Small Town Hires Cop with Sketchy Past. Then It Gets Weird

FRAT Version: A small town in Georgia hires a police officer who has been found guilty of some misdemeanors and accused of some felonies. Earlier this year, the local district attorney warns the chief of police he will not put that officer on the stand.
A few months later, that officer tickets a man for speeding. The man’s attorney sends the city attorney an email pointing out the DA has determined that officer has credibility issues. If ends up with the chief of police getting an arrest warrant for the driver’s attorney for extortion and bribery.

According to Norris’ POST profile, before he was an officer Norris was found guilty in 2002 of misdemeanor stalking and harassing communication. For actions in 2011, he was indicted for criminal trespass, stalking, criminal attempt to commit aggravated stalking and obstruction of an officer while with the Ware County Sheriff’s Office. In 2014, the charges were placed on the dead docket (not prosecuted) with several stipulations, including that he not have contact with another officer who was the subject of the allegations and that he was banned from the judicial circuit in which he had been working. In 2015 the charges were “nolle prossed,” abandoned by the prosecutor.

In 2016, POST placed Norris on 36 months probation and ordered him to complete a domestic violence course and issued a public reprimand

Your FRAT description is potato and the site you linked requires registration to read…


The site doesn’t require registration to read.

Banshee ?


Follow up.

The district attorney said he was “shocked that Officer Swilley and (Police) Chief (Kyle) Moreno would take it upon themselves to seek serious felony warrants against an attorney representing a client in their court without talking to me first or at least seeking advice from their own city attorney or city court prosecutor. and without interviewing their only witness, Mr. Rayburn, to make sure he interpreted the email the same way they apparently did.”

“I’m also very concerned about the lack of candor with the Magistrate Court,” Poston said. “An officer seeking a warrant has a duty to advise the court of all of the relevant facts and circumstances, not only those which support the issuance of the warrant but any exculpatory or mitigating facts or circumstances which might give the judge reason to decline the request. Had Judge (Tom) Phillips known that the alleged communication was from an attorney advocating on behalf of his client, I very much doubt that the warrant would have been issued in the first place.”