DUBLIN, Ga. — With the sheriff's race heating up in Laurens County, challenger Tyler Jackson is claiming the safety of jailers isn't being taken seriously by the sheriff.
On Oct. 16, Jackson made a Facebook post asking why a jailer showed their phone to an inmate back in August. The next day, Sheriff Larry Dean made a Facebook post saying Jackson's post was full of accusations.
13WMAZ interviewed both men about what happened. Jackson told us he spoke with a jailer who said a jail inmate threatened his life in August. He and Dean said the jailer has since resigned.
"He verbally told me. And I asked what was done and he said nothing," Jackson said.
In Jackson's Oct. 16 Facebook post, he said a jailer showed an inmate his phone. He said the phone had texts messages saying that another guard had intercepted a drug drop. Jackson said as a result, the inmate threatened the second guard.
"He brought it to the attention of his command staff, and it was pretty much swept under the rug," Jackson said.
In Jackson's Facebook post, he asked whether Dean values his officers' safety, and said as sheriff, Jackson would hold everyone accountable.
Dean said his staff investigated the incident, and the jailer with the phone got a verbal reprimand. But Dean said the guard showed the inmate a football score - not texts. And Dean said that the second guard's life was never threatened.
"I don't think the jailer broke the law by just passing it on, he got reprimanded for showing the phone - [which showed] the score to the ball game," Dean said.
Jackson said he believes the jailer who was threatened instead of Dean. He questioned why the inmate would need to see a football score on a phone, when the inmates have access to watching TV in their cells.
Dean said at the time, that jail cell didn't have TV privileges and couldn't watch the game. Jackson said it's an example of the sheriff not taking employee safety seriously.
Back in June, the sheriff's office arrested Dublin attorney Courtney Morgan for letting her client at the jail use her phone.
In our previous report, the warrant said that a sergeant in the sheriff's office witnessed an inmate, Jacqueline Foraker, on the phone while on a visit with Morgan.
While the inmate said that she was on the phone with a rehab facility, the sheriff's office said a phone call recorded in the jail suggests she was actually talking with her boyfriend when a sergeant confronted them.
"If an attorney can get locked up for allowing an inmate to use their phone, why can't an officer get locked up for doing the same thing, even though he didn't physically give it to him," Jackson said.
Dean said that incident was completely different from what happened in August.
"That case is still pending. She's been indicted by a grand jury. Superior Court Judge wrote the warrant. She broke the law straight out," Dean said.
Jackson wanted to know why the sheriff's office didn't conduct a polygraph test in August.
"Whenever you do conduct an investigation and if it's to the point where officer's life is being threatened, you need to conduct a polygraph test," Jackson said.
"A polygraph can't be admissible in court. So I don't think the issue was significant enough to be polygraphed about," Dean said.
Dean said he takes safety seriously - but dealing with inmates and the comments they make is just part of the jailer's job.
"You'd be overwhelmed if we investigated everything that's insignificant. I'm not saying the issue is not significant if he's threatening life, but his life was not threatened," Dean said.
Dean also shared a statement and investigation report with us. His full statement is below:
"This incident should not have been used by my opponent for political purposes. It was looked into as soon as it was reported. The Jail Lt, along with an investigator conducted the investigation. It was concluded that the evidence did not support the complaint that was made. As always, if any other evidence comes up on this case it will be looked into. You have to look into every complaint you get, but you do not just take one persons word over another and take that as facts. You investigate and base your investigation off of the evidence. As far as drugs coming into our facility, we have very little issues with that. Like every jail in this country, it does happen from time to time. If an inmate or employee has ever been caught doing this, they have been charged. We will always thrive to provide the best service to our citizens and run a professional Sheriff's office.
On or about Monday August 26th, 2024, Jail Administration was made aware of an incident that had
allegedly taken place over the course of the previous weekend concerning suspected drugs being removed from a jail cell. During the course of the investigation, the Jail Administration learned that a jailer had allegedly showed an inmate a text thread between several officers the led the inmate to believe that another jailer had intercepted his "drop". Since this matter involved suspected drugs, Jail Administration called Investigations for assistance. Investigators reviewed our evidence and called in the accused jailer for questioning of his involvement. The jailer, immediately and without hesitation, admitted to showing an inmate his phone on Saturday August 24 2024 while serving lunch trays, but stated that he was only showing the score of a football game that was being played between Georgia Tech and Florida State. The jailer was verbally reprimanded about the matter and the investigation continued. It was later discovered that the jailer accused of "intercepting the drop" had allegedly been verbally threatened during headcount by the inmate the suspected drugs were originally intended for. On or about August 28th 2024, Investigations interviewed the inmate that was allegedly shown the text thread among jail officers concerning the suspected drugs and he corroborated the story that the accused jailer told us. He did not corroborate the accusation that any threats had been made to the other jailer. The evidence also suggested that the accused jailer was being truthful about what he had shown the inmate on his phone. Investigations also interviewed the inmate that allegedly made threats to the jailer and he stated that he didn't make any threats towards the officer, but was reading the text thread over the shoulder of inmate who had been shown the ballgame score. Investigations explained that based on the evidence, it was not possible for him to read an entire text thread in the amount of the time the video had shown the officer had his phone faced towards the inmate reading the ballgame score. He then recanted that he had read anything and stated that he not only had no issue with the jailer, but they had spoken most all night via the inmate call box located in the control room. The jailer later admitted he and the inmate did talk most of the night and all was ok. The jailer made a report of the alleged threats, but did not seek a warrant. The jailer who was allegedly threatened, resigned as the investigation into the alleged threats were on going. This investigation has otherwise led to one of the jail officers being terminated for officer misconduct and is still active.”