Stolen Trailers and a Waverly Police Department Report

In the video above, Sheriff Chris Davis “misrepresents” the facts about a stolen trailer that was recovered on the property of Mr. Lemuel Palk, a friend of Sheriff Davis who had served as his (Davis) campaign treasurer. According to Sheriff Davis, he does not remember how he came about the information concerning this stolen trailer and that he and Investigator Ronnie Toungette went to Mr. Palks’ property and recovered it. However, we believe Sheriff Davis is not being 100% accurate about certain facts surrounding the actual recovery of this stolen trailer.

In a deposition given by Inv. Tougette, he states that he (Toungette) made Sheriff Davis aware he had information there could be stolen items on Mr. Palks’ property and that he and Sheriff Davis did go to Mr. Palks’ property in late 2006 based upon his (Toungette) request and information. However, Inv. Toungette further states there was no recovery made of any stolen property on that occasion, that Sheriff Davis spoke with Mr. Palk by cellphone, and that he (Mr. Palk) was going to bring all the suspected stolen property to the Sheriff’s Office. Click here for Deposition given by Ronnie Toungette

Despite the arrangement Sheriff Davis made with Mr. Palk, the property was not brought to the Sheriff’s Office.  Sheriff Davis was made aware of this and called Mr. Palk again. After this call, Sheriff Davis stated once again that Mr. Palk would be turning in the property. Yet, the property was never brought to the Sheriff’s Office. Inv. Toungette even spoke with the DA’s office (ADA Billy Miller and Inv. John Ethridge) about what was happening, yet no help was offered.

Inv. Toungette goes on to state in his deposition that it was not until almost a year later after a drug raid on Mr. Palks’ property was the trailer actually recovered. Inv. Toungettes’ statement is backed up by a Waverly Police Department report from September 2007 (which The Independent has obtained. concerning that drug raid. Click here for Waverly Police Department Report

This report confirms that the trailer was not recovered until after this drug raid and directly conflicts with Sheriff Davis’ statements. It also confirms what Inv. Toungette stated in his deposition about how he came into work and found the trailer in the parking lot after a drug raid almost a year after he and Sheriff Davis went to Mr. Palks’ property. This report further states that Sheriff Davis had information the trailer was stolen at the time of the raid.

Why does a Waverly Police Department report state that Sheriff Davis had information concerning a stolen trailer located on Mr. Palks’ property in September 2007 when he (Sheriff Davis) calms under oath in a deposition to have recovered it in late 2006, months before the raid ever happened? Better yet what is the trailer doing there if Sheriff Davis recovered it like he stated?

How much of what Sheriff Davis is telling in his deposition is fact or misrepresentation?  

FACT. Both Inv. Toungette and Sheriff Davis confirm they went to Mr. Palk’s property.                                      

FACT. Both suspected the trailer was stolen.                                                                                

MISREPERSENTATION. Sheriff Davis and Inv. Toungette recovered the stolen trailer when they went to Mr.Palk’s property.     

FACT. A Waverly Police Department report from September 2007 confirms Inv. Toungette and Sheriff Davis did not recover the trailer as sworn to under oath by Sheriff Davis.

So in our opinion, Sheriff Davis is not only “misrepresenting” the facts, he is blatantly doing so!