They also verified Whitten’s testimony of the previous day that such a resolution would not be signed in closed session or likely be marked “Confidential” as it was.
The quartet of EDA board members also expressed varying degrees of knowledge or a lack thereof about EDA board discussion of Tran’s prospective Front Royal Farms operation. However, all agreed whatever discussion had occurred was far from the authorization of millions of EDA dollars to be committed to the purchase of land for such an endeavor.
Previous hearing testimony indicated that those parcels referred to as “the Buck Mountain properties” were sold back to the original owner William Vaught Jr. a month or so after purchased by McDonald real estate company DaBoyz LLC at a $600,000 loss.
“Even after she left (the EDA) she continued to conceal against those board members we heard from today. She betrayed that trust in the most pernicious ways,” Seltzer told the court in summarizing his case for attachment of $3.17 million of McDonald or her real estate companies’ assets.
Of Defense Exhibit 8, the EDA attorney called it “unbelievable, bare-faced contempt”, not only of her former board members but of the court in its attempt to render a judgment on the freezing or releasing of McDonald assets related to the civil litigation.
“She has attempted to deceive the court – I’ve never seen anything like that in a courtroom,” Seltzer said of the introduction of an apparently fraudulent document in support of a defense motion not to enjoin defendant assets.
The Sands-Anderson attorney made it clear he was not implicating his legal adversary in that deception – “He has been used by his client to perpetuate shocking deceit,” Seltzer told the court.
However, McDannell disputed that assessment, noting his client’s agreement to withdraw the document and her voluntary assertion that two properties under her control were being held in a “constructive trust” for the EDA.
He also pointed out to the court that his client had not tried to convert her real estate assets into cash and flee prior to facing the civil and criminal charges now hanging over her head, those latter charges leaving her incarcerated as a flight risk.
As reported in our above-linked initial story of the court ruling, Judge Athey took a middle ground in attaching some McDonald cash and real estate assets and not others, on the latter front leaving those co-owned with other family members alone, and on the former leaving her funds to pay for her defense against the felony criminal charges she faces.
See Related Story:
EDA Attorney accuses former executive director of forging document
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.