MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Brickbat: Sheriff, Businesswoman

salesmanLunamarina / Dreamstime.comA federal judge has ruled that Morgan County, Alabama, Sheriff Ana Franklin violated a consent degree when she took $160,000 from the fund to feed inmates and loaned $150,000 of it to a used car lot that later went bankrupt. Franklin said she had received legal advice saying she did not have to obey the consent decree but didn't say who gave her the advice. The county attorney says he didn't tell her that.

Photo Credit: Lunamarina / Dreamstime.com

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • gaoxiaen||

    Become an Alabama sheriff?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    At the time, the county commission refused to pay Franklin's legal bills for seeking an attorney's opinion on the federal lawsuit and the funds.

    They're practically forcing the lady sheriff to dip into the food fund!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The consent decree resulted from a 2001 lawsuit filed by inmates against the county and then-Sheriff Steve Crabbe. The lawsuit came to a halt when an agreement was reached for improvements including building a new jail. The case returned to court in 2009 when then-Sheriff Greg Bartlett was held in contempt for feeding inmates corndogs for weeks while he profited more than $200,000 of the food money. The amended decree was issued by now-retired Judge U.W. Clemon.

    In Morgan County, the sheriff receives $1.75 per day from the state for each Alabama inmate housed in the jail. The county also receives about $3 per meal for each federal inmate.

    Those private, for-profit prisons are so corrupt!

  • Radioactive||

    yeah, but CORNDOGS!!!!!, probably served them with Hawaiian Punch! mmmmmmm

  • Cyto||

    I wonder what "profited" means in that sentence.

    while he profited more than $200,000 of the food money.

    Does that mean they used money that was allocated by state and federal governments for food was used for other purposes? Or does that mean he pocketed the $200k? Big difference there.

    If they were getting between $1.75 and $3.00 for food and manged to spend only $1.25, I suppose you could term it "profit". But I'm not sure that this would be a bad thing. Although what idiot thought spending less than 2 bucks a day on food for a grown man was a good idea? That can't be a quality nutritional experience.

  • Robert||

    Lemme get this straight—they needed a consent decree to make sure the food fund was spent on food? What next, a consent decree to obey consent decrees? A consent decree to not convert the jail house into a place of private business for the sheriff, & another for the sheriff not to sell all the dept. vehicles to Russian gangsters for parts?

  • Longtobefree||

    "What I'm trying to figure out is does she have the right to say I don't believe that law applied to me or should she have gone first to the court and raised that point before she engaged in the conduct"
    Well, if there is equal protection under the law, I would say Obama set the example. Free pass.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online