Sheriff's Wife Makes False 911 report

  

  

•  Cowardly Wagoner County Commissioner Attempting to Evade Process Server
•  Wagoner County Sheriff Chris Elliot's Wife Judy Assist by Turning in False Police Report
•  Further Evidence that Sheriff Elliot has Close Ties to Alleged Child Molester Commissioner James Hanning
• Missing Dash Cam Footage and Phone Calls Audio Tapes Despite Open Records Request

 We have long told you that Wagoner County Commissioner James Hanning has been conspiring with Wagoner County Sheriff Chris Elliot to harass and intimidate a local businessman in an effort to derail an embezzlement lawsuit where Commissioner James Hanning is accused of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from his ex business partner. The Wagoner County Sheriffs office has been used by employees of the department, particularly Commissioner Hanning's own brother who works there and by the wife of Sheriff Chris Elliot. The brother called in the Eufaula police report that ended with the embezzlement victim being arrested after the Eufaula Police called right back to Wagoner County Sheriff department to confirm the “tip”, speaking with the brother that had called in the “tip” a few minutes earlier.

Now evidence has surfaced showing that Sheriff Elliot's own wife called in a report of a trespassing complaint at Commissioner Hanning's residence that was a process server attempting to serve subpoenas on Commissioner Hanning. She not only called her own dispatch office, that she supervised, she requested that the officer that responded reach out to her after the call to update her.

There are several dozen 911 dispatch calls that were part of the Open Records request. Most are short, responses by the deputies as they received the call and responded so we took the most important and turned them into one four minute long MP4 to post on Youtube. Clck on the link to the left to listen to the audio 911 recordings.

In the first part of the video we hear Wagoner County Sheriff Chris Elliot's wife Judy calling into her own office to get special treatment for a complaint that she must have received from Wagoner County Commissioner James Hanning. She asks who is working and asks to speak to a particular deputy, no doubt one that will follow orders regardless how corrupt. She requests that he put in a call for trespassing at Commissioner James Hanning's home to deal with a person “pounding on the door”. Now she had just talked to dispatch before she was transferred to the deputy. Then she pretends not to know who the “trespasser” is and describes the guy and provides details and asks who is being sent out and ask them to text her.

The first deputy calls in the trespassing report, then another dispatcher identifies the “trespasser as process server Fogleman, a duly registered, licensed, and bonded process server. You then here another radio call advising the onsite deputy to ask the process server to serve Commissioner Hanning at the office.

We know that the process server noticed deputies coming to the area so he turned around and met the deputies to explain the situation. However, despite the Open Records request returning some of the audio files, that dash cam footage that is automatically taken during a stop/interaction was not provided. Neither were the phone calls from the process server company to the Sheriff office and dispatch.

There are all kinds of problems with this. First a process server is an officer of the court and it is not illegal for them to “trespass” on anyone's property nor more than it is illegal for a law enforcement officer to come arrest someone or come on a property to investigate a call for help or crime. Next, the collusion and conspiracy between the alleged child molester, Commissioner James Hanning, and the Sheriff taints the judicial process when the sheriff's wife and employees conspire to assist Hanning's evasion of being served by the court. Third, can you imagine standing before a judge explaining why a defendant tried to have a process server arrested, jailed, and prosecuted for serving legal paperwork required by the court to function?

As you can see in the case information below the case was closed, no prosecution was pursued, a highly unlikely charge in any court matter.

Even worse was three days later when Commissioner James Hanning called in another report of trespassing, once again pretending he doesn't know who the person is despite knowing that the process server is working for the lawyer that is suing him for embezzlement from a partnership. This time the process server was the father of the first process server, both being licensed officers of the court responsible for serving court papers.

And the process server is a former law enforcement officer, someone that knows the law and knows that process servers are allowed to do things as officers of the court just like officers can investigate behind fences or trespassing signs.

Commissioner Hanning calls 911 this time himself, claiming that he doesn't know who the person is that is on his property. Hanning appears to have a security video set up and he is watching on the cameras, claiming the guy is walking around his property and woods, most likely because he was returning to his car. Hanning attempts to put a sense of urgency and fear in the conversation, as if he was truly in fear instead of just trying to get a process server arrested and prosecution.

The next part of the mp4 is the dispatcher calling Commissioner Hanning back saying the guy is no longer present but that he had called in and told dispatch that he was a process server attempting to serve Hanning. Commissioner Hanning is then asked for a gate code, to which Hanning responds that the gate is broken, well then how does one enter and leave to go buy groceries? More like Hanning cowering behind a locked gate

The dispatcher calls the responding deputy and informs him that it was a process server and that the process server had been warned three days earlier. The dispatcher says that Hanning is very upset and wants something to be done by this guy, the responding deputy is saying “okay”, no doubt wondering who would attempt to arrest a process server doing his job. The dispatcher does tell the responding deputy that Fogleman had been warned not to come back and attempt to serve court papers.

Once again the process server contacted the dispatch and met with the responding deputies so that they weren't wasting their time and public resources looking for a bad guy and once again the dash cam footage and phone recording of the calls were not provided by Wagoner County.

As you can see by the incident report below this case was also closed with no action taken. The process servers were shaken by the incidents though as they were threatened with arrest by Wagoner County Deputies, no doubt doing so at the behest of Commissioner James Hanning or Sheriff Chris Elliot or his wife Judy Elliot.