Weather	Late News	Justice	City budget	County budget	Archives	Search	About	Contact
Links	Lawyers	Looper	Restaurants	Bob the GOB	Opinion	Poll results	CRMC	Guest book

Subject: public records request
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:25:42 -0500
From: Nathan Honeycutt <nhoneycutt@ci.cookeville.tn.us>
To: "'geoff@putnampit.com'" <geoff@putnampit.com>

Mr. Davidian,

I have your Request for Public Records (dated July 20, 2000) on my desk.
Some clarification is necessary.

1.) in reference to the "Eldridge Murder file": do you want to inspect it,
or do you want a copy of it- your request is not clear. If you want to
inspect that file, you will have to make an appointment; and keep that
appointment. You can schedule that appointment with me.

Because of the size of that file and because it is an open investigation, we
have to make special arrangements for Records Section personnel scheduling.
We want to assist you, but you've got to help us do that. Arriving without
an appointment causes an inconvenience to you, to us and to other citizens
we serve.

The last time you requested that file (on June 20, 2000), YOUR failure to
keep an appointment resulted in personnel not being available to assist you.

I want to be clear on this: make an appointment; make that appointment with
me. I will make sure that you receive the assistance that you need.

2.) in reference to the requested arrest report: a copy of that report has
been made available to you. We made that report available after normal
business hours as a convenience to you. The normal charge for a report copy
is two dollars; please send a check or money order, payable to the City of
Cookeville.

3.) in reference to your request concerning "concealed weapon training"
records: your request is no clear; contact me and clarify your request so
that I can locate the information you want to inspect.

4.) I was informed this morning that you (on your web page) made reference
to:

a) being denied access to public records; and
b) employees 'not being available to you'

I want to be clear that I have not personally read what might be published
on your web site, and that I received this information from a third party.
Having stated that, IF either of the above are in fact published on your web
site, they are in error and/or are false and misleading. I would ask that
you contact me so that we can discuss this issue further.

Nathan Honeycutt

Response to letter from Cookeville Police Capt. Nathan Honeycutt denying they deny records

Subject:
         public records request
    Date:
         Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:25:42 -0500
   From:
         Nathan Honeycutt <nhoneycutt@ci.cookeville.tn.us>
      To:
         "'geoff@putnampit.com'" <geoff@putnampit.com>

Nathan Honeycutt wrote:

> Mr. Davidian,
>
> I have your Request for Public Records (dated July 20, 2000) on my desk.
> Some clarification is necessary.
>
> 1.) in reference to the "Eldridge Murder file": do you want to inspect it,
> or do you want a copy of it- your request is not clear. If you want to
> inspect that file, you will have to make an appointment; and keep that
> appointment. You can schedule that appointment with me.

 The state open records act requires records to be open during regular business
hours. It is not necessary for you to take time out to monitor my inspection of
public records. I can go over them myself. The law does not require me to make
an appointment, but if that is a demand the city wishes to make, I will gladly make an appointment.

I am sorry my request was not clear. It is the same request I made on three prior occasions and was denied.  I want to be in the same room with the files during regular business hours. The law does not restrict my access to them to whether you understand what I want them for. Nor does it say I cannot have them unless I have an appointment with you.

There have been instances where I have come in and there is deliberate evasion of assisting me. What
if you are ordered to run out the back door like Steve Corder was ordered to do when I come?

And when I sought to make appointments in the past, the employee is "not going to be in, but you're welcome to reschedule because our records are open during regular business hours."

Then there was the time I came for parking files and despite the city's announcement that the files would not be available because you would not be in, I went to the police department and there you were! And although you were there, you still denied me access. This is a road we have gone down in the past and I will not go down it again.

>
> Because of the size of that file and because it is an open investigation, we
> have to make special arrangements for Records Section personnel scheduling.
> We want to assist you, but you've got to help us do that. Arriving without
> an appointment causes an inconvenience to you, to us and to other citizens
> we serve.

I am sorry that the request for public records is an inconvenience to the city. As you know, the city's policy of denying records has caused much greater inconvenience than simply providing them.

Does every citizen have to make an appointment. Does every citizen have to make an appointment? Is geoff Davidian rudely inconveniencing other citizens?

If I'm there during regular business hours, why not comply with the law. We understand sometimes you're busy. Sometimes the files are cumbersome.

But as you know, Ms. Chantal Eldridge was instructed by the city to not show those public records to only one person. Geoff Davidian. I wonder why, if the city is willing to cooperate by making public records available for inspection, Ms. Eldridge was made to understand she should not show them to only one person  -- the person the U.S. Court of Appeals recognized the city was retaliating against because of the content of The Putnam Pit?

In the case of Davidian v. O'Mara, the court recognized the government has retaliated against the putnam pit by denying records.

I understand that the letters you send me are generated to make it appear that the city is interested in obeying the laws but
letters in the absence of the actual provision of the records if a thin veneer of friendliness.

>
>
> The last time you requested that file (on June 20, 2000), YOUR failure to
> keep an appointment resulted in personnel not being available to assist you.

Please tell me when I missed an appointment. I asked for records. You did not state it was necessary to make an appointment. There is no city policy or law exempting records from inspection unless an appointment has been made. The law says they are open to inspection during regular business hours.

Nevertheless, does it seem likely to you after all the time and cost to me I would not show up for an appointment?

Aren't these the same records Mr. O'Mara fought so valiantly to keep hidden when they were subpoenaed in a 1995 traffic trial in which he was paid fees of more than $10,000?

Is there any one instance of the city speaking the truth in anything having to do with The Putnam Pit? No, and you know it. Even when we caught the police chief sending pornography to the District Attorney and other high-ranking police officers, the chief LIED. He is a liar, the city is a liar.

Captain Honeycutt, your name is listed as a recipient of that email. Did you receive it or not? If you did, you know the chief is a liar. Why should anyone believe anything anyone in Cookeville government says?

>
> 2.) in reference to the requested arrest report: a copy of that report has
> been made available to you. We made that report available after normal
> business hours as a convenience to you. The normal charge for a report copy
> is two dollars; please send a check or money order, payable to the City of
> Cookeville.

I don't ask for special favors. I asked for the record during regular business
hours. Perhaps it would be a good idea to have employees actually working during
business hours so it is not necessary for the city to make me return after
regular hours to obtain them.
 

> I want to be clear that I have not personally read what might be published
> on your web site, and that I received this information from a third party.
> Having stated that, IF either of the above are in fact published on your web
> site, they are in error and/or are false and misleading. I would ask that
> you contact me so that we can discuss this issue further.

Your denial of these facts is misleading and meant to cover the city's continued retaliation for what is written about officials.

I have sought over the years to have a friendly relationship with you, and you
have been a conscientious and cooperative gentleman.

Your statements in the current letter are much different in that they misrepresent facts and fail to take
into consideration evidence the courts have recognized.

I look forward to the day the City will stop retaliating against us for the stories we publish, like the pornography the chief sends to District Attorney Bill Gibson and high-ranking police officials. I, as always, will cooperate with you to that end.

You may call me at your convenience.

Geoff Davidian, editor and publisher
The Putnam Pit