1

TO: Jim Zachary, Director, Transparency Project of Georgia

http://transparencyprojectofgeorgia.com/about/
Email: zacharyjim@gmail.com

FROM: E. Denise Caldon Sorkness
C: 478.731.5576 Email: cotn712@aol.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/denisesorkness
Georgia Whistleblower Protection Act Case
CALDON V. BOARD OF REGENTS
Fulton County Superior Court - 2009-CV-165267; Court of Appeals No. A11A0382

DATE: 28 October 2014

RE: Evidence of Non-Compliance of Government Transparency
by Attorney General Sam Olens and Staff

Attorney General Sam Olens is on public record stating to both the General
Assembly and the public his mandate for government transparency, while Attorney
General Olens exempts his office from government transparency when it comes to
his own defendants the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia.

Attorney General Sam Olens and staff have not only failed to address or investigate
serious RICO (racketeering) and malfeasance by their defendants, the Board of
Regents of the University System of Georgia, that negatively impact Georgia families
statewide, the AGs Office has kept the evidence confirmed in Depositions, Affidavits
and Discovery documents sealed from public view.
Yet, Attorney General Sam Olens approved the filing of four Responses in
Oppositions in Fulton County Superior Court to four Motions filed by me, E. Denise
Caldon, requesting Judge Doris Downs to lift the Protective Order that seals evidence of
RICO (racketeering) and malfeasance by Attorney General Olenss defendants the
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia.

Copies of Attorney Generals official Responses in Oppositions - which enabled
non-compliance of government transparency - were filed on the following dates at
the Fulton County Superior Court and are available via email request to anyone:

7 Sept. 2012; 10 May 2012; 2 Feb. 2012; 11 August 2011



2

Below are the Depositions and Affidavits kept Sealed from Public View by
Attorney General Sam Olens (along with Discovery Documents) since Olens first
day in office:

30 Jan 2010 Affidavit !"#$ &'&()*&+' ,*--./ Former MSC Foundation Trustee
4 Feb 2010 Deposition &+*0"-&12 '&(*.& 3"+'4(, Office of the President Administrative
Assistant from 1993 2008 (15 years)

8 Feb 2010 Deposition
#&,&(1 '4#&&( 54*1&6*(1 Former Vice Chair of the BORs
Organization and Law Committee * See notes above
11 Feb 2010 Deposition +&6$ $47!"(./ VP for Fiscal Affairs, retired; rehired as Consultant
17 March 2010 Deposition 842( 34+&/ VP for Legal Affairs; later terminated
19 March 2010 '"6*' -&++/ President of Macon State College 1996 2010;
30 March 2010 Affidavit 3+"7'*" 5&34#/ MSC Faculty member; retired
12 April 2010 Deposition '"6*' -&++/ President of Macon State College 1996 2010; retired & rehired;
Deposition videotaped; DVD in possession of E. Denise Caldon Sorkness
12 April 2010 Deposition 84"(( 92"1+&$ Secretary
12 April 2010 Deposition +&1*1*" +"(,+&$ : Secretary
7 June 2010 Deposition 3"#4+*(& ;&++&#/ Assistant General Counsel with Gulfstream Aerospace
Corporation in Savannah and Daughter of former President David A. Bell; Ms. Keller
requested a private meeting with the BOR to discuss her Fathers mental health issues
to which she received no response.

Ms. E. Denise Caldon filed four Motions requesting Judge Doris Downs, Fulton
County Superior Court, to lift the Protective Order(s) sealing ALL Depositions,
Affidavits and Discovery Documents which resulted in Attorney General Sam Olens
and staff filing four Responses in Opposition unquestionable non-compliance to
government transparency and Conflict of Interest by an elected official.

Following Attorney General Sam Olens four Responses in Oppositions, all four
Motions to release the documents to the public - which confirm RICO (racketeering)
and ethical, fiscal and criminal malfeasance by Olens defendants, the Board of
Regents of the University System of Georgia - were denied by Judge Doris Downs.

3

<=>?@ABC? DBE "@@BEC>F ,>C>EGH .GI 4H>C?J
!
I. It is strongly believed that the Attorney Generals use of the
HIPPA LAW to seal Depositions, Affidavits and Discovery documents
in the CALDON v BOR Whistleblower case is an attempt to keep
evidence of malfeasance by the Board of Regents of the University System
of Georgia - that negatively impacts Georgia families statewide - from
public view.
Ms. Caldon even offered to Attorney General Sam Olens to have the
mental health issues (confirmed in sealed Depositions and Affidavits) of
the USG college president retracted (for his familys sake) as long as the
evidence of additional malfeasance by the Board of Regents of the
University System of Georgia was released to the public.
Attorney General Sam Olens did NOT respond.


See Exhibit I (pg. 4) included in Third and Fourth Motions and the Rule
60 Motion filed on 24 July 2014 to which a ruling is expected any day;

*Copies of Fourth Motion and Rule 60 Motion are included in this
correspondence in separate files:


4


5


<7&.1*4( 4(&J Why did Attorney General Sam Olens and his staff repeatedly
use the HIPPA Law excuse to seal the Depositions, Affidavits and Discovery
documents that confirm a vast number of RICO violations and malfeasance by their
defendants, the Board of Regents of the USG, when, in fact, the excuse used by the
Attorney Generals Office did not meet the statutory definitions of being a Covered
Entity under HIPPA?

II. In correspondence to Ms. Caldons attorney, Stephen Humphreys,
dated 23 September 2014, Annette Cowart, Senior Attorney General, stated
in writing: The transcript of Doreen Poitevint was not among those filed
under seal, when, in fact, legal record confirms that statement is false.

The Deposition of Regent Poitevint was ONLY legally allowed to be
released to the public as a result of Ms. E. Denise Caldon including the
full Deposition of Regent Poitevint as an Exhibit in her Fourth Motion
NOT by any action or authorization by the Attorney Generals Office as
falsely stated by Annette Cowart, Senior Attorney General, in her 23
September 2014 correspondence.

Excerpt below from! Fourth Motion filed in Fulton County Superior
Court by Ms. E. Denise Caldon on 30 August 2012:


6


5+"*(1*)) &+*0"-&12 '&(*.& 3"+'4(
)47#12 !41*4( 14 +*)1 5#41&31*6& 4#'&#.

COMES NOW, a Fourth Motion by Elizabeth Denise Caldon, Plaintiff in
the above-styled civil action, requesting approval to release the following
Depositions/Affidavits taken in Caldon v BOR Georgia Whistleblower Case
2009-CV-165267 immediately due to previously submitted evidence that none
of these Depositions or Affidavits meet the statutory definitions of being a
Covered Entity under HIPPA and additional Good Cause.
Of critical importance, comes now the request for approval to release the
Deposition of Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint - dated 8 February 2010 - from
any and all Protective Orders (Orders) issued by this Court that currently
seals the documents noted below in regards to Georgia Whistleblower
Protection Act Case 2009-CV-165267 filed in January 2009:
End of Fourth Motion Excerpt.





7

<7&.1*4( 194J Will Attorney General Sam Olens provide written proof
that, as stated by Annette Coward, Senior Attorney General, in her
correspondence dated 23 September 2014, The transcript of Doreen
Poitevint was not among those filed under seal and answer why this
critical fact was NEVER mentioned in any of the Attorney Generals four
Responses in Opposition filed by Attorney General Sam Olens and his
staff?

Note: Ms. Annette Cowarts false statements in the Attorney Generals 23
September 2014 correspondence is the AGs latest attempt to appear transparent
in an election year. This letter - along with false statements made by Attorney
General Sam Olens and staff in their four Responses in Opposition which
knowingly misled the Court and misrepresented the truth - are violations of
O.C.G.A. 16-10-20:

False statements and writings, concealment of facts, and fraudulent documents in
matters within jurisdiction of state or political subdivisions; State Bar Rule 4.1
Truthfulness in Statements to Others.


***K The Office of Attorney General failed to acknowledge, address or
investigate the statement in the Georgia State Office of Inspector
Generals Office investigation, which states:

The evidence/conclusions disclosed in this report may have been limited by
evidence (including email, computer files, etc.) that was no longer available
at the time of this investigation, or due to certain facts and circumstances
not being divulged by those interviewed.


8

Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to acknowledge, address
or investigate evidence tampering in the removal of Ms. Caldons office
computer immediately following her termination.

Rule 60 Motion, filed 24 July 2014 in Fulton County Superior Court by
Stephen Humphreys, P.C., states in Sections 6 and 7:

6.

Upon information and belief, moreover, fraud was committed within the meaning of
OCGA 9-11-60(d)(2), as well as evidence tampering under OCGA 16-10-94, when
Plaintiffs computer was removed from her office at Macon State College
immediately upon her illegal termination in order to eliminate evidence of knowing
falsification of reports by and to a state agency in violation of OCGA 16-10-20 &
47-3-141, raising issues never brought before the Court.

This fraud related to knowing falsification of state agency reports has been previously
withheld from public disclosure under a contested Consent Order that has been
applied to the entire file in this action (notwithstanding whether the materials relate
to evidence of knowing falsification of state records in the form of personal leave
reports and resulting fraud in pension calculations), four Oppositions by the
Attorney General to Plaintiffs Motions to Lift the Protective Order (including three
oppositions by the Attorney General that falsely state that the entire file in this action
falls under the contested Consent Order barring release of embarrassing materials and
HIPPA), and four orders denying Plaintiffs motions. See, e.g., Exh 6, Caldon Third
Motion to Lift Protective Order, filed pro se
1
; Exh 7, Attorney General Opposition.
7.


9

The Colon case has brought to light both the improper application of the GWA by
the courts, directly relevant to this action, and allegations of evidence tampering
through the improper withholding of relevant evidence and false representations by
the Attorney General in actions against the State in violation of OCGA 16-10-20, 6-
10-8, 16-14-1 et seq. &16-10-94.
2
See, e.g., Exh 8, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Ethics
Memo Raises Big Questions, July 19, 2014 (question of improper withholding of
documents by Attorney General).

<7&.1*4( 12#&& LM N=>?@ABC? E>HG@>OPJ

Why did the Attorney Generals Office never investigate the removal of Ms.
Caldons office computer immediately following her termination after
fifteen years of service in the office of a USG college president?

Why did the Attorney Generals Office not investigate the statement by the
Georgia Office of Inspector General which states, The
evidence/conclusions disclosed in this report may have been limited by
evidence (including email, computer files, etc.) that was no longer available
at the time of this investigation which is further proof of evidence
tampering?





10

*6K Following the recent win in a very rare open records case, Attorney
General Sam Olens was quoted saying:

This ruling is a major victory for government transparency, said Olens.
Georgians deserve a government that operates openly and honestly. The
essence of our democracy is that elected officials are held accountable to the
citizens and that citizens are allowed to exercise their rights granted by the
First Amendment.
http://law.ga.gov/press-releases/2014-08-26/attorney-general-sam-olens-prevails-lawsuit-defending-open-government


<7&.1*4( )47#J Why do you, as Georgias Attorney General, profess in
the media that Georgians deserve a government that operates openly and
honestly, yet, you, Attorney General Olens, are on legal record exempting
the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia from government
transparency?

Ms. Caldon is waiting for the Rule 60 Motion ruling by Judge Downs to which she
plans to appeal if it is denied. She is also filing a Fifth Motion requesting the Court
to lift the Protective Order sealing the remaining Depositions, Affidavits and
Discovery documents which confirm malfeasance by the states higher education
system that the public elected you to investigate.

<7&.1*4( )*6&J Will you, Attorney General Sam Olens, submit a fifth
Response in Opposition to continue keeping evidence of confirmed
malfeasance by the Board of Regents hidden from public view
while, at the same time, pledging government transparency in the press?
11

!
RICO (RACKETEERING) AND MALFEASANCE SUMMARY:

The Deposition of Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint sealed by the Attorney Generals
Office for years confirmed repeatedly Applications for Reviews (appeals) submitted
to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia by USG faculty, staff
and students from over thirty public colleges statewide are, in fact:

*NOT READ by the members of the BOR Organization and Law Committee as the
USG faculty, staff and students are fraudulently made to believe by the BOR;

*NOT presented to the Board of Regents and

*NOT investigated, reviewed and given careful consideration

The mass mailings of BOR Decision letters to hundreds of USG faculty, staff and
students that include confirmed fraudulent and misleading statements on official BOR
letterhead and signed by J. Burns Newsome, BOR Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs, are
both State and Federal Mail Fraud:

O.C.G.A 16-10-8: False official certificates or writings by officers or employees of
state and political subdivisions.

18 U.S.C. 1341, 1343. The extensive use of RICO in the civil context is almost solely
attributable to the inclusion of mail and wire fraud as predicate acts. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v.
Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479, 500 (1985). The mail and wire fraud statutes essentially make it
criminal for anyone to use the mails or wires in furtherance of a scheme to defraud.
Note that the fraudulent statements themselves need not be transmitted by mail or wire; it
is only required that the scheme to defraud be advanced, concealed or furthered by the
use of the U.S. mail or wires.

Because every business or corporation in the United States uses the mails or wires to
make money, any business who allegedly engages in common law fraud arguably
violates the federal mail and wire fraud statutes. As a result, almost any business that
allegedly engages in common law fraud can theoretically be sued under the RICO Act.
http://ricoact.com/?page_id=53

Mail Fraud specifically requires the intent to defraud, and is a federal offense governed
by section 1341 of title 18 of the U.S. Code.

The use of the U.S. Mail is what makes it mail fraud.
12


https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/investigations/mailfraud/mailfraud.aspx

Excerpt from Deposition of Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint dated
8 February 2010, Pg. 11, sealed for years by Attorney Generals Office, states:

Q: Is there a review of any documents or evidence by the Board of Regents?
A: Do you mean physical documents?
Q: Yes, Maam.
A: "No."
Q: Do the Regents review the applications for review that are submitted by the
employees?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: I think just like I said time restraints.
Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint states on record that she did not even know she was
the Vice Chair of the BOR Organization and Law Committee in November 2008
two years earlier than her Deposition.
Note: Additional Excerpts below; full Deposition of Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint is
below on pgs. 11-35.
Pgs. 14-17
Q: So do you have knowledge of why Ms. Caldon departed employment from Macon
State College?
A: Only after our committee meeting because I dont remember hearing the case
discussed.

Q: And specifically, are you referring to the meeting when Ms. Caldons application for a
review was to come up and be heard or addressed?
A: Yes.

Q: But you dont recall that Ms.the matter of Ms. Caldons appeal came up at that
meeting?
A: No.

Q: Is that correct?
A: Its correctA phone call was made to me by Ms. Caldon.she said, .do
you remember the case that came up in the Organization and Law meeting or
something. And I said, No, I dont..
13

Q: I understood you to say that the knowledge you have about Ms. Caldons employment
situation and her appeal from the termination was gained by you after the committee
meeting was closed on or about November the 10th of 2008?
A: Well, to tell you the truth, Im not sure about where the information came from.
Pgs. 18-21
Q: Do you have any knowledge, Ms. Poitevint, of the allegations in our lawsuit, in this
lawsuit that Ms. Caldon brought?
A: No, I really dont.
Q: You dont know why she is challenging her termination in court?
A: Not really.
Q: Are you familiar with the Georgia Whistleblower Act at all?
A: I have heard of it. So far as specifics, no.
Pgs. 18-21
Q: Okay. Have you ever been involved in a Board of Regents matter or meeting where
the topic of the Georgia Whistle Blower Act came up in connection with an employee
termination, or maybe there was perhaps a concern whether an employee who was being
terminated was being fired in violation of the Act?
A: Its very hard for me to because I am familiar with the term, as to whether
something like that had come up with had come up that I was involved with the
Board. Im sorry.
Q: Im just wondering, as you sit here today, are you able to recall ever having a
discussion about the Georgia Whistle Blower Act.
A: No specific discussion whatsoever.
Q: Okay. As you understand it, the purpose of Mr. Newsomes review is to determine
whether there is any validity to the appeal?
Ms. Hyman: I object.
Q: Is there any preliminary opinion or conclusion or assessment that the Legal Affairs
Office provides before the matter is formerly heard by the Board of Regents?
A: I would think so.


14

Pgs. 23-29
Q: So is it fair to say then that most of the time the Board of Regents is going to be
interested in ascertaining why a particular employee who is appealing a termination was
terminated?
A: Possibly.
Q: And are there any printed guidelines or rules regarding how reviews of employment
terminations are to be conducted?
A: Not that Ive ever seen.
Page 33
Q: And are these meetings these applications for review and employment appeals, are
they brought up and handled at a at one of these eight meetings or so?
A: For all the Regents to participate in? No.
Pgs. 35-37
Q: Is there an agenda thats usually followed for these meetings?
A: We have a sheet that will be handed out to us that will have the cases down. But
nothing about the case will be brought up until the person whos handling that
case will visit with people about that.
Page 39
Q: And then is there a review of any documents or evidence by the Board of Regents?
A: Do you mean physical documents?
Q: Yes, maam.
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: Well, I think that time restraints is one of the main problems right there.
Q: Do the Regents review the applications for review that are submitted by the
employees?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: I think just like I said time restraints.


15

Page 41
Q: So then it usually is the case or frequently is the case then that no physical documents
are reviewed by the Board of Regents in connection with employee applications for
review?
A: I cant think of a single incident where that is the case on anything that I have
been involved with. I cant answer for any prior time to that.
Q: Okay. Usually documents themselves are not reviewed when the matter comes up?
A: No physical documents.
Q: Okay. So its just discussion?
A: Discussion
Page 51

Q: Is there a record of the vote about how to handle a particular appeal?
A: Can I tell you whether that is regarded (recorded?) in stone, no, I cant.
Q: Okay. And so you dont know whether there is any to the extent there are votes, and
it sounds like there are, are the votes recorded anywhere?
A: I cant answer that.
Q: Is there any kind of standard that the Board of Regents employs in its review of
employee termination decisions?
A: Im so sorry to be taking so long with this, but, no, there is no written anything.
Page 52

Q: But what Im wanting to know, is there any document that is generated that contains
the Boards decision with respect to a particular appeal and perhaps the reason for its
decision?
A: Not that I am aware of, but I feel sure that theres some notation somewhere, but
not any that Im aware of.
Pgs. 56-57
Q: But as we sit here today, you dont and I think the meeting minutes reflect your
presence at that meeting on that date, but your testimony is you dont recall ever sitting
in a Board of Regents meeting and hearing any appeal of Ms. Caldons matter?
A: No, I dont.
16

Q: And you dont know whether the matter was heard or not. Youre not in a position to
know that?
A: No, I dont.
Page 63
Q: Does this look, though, like a form you are familiar with that would layout an agenda
for items to be reviewed by your committee?
A: The document that I get is a sheet that will have the case number and the
individuals or individual involved, and that will be it.
Page 69
Q: So the official meeting minutes, Ms. Poitevint, reflect your presence, input and voting
with respect to matters A through H on this form, correct?
A: Correct.
Q: Okay. One of which was the matter of Ms. Denise E. Caldons application for review
concerning her termination?
A: Correct.
Q: Okay. But your testimony is you dont recall her matter coming up at all in the
November 10, 2008 meeting?
A: No, I dont. .
Page 79

Q: Have you ever spoken to any other Regent who can attest that Ms. Caldons matter
was heard and was properly handled through the proper Board of Regents policies and
procedures on November 10th?
A: No. Im sorry. I havent.
Q: Okay. Do you know what to the extent that Ms. Caldons matter did come up and
was duly handled by the Board of Regents, do you know what documents, materials and
information were reviewed by the Board?
A: No, I dont.
Pgs. 82-83
Q: Youre not aware of any investigation or assessment into whether or not into Mr.
Bells conduct or misconduct or anything like that?
A: No.
17

Q: And are you sure -- werent you the chair of that committee back in November 2008?
A: I thought I just became the vice chair ---
Q: Could you have been the vice chair back in November of 08?
A: (Witness shaking head negatively.)
Q: Tell me again when you began being the chair.
A: Well, I looked down at this. I thought I just became the vice chair
Q: Could you have been the vice chair back in November of 08?
A: Thats what it says on this, but I dont think so.
Q: Thats why I was asking.
A: I dont think so.
Q: Okay. So youre not in the position to know whether or not the denial of Ms. Caldons
application for review was the appropriate action for the Board of Regents to take?
A: No. Im sorry. Im not.
Q: Ms. Caldon makes the statement about Mr. Bells mental decline. Im wondering if
reading that now perhaps refreshes your recollection that youve seen this document at
some point in time.
A: No, I havent.
Pgs. 84 - 89
Q: But seeing this here doesnt
A: No.
Q: - refresh your recollection that youve seen this before?
A: No, not at all.
Q: Okay. Is it concerning for the Board of Regents where you have an administrative
assistant to the president whos been at the school for some 15 years reporting that her
supervisor, the president of the college, is experiencing a mental decline?
A: Would that be of concern to me?

Q: Yes, maam.
A: I would take everything into consideration, yes, I would.

Q: But really the question was, as a Regent, not you as a human being, as a Regent I
assume that would be something that would be concerning?
A: Yes.

18

Pgs. 84 - 89
Q: Do you know whether that matter was discussed -- I take it you dont
A: No, I dont.
Q: And on the second page, Ms. Poitevint, it indicates Dr. Bells own daughters and son
have called me both at home and at the office for two years regarding their strong
concern for their fathers increasing psychological health decline. And the question is
the same. Is it is that a matter of concern to you as a Regent?
A: I think it would be a matter of concern. I definitely do.
Q: Ms. Caldon reports that while working for Mr. Bell Dr. Bell, I was put in a position
of covering up countless and inappropriate auditor sensitive discrepancies. And, again
this is coming from an employee whos been there a long time. Is that something thats
concerning to you as a Regent?
A: Yes, its of a concern to me.
Q: Has the Board of Regents ever looked into or any committee organized by the Board
of Regents ever looked into any of these matters relating to Dr. Bell?
A: No, not that I am aware of at all.
**SEE FULL DEPOSITION OF REGENT DOREEN STILES POITEVINT ON PGS. 26-50
Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to address the fact the Georgia Court
of Appeals (GCA) admitted pretermitting the Whistleblower evidence in my case.
The GCA Ruling in the Caldon vs BOR Whistleblower case, 13 July 2011, pg. 8,
states:
Pretermitting the issue of whether (a) Caldons actions regarding Bells leave report;
(b) Caldons statements regarding Bells mental health; (c) Caldons report of Pattons
conflict of interest; and (d) Caldons report of Bells use of funds for professional
functions constitute whistleblowing activity pursuant to O.C.G.A. 45-1-4, we hold that
the trial court correctly granted summary judgment to the Board.

Definition of pretermit 1. to let pass without notice; disregard.
2. to leave undone; neglect; omit.
19

Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to address the fact the Georgia Court
of Appeals Ruling further admitted having little experience in such appeals.
The GCA Ruling in the Caldon vs BOR Whistleblower case, 13 July 2011, pg. 7,
states:
Georgia courts have addressed the issue of summary judgment in the context of
whistle-blower claims in very few cases, none of which explicitly sets forth a standard
for analyzing when summary judgment is appropriate in such circumstances.
Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to comply with the Georgia Supreme
Court ruling, 18 November 2013, which states, in part:

public employee would still be protected from retaliation after making the
disclosure. This makes sense, as OCGA 45-1-4 would then operate such that a public
employee would always be protected from retaliation when disclosing improper
conduct, rather than offering protection for some public employees who disclose
improper conduct (i.e. those reporting rule violations relating to state funded
operations) and leaving others who disclose improper conduct without such protection
(i.e. those reporting rule violations that do not relate to state funded operations).

http://law.justia.com/cases/georgia/supreme-court/2013/s12g1905.html


"#$%&'&() *#+,-. /-0 123(,+&4+-1&%( 5&(&%6& 578 3. 9-#%,
By JIM WALLS Nov. 18, 2013

The decision strengthens enforcement of Georgia's whistleblower law by holding that
sovereign immunity does not shield government agencies from claims filed under the
statute. Reversing a 2012 decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, the justices also
found that the law protects all public employees, not just those who work in state-
funded programs."

http://atlantaunfiltered.com/2013/11/18/supremes-fulton-co-whistleblowers-deserve-day-in-court/




20

Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to comply with Georgia Law
O.C.G.A. 45-1-4 Georgia Whistleblower Act, which states, in part:

protects public employees who disclose an alleged violation of or non-compliance
with any federal, state, or local law, rule or regulation pertaining to the possible
existence of any activity constituting fraud, waste, and abuse in or relating to any state
programs or operations. Any public employee who reports a potential violation shall be
free from discipline or reprisal from his employer, unless such disclosure was made with
false and reckless disregard.

A public employee is defined as any person who is employed by the executive, judicial,
or legislative branch of the state or by any other department, board, bureau, commission,
authority, or other agency of the State Personnel Administration and any local or
regional governmental entity that receives any funds from the State of Georgia or any
state agency.

http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-45/chapter-1/45-1-4/

Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to acknowledge, address or
investigate the fact that E. Denise (Caldon) Sorkness, Administrative Assistant in the
Office of the President for fifteen years at Middle Georgia State College (formerly
Macon State College), was terminated just nine days following her written request
to former USG College, President David A. Bell.

Ms. Caldon wrote it was more appropriate for the President to fill out his personal
Leave Reports following her years of verbal objections to altering the USG
Presidents official Leave Reports confirmed in Deposition of Vice President Levy
Youmans and among the documents sealed from public view by the Attorney Generals
Office.


Attorney General Sam Olens and staff failed to acknowledge, address or
investigate the statement by J. Burns Newsome, BOR Vice Chancellor for Legal
Affairs, reported by Jeff Chirico, CBS46, in the third of eight investigative reports
which states, in part:
Newsome said he and his staff didnt consider Caldons claims of
retaliation when recommending the Board of Regents deny her appeal
in 2008.
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23973296/former-employee-board-of-regents-hiding-records
21


C:
Stephen Humphreys, P.C.
Email: athenslaw@gmail.com
706. 207.6982
Hollie Manheimer, Executive Director
Georgia First Amendment Foundation
150 E. Ponce De Leon Avenue, #230
Atlanta, GA
Email: gfaf@mindspring.com
http://www.gfaf.org/ 404.525.3646

Sabrina Smith, Georgia Watchdogs
Email: SabrinaWorks247@hotmail.com
http://georgiawatchdogs.com/ 770.572.5888

3-. "@HGC@G (>Q? #>RBE@ ST:
A CBS Atlanta investigation exposes allegations that the powerful Board of Regents has
mishandled appeals filed by terminated employees.
Posted: Nov 11, 2013 12:27 PM EST Updated: Nov 13, 2013 10:35 AM EST By Jeff Chirico
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23934987/investigation-exposes-allegations-that-board-of-regents-mishandles-
employee-appeals
ATLANTA (CBS ATLANTA)

With a $7.5 billion budget, the Regents run all 31 of Georgia's public colleges and universities which
include the University of Georgia and Georgia Institute of Technology.
They are also responsible for reviewing appeals filed by terminated employees or expelled students but
CBS Atlanta has uncovered a document that reveals the Regents don't read the appeals before voting on
them.
"It's ruined my life," said Dale Owens.
"I lost my marriage," said Todd Brandenburg.
"I literally sat there at night," said PJ Peterson. "Crying, begging God, 'Why, what did I do?'"
Six people explained to CBS Atlanta News reporter Jeff Chirico how they believe they were unjustly
fired by the university system of Georgia. Most said they were terminated by college presidents after
criticizing a school policy or practice which they said was "rubber stamped" by the board.
22

Each received the same form letter from the Board of Regents claiming it investigated, reviewed and
carefully considered the appeal but denied it with no explanation.
"I thought the board of regents was my advocate," said Todd Brandenburg. "I'm naive."
Hidden inside public files, CBS Atlanta uncovered a deposition the board has fought to keep secret, in
which Regent Doreen Poitevint admitted regents don't actually read appeal documents.
"I can't think of a single incident where that's been the case," said Poitevint during the deposition.
CBS Atlanta analyzed ten years of appeals and found the board upheld 97 percent of terminations.
"I think the number speaks for themselves. It shows it's just a formality that the Board of Regents goes
through," said Nancy Abudu, lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Abudu, who represented a university whistle blower, argued in court records that the board violated his
right to due process by not providing a meaningful opportunity to appeal his termination. The case lost -
in part - because the board has immunity.
"The Board of Regents benefits from the legal protections that are afforded to the state when it comes to
who can sue the state and what relief a litigant can seek against the state," said Abudu.
For a month CBS Atlanta tried to interview Vice Chancellor Burns Newsome, the Board of Regents
attorney, who reviews appeals and recommends how the board should vote. Workers we spoke to said
Newsome's recommendations aren't based on a full investigation.
"He determines whether there's grounds for you to sue, and if there's no grounds for you to sue, he sends
out a form letter," said Owens.
Newsome and another board attorney, Kimberly Ballard-Washington, eventually agreed to sit down with
CBS Atlanta for an interview. Newsome said the 97 percent denial rate isn't proof of a rubber stamp
process but rather shows terminations are being handled properly at the campus level.
"We provide the best advice we can with the documents we have," said Newsome. Newsome and
Washington said the key factor in making recommendations is keeping the board from getting sued, but
they also consider employees' interests. When asked if those might at times conflict, Washington said,
"No. They never do. The best interest of the Board of Regents is to not lose cases in court."
When asked about allegations that the Board of Regents don't protect employee's rights to due process
when they file an appeal, Newsome said, "I should make clear there's no constitutional right to have the
hearing before the Board of Regents. The Board of Regents appeals process is discretionary entirely."
But Abudu said she doesn't believe the current process of determining appeals protects of system
employees and students. The workers CBS Atlanta spoke to agree and said the Board of Regent's current
appeals process left them without the jobs they loved and unable to find work in their fields.
"You get blacklisted once you get terminated," said Peterson.
"I will literally never work again because of the accusations made at me," said Thomas Thibeault. "They
completely ruined my career as a teacher." Regent Poitevint would not speak about her deposition
when asked by Chirico.
Copyright 2013 WGCL-TV (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

23


3-. "@HGC@G (>Q? #>RBE@ SU:
Former employee: Board of Regents hiding records that show mismanagement
Posted: Nov 14, 2013 5:15 PM EST Updated: Nov 14, 2013 5:53 PM EST By Jeff Chirico
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23973296/former-employee-board-of-regents-hiding-records

MACON, GA (CBS ATLANTA) -
Denise Caldon, of Macon, has repeatedly tried to unseal court records that she said contains evidence
that the Board of Regents has mismanaged a college campus and employment appeals.
"It will open a Pandora's box, there are so many issues," said Caldon.
Caldon was fired in 2008 after she said she refused to continue falsifying documents at the request of her
supervisor, David Bell, former president of Macon State College, now Middle Georgia State College.
"After I put in writing that I would no longer falsify his leave reports, 9 days later I was terminated after
15 years of dedicated service," said Caldon who worked as Bell's administrative assistant.
In court papers, Caldon alleged Bell neglected his duties and she covered to protect him.
"He would never make a full day of work," said Caldon. "It was common knowledge on campus that we
had to limit his meetings. Limit his speaking engagements."
Caldon unsuccessfully appealed her termination to the Board of Regents, then filed a whistle blower
lawsuit against the Board but lost.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Doris Downs sealed the evidence in the case which Caldon has
sought to unseal four times. Each time, the office of Attorney General objected.
According to Caldon, a source inside the Board of Regents told her the administration was concerned
about losing their own jobs for allowing a president to serve under his medical condition for three years.
A piece of sealed evidence, CBS Atlanta found in the public file contains a deposition in which Regent
Doreen Poitevint admitted that Regents don't review appeals filed by terminated employees before
voting on them.
"They make the faculty and staff and students believe that their appeals are read and they are not," said
Caldon.
Bill Simon, conservative blogger for Political Vine, wrote a court brief on behalf of Caldon's push to
unseal the records. He said it's hypocritical for Attorney General Sam Olens to tout his commitment to
open records and then prevent the public from seeing what's in Caldon's court file.
"He's engaging in false, deceptive, misleading legal tactics to cover up wrongdoing at the Board of
Regents," said Simon.
24

Lauren Kane, Olens' spokesperson said the Attorney General's office stands by its pleadings and pointed
out Caldon's attorney had agreed to a consent order sealing the record, something Caldon said she never
signed off on.
Board of Regents' Vice Chancellor Burns Newsome said an internal investigation found Bell had done
nothing wrong but admitted that the investigation wasn't documented.
Newsome said he and his staff didn't consider Caldon's claims of retaliation when recommending the
Board of Regents deny her appeal in 2008.
Since being fired, Caldon said she has lost her home, her savings and her medical insurance but
continues to fight to protect the jobs of others.
"I just wanted them to fix what they've been doing to all the faculty, staff and students. They need to
right a wrong," said Caldon.
Copyright 2013 WGCL-TV (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

Links to all Investigative Reports are below:
CBS Atlanta News Report #8:
Racketeering lawsuit against attorney general, USG officials heads to courtPosted: Sep 22, 2014
12:19 PM EDT Monday By Rebekka Schramm By Jeff Chirico
http://www.live5news.com/story/26594770/watchdog-group-following-racketeering-lawsuits-
against-state-officials

CBS46 Atlanta News Report #7:
Allegations of public corruption not investigated by GA attorney general
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Aug 18 2014
http://www.cbs46.com/story/26310100/allegations-of-public-corruption-not-investigated-by-ga-attorney-general

CBS46 Atlanta News Report #6:
Former GA Perimeter College President Sues School for Damages, Relief
By Will Frampton Posted: May 07, 2014 6:17 PM EDT
http://www.cbs46.com/story/25458130/former-ga-perimeter-college-president-sues-school-for-damages-
relief

CBS Atlanta News Report #5:
UGA professor sues GA Attorney General and others for racketeering
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Dec 05, 2013 6:29 PM EST Updated: Dec 05, 2013 6:47 PM EST
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/24149062/uga-professor-sues-ga-attorney-general-on-charge-of-
racketeering

CBS Atlanta News Report #4:
Student: Investigation into Ga. university system is 'my own version of Watergate'
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Nov 22, 2013 4:41 PM EST Updated: Nov 25, 2013 4:25 AM EST
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/24047558/student-investigation-into-university-system-of-georgia-is-my-
own-version-of-watergate



25

CBS Atlanta News Report #3: *See pgs. 23-24
Former employee: Board of Regents hiding records that show mismanagement
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Nov 14, 2013 5:15 PM EST Updated: Nov 14, 2013 5:53 PM EST
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23973296/former-employee-board-of-regents-hiding-records

CBS Atlanta News Report #2:
State worker fired after reporting Regent's ethics violation, fights for job back
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Nov 13, 2013 5:24 PM EST Updated: Nov 13, 2013 6:30 PM EST
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23961439/university-worker-fired-after-reporting-regents-ethics-
violation-fights-for-job-back

CBS Atlanta News Report #1: * See pgs. 21-22
A CBS Atlanta investigation exposes allegations that the powerful Board of Regents has mishandled
appeals filed by terminated employees.
By Jeff Chirico Posted: Nov 11, 2013 12:27 PM EST Updated: Nov 13, 2013 10:35 AM EST
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23934987/investigation-exposes-allegations-that-board-of-
regents-mishandles-employee-appeals

Atlanta Unfiltered.com
University execs deferred pay, often hidden, tops $7 million
By Jim Walls, October 5, 2009
http://www.atlantaunfiltered.com/2009/10/05/university-execs-deferred-pay-often-hidden-tops-7-million/
* E. Denise Caldon was the initial source on this Atlanta Unfiltered.com news article above

PoliticalVine.com
RICO Violations by Georgia Government Enterprises
By Bill Simon, January 24th, 2014
http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/odds-and-ends/rico-violations-by-georgia-government-enterprises/
*Scroll down to Macon State paragraph heading - begins halfway thru the article

PoliticalVine.com
Meet the Olens-BOR Crime Family by Bill Simon
http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/odds-and-ends/meet-the-olens-bor-crime-family/

The Center for Public Integrity:
Accountability: State Integrity Investigation - Georgia: Worst score in the country
!" #$% '())*" !"#$! &'( )&*+, !-( "$!" ./0&120# 3#34 /'( 5/*67 8( "$!"
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/03/19/8427/georgia-worst-score-country

The Center for Public Integrity
Georgia Ranks Dead Last in Ethics, Integrity Scorecard
By Jim Walls, March 12, 2012
http://www.atlantaunfiltered.com/2012/03/19/georgia-ranks-dead-last-on-ethics-integrity-
scorecard/comment-page-1/#comment-4579

The November 2013 Georgia Supreme Court Ruling mandates that Whistleblowers deserve
their day in court. Their decision "strengthens enforcement of Georgia's whistleblower law by
holding that sovereign immunity does not shield government agencies from claims filed under the
statute. Reversing a 2012 decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, the justices also found that
the law protects all public employees, not just those who work in state-funded programs."
http://atlantaunfiltered.com/2013/11/18/supremes-fulton-co-whistleblowers-deserve-day-in-court/
26


27


28



29


30


31


32


33


34


35


36


37


38


39


40


41


42


43


44


45


46


47


48


49


50