Transparency on Trial: Attorney Katherine Frazier Under Fire, Accused of Misusing Motions to Undermine the Honorable Judge James R. Newsome III’s Court
By: Legal Affairs Staff
SHELBY COUNTY, TN —- What any reasonable person would call a “ threat to public transparency”, in the Chancery Court of Shelby County, Tennessee, a concerning scenario unfolds that pits the public’s right to information against apparent governmental obstruction. At the heart of this legal entanglement is Attorney Katherine Frazier, who stands accused of attempting to beseech the Honorable Judge James R. Newsome III, a distinguished jurist known for his wisdom and years of commendable service, to partake in actions contrary to the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct and state law – Tennessee Code Annotated (T.C.A.) § 10-7-505(b).
The case in question, led by pro se plaintiff Dr. Gerald Kiner, involves Shelby County Government’s alleged refusal to comply with the Tennessee Public Records Act (TPRA). It’s not just any case: at stake are the transparency of public actions and the very principles that underpin public trust in our governing institutions.
Kiner’s response to the county’s motion to stay proceedings, highlights a disturbing pattern of delay tactics by Shelby County’s legal representatives, particularly Ms. Frazier. These tactics, Kiner asserts, aim to extend legal battles unnecessarily, thereby drowning the truth in a sea of procedural limbo. In his filing Friday, October 12, 2024, “Plaintiff’s Response Opposing Defendant’s Moot Motion to Stay Pending in Camera Review and Request for Sanctions Against Defendant’s Counsel” , Kiner wrote “The Defendant’s approach not only seeks to extend these proceedings without merit but also solicits this Court’s complicity in delaying justice. Such tactics warrant sanctions against the Defendant’s counsel due to it being detrimental to the principles of judicial efficiency and fairness as outlined in the aforementioned judicial conduct rules, making the motion to stay triply moot and contrary to the principles of expeditious legal process.”
This case gains further complexity with the overlay of a $25 million federal lawsuit against Veronica Brown and the Shelby County Government. Notably, the counsel involved in defending the county in both the federal and state cases is the same, raising questions about conflict of interest and the motives behind resisting transparency.
According to documents filed the federal case, there is a significant concern that Shelby County, under the guidance of its attorneys, including Ms. Frazier, is not only resisting the lawful disclosure of public records but might be strategically maneuvering to protect not just county officials but potentially their own careers if misconduct is revealed as Kiner court documents suggest.
The implications of this are severe. If it is demonstrated that Ms. Brown flouted proper procedures and the county’s attorneys defended such actions unlawfully, it suggests a deep-rooted systemic pattern of official misconduct by Shelby County Government officials. Such a scenario underlines a profound motive behind the persistent stonewalling faced by Kiner and, by extension, the public.
In an era where the cries for transparency grow louder, the actions purportedly taken by Shelby County’s attorneys, as outlined by Kiner, could be seen as a direct assault on the public’s right to know. This is not just a local issue but a fundamental test of our democratic safeguards against the misuse of power.
Thankfully, America’s robust judicial system, bolstered by stalwarts like Judge Newsome, provides a battleground for these rights to be affirmed. It is imperative, now more than ever, that this legal battle is observed not as a mere skirmish in the courts but as a clarion call for the vigilant defense of transparency and accountability.
The residents of Shelby County deserve a resolution that honors their right to access public information, a cornerstone of democratic governance. As this case progresses, it remains crucial that the judiciary upholds the highest standards of fairness, acting swiftly to cut through delays that might otherwise cloud the truth.
About Post Author
