110

Darrell Cox – On The Wrong Side Of The Law?

ECWd’s – 110th State Representative

We covered the Illinois State Rifle Association’s endorsement of Reggie Phillips in this article and we can only wonder why the Sheriff was not their pick.  I suspect the information below may have a little bit to do with it!

You see when this article hit, and one day later Fox News picked up the story here.  Those people have enough attorneys who can read and comprehend the law, I suspect they figured out exactly what I did, which included all the evidence contained in the remaining portions of this article.

Darrel Cox, specimen of lawlessness and corruption

Darrel Cox, currently employed as the Coles County Sheriff and is asking for your vote to become a State Representative.  He also operates Darrel Cox Gunsmithing business from his home in Ashmore, Illinois.  I briefly covered those questionable transactions with his own gunsmith business in this article,

 

Sheriff Cox in conflict with State Law 720 ILCS 5/24-6 and Appellate case law.

Directly from the Appellate Court case record:

“Under this statute if confiscated weapons are not returned to the person entitled to possession or destroyed, they are to be “preserved as property” of the appropriate governmental body. Sales of such weapons are unauthorized. Consequently, the mayor would clearly have been acting outside the law in participating in a prohibited transaction with his own police department. Defendant’s argument is without merit.”

The Illinois Appellate case law clearly states, Sales of such weapons are unauthorized!

There is no confusion on this matter and politics has nothing to do with it!

Darrel Cox is in conflict with state law and case law by selling/trading seized weapons!

 

He violated court orders issued under 720 ILCS 5/24-6– Confiscation and disposition of weapons. The attached records reflect that not only have weapons been sold/traded (Gun Records #1 and #2) in violation of 720 ILCS 5/24-6 but the orders from the courts for most of these weapons direct them to be disposed of in accordance with Department Policy and the “Department” in the statute is the Illinois State Police Department, not the Sheriff’s Department. All that aside, disposed of does not mean sell or trade!  

A previous request for the Sheriff’s Policy manual generated this document.  Note that nowhere in this document is there any policy pertaining to disposal of seized weapons. 

After cross referencing all the court orders with the list of guns they initially claimed were sold/traded, the shifting began!  After demanding further records they now claim some of the guns were destroyed, kept for department use, and/or they have no records for the gun since the case is so old.  Keep in mind my request was for records from the Sheriff’s office for the past 5 years!

More disturbing is the results of this request from the State of Illinois for records destruction authorizations for the Coles County Sheriff’s office covering 20 years!  Reviewing those authorizations here, here and here, you can plainly see there was never any authorization for records to be destroyed pertaining to weapons. So do we have a sheriff’s office that can’t manage court orders related to seized weapons?  Is that State Representative material?

After numerous FOIA requests trying to establish under what authority Darrel Cox sold/traded seized weapons I was informed that the Courts granted them permission to do so however they have yet to produce a single court record to support this new claim. 

They then claimed the policy manual allows it yet what they gave me contained nothing about any such matter.  When questioned about their claim, they later produced a single document claiming it’s from the policy manual.   Major problem with that is, as you can see by comparing those two files, the original policy manual does not contain a section 305 in the Index or in the manual itself. 

Was this document just created in an attempt to cover their tracks?

A Sheriff does not have the authority to create a policy that is in direct violation of state law!

What Darrel Cox created followed state law until the last section which states, “The Coles County Sheriff’s Office may also transfer the firearm to a reputable gun dealer.”  That last addition violates state law and NO WHERE in state law will you find that language!

What really happened to the weapons?

One of those claimed to be destroyed was a Ruger Rifle yet they kept a derringer pistol for department use?   Ironically, he wants us to believe a Ruger Rifle was destroyed but to date no evidence has been provided to substantiate it other than their word. Is there any law enforcement officer out there than can tell us why a Sheriff’s Office needs a derringer 22 pistol as part of their inventory of weapons?  Drop Gun? 

For the sake of open debate, what if the law did permit the sale or trade of these weapons, which is what some sheriff’s office’s claim?  Why can’t a citizen have a chance to purchase the same guns?  Why does that gun dealer have favoritism over any other? 

Darrel Cox has created an exclusive business arrangement with a local gun dealer in direct violation of state law!  I wonder much gunsmithing business Mr. Cox does with that gun dealer?

Not convinced we have a problem with this Candidate?

Darrel Cox Violated 5 ILCS 420/4A-101 by failing to disclose under item #6 of his economic disclosure statement that he received funds in excess of $1200.00.  (See attached EIS documents)

5 ILCS 420/4A-107 clearly spells out that the filing of a false or incomplete statement shall be guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor.

Sec. 4A-107. Any person required to file a statement of economic interests under this Article who willfully files a false or incomplete statement shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.  His own signature outlines the penalty for violating this portion of the statute.

So not only is he doing business with his own elected office, he can’t even be honest about it in his economic disclosure statement!

Need More Convincing?

Darrel Cox appears to have violated 50 ILCS 105/3 Sec. 3. Prohibited interest in contracts: No person holding any office, either by election or appointment under the laws or Constitution of this State, may be in any manner financially interested directly in his own name or indirectly in the name of any other person, association, trust, or corporation, in any contract or the performance of any work in the making or letting of which such officer may be called upon to act or vote.

More?

Darrel Cox appears to have also violated 720 ILCS 5/33-3 which is Official Misconduct based on his actions outlined and supported by documentation provided.  Specifically Darrel cox appears to have violated all 4 applicable portions of the statute.  Note, a conviction of any provision of this section forfeits his office and is a Class 3 felony. 

(720 ILCS 5/33-3)Sec. 33-3. Official Misconduct. A public officer or employee or special government agent commits misconduct when, in his official capacity or capacity as a special government agent, he commits any of the following acts

(a)   Intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any mandatory duty as required by law;

(b)  Knowingly performs an act which he knows he is forbidden by law to perform; or

(c)   With intent to obtain a personal advantage for himself or another, he performs an act in excess of his lawful authority;

(d)  Solicits or knowingly accepts for the performance of any act a fee or reward which he knows is not authorized by law.

A public officer or employee or special government agent convicted of violating any provision of this Section forfeits his office or employment or position as a special government agent. In addition, he commits a Class 3 felony.

For purposes of this Section, “special government agent” has the meaning ascribed to it in subsection (l) of Section 4A-101 of the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act.  (Source: P.A. 94-338, eff. 1-1-06.)

Justification that each prong of the Official Misconduct statute appears to have been met?

(a)   – By selling/trading weapons in direct violation of the court orders Darrel Cox failed to perform his mandatory duty.

(b)  – By selling/trading weapons in direct violation of the court orders AND the statue in addition to submitting invoices to his office for payment to his own personal business he has knowingly performed an act which he knows he is forbidden by law to perform.   

(c)   – By submitting invoice to his own office for work he performed in his private business he used his office for personal advantage for himself and committed an act in excess of his lawful authority.

(d)  – By accepting payment for the invoices he submitted such acceptance constitutes a fee or reward for the performance of work he did and is not authorized by law to perform.

 

When a person puts a badge on their chest and takes an oath to protect and serve, that oath is only as good as the moral fiber of the person taking it.  Clearly Mr. Cox has proven with his past record and his ongoing questionably illegal activities he has no business with a badge, let alone being a State Representative. 

The days of our politicians having any honor seem to be a thing of the past and now anyone questioning that is considered radical.  Call me what you may, it’s time to expose the truth.

What is Honorable?

Honest – Tells the truth all the time, to include when under oath.

Moral – Respects a woman and her right not to be groped or hit.

Ethical – Does the right thing when no one is watching.

Principled – His actions speak louder than words.

Righteous – Stands up for what is right and acts on it.

Right Minded – Knows what right is vs wrong.

What do we know as fact about Darrel Cox based on court records, testimony, discipline records and public documents obtained through FOIA?

Facts:

Lied under oath

Withheld information

Violates rules of conduct

Drinking before duty

Violates administrative Rules and Procedures

Conspired with co-workers to lie and cover-up his actions

Judge states: Plaintiffs behavior not corrected with 17 years of progressive discipline

Failed mandatory Drug Testing Criteria

Bets deputies he can grab the breasts of a co-worker and get away with it

Lies about balancing his budget 6 of the last 7 years

Have we become so entrenched in our blind support of people that we ignore the actions of those people, even when clearly in direct contradiction to state law?  

 

What happen to the days of Men being Men and holding people accountable to what is right, regardless of who it is?

 

Our country is crumbling around us with corruption and lawlessness and as I have said for years, if we can’t fix it at the local level, we will never fix it at the state and national level!

 

In an effort to fix this problem I reached out to the Coles County States Attorney.  He immediately directed me to Zone 5 office of the Illinois State Police.  I did so on March 10th, 2013 and provided all the information I have shared here and then some!  

I am praying that our system of government is not so broken that these actions are washed under the rug.  Due to department policy, the ISP can’t say whether or not there is an official investigation.  They did thank me for all the emails, documents, and information. 

I wonder what the judges will think to find out their court orders are not being followed?  Will the States Attorney step up and prosecute or maybe turn it over to the appellate prosecutor’s office to handle? 

The bigger question:  Will the voters vote for honesty and integrity or will they ignore the truth and send more corruption to Springfield?

Criminal prosecution aside, the one major factor so many fail to realize in this particular State Representative race is the importance of selecting a candidate that can in fact win in November against a Democrat challenger.  I think the baggage on Darrel Cox as well as Kevin Garner is such that neither one stands a chance in November to that type of challenge. 

We the People must take a stand and demand accountability to our laws, especially for those who took an oath to uphold them!

Vote with your brain March 18, 2014!

4 replies »

  1. Like we don’t have enough crap to worry about! And how do these people get by year after year? Vote out the trash! And you can decide on your own which side to get rid of first! They are both so bloated with “pork” that it really doesn’t matter. What would serve the people best is a Noah-like slate wiping! Surly we have enough men and women that actually have moral fibre to start over? The days of doctors and lawyers and multimillionaires running the show need to end! Why can’t an “Everyman” make a difference? Because an election is nothing more than a popularity contest, and to be the most popular you have to spend the most on your campaign. I personally won’t vote for anyone I don’t know. That is grassroots. That is how a candidate gets in tune with the people. Meet them, listen to them, and if you can’t empathize, if you have no frame of reference for their position then just go away. I’m not saying Springfield should be filled with farmers. Just real honest people. People that work hard everyday to get by, not pad one of their bloated investment portfolios. People of the working class. People who know how life outside of Springfield and Chicago really is. Rant over.

  2. Joe do you hear yourself? Are the Masons and Shriners about supporting one of their own over following the law? Not a single candidate has paid me for my work ever! Deep down you know that is true but now that something close to home gets exposed you side with injustice instead of justice, which is all we have ever pushed for. There is no Phipps in this campaign. Its Phillips, and like I said, not him or anyone on his campaign has paid us for our work. That would violate everything we have worked to build for the last 3 1/2 years.

  3. Well I hope this will bury your scandal leaf…I’m sure Masons and Shriners will not buy your paper which has obviously been payed for by Phipps

Leave a witty comment