Sheriffs Blast GSA for Demanding Charges from Decide Hatchett

[ad_1] by Keka Araújo December 15, 2025

The sheriffs explicitly argue that the GSA’s pursuit of charges undermines the very moral basis of their occupation.

A formidable contingent of 11 Georgia sheriffs has issued a public condemnation of the Georgia Sheriffs’ Affiliation (GSA) for its controversial determination to pursue lawyer’s charges from the Honorable Decide Glenda Hatchett, a documented survivor of sexual battery.

The sheriffs, representing populous counties together with Fulton, Cobb, and Gwinnett, delivered a proper letter to the GSA Govt Board on August 6, 2025, imploring the group to withdraw its authorized declare instantly. They contend that the motion in opposition to the well-known tv choose—who former Bleckley County Sheriff Kris Coody assaulted—is morally indefensible and severely compromises the integrity of legislation enforcement establishments.

“We're writing to specific our deep concern and ethical opposition to the Georgia Sheriffs’ Affiliation’s latest authorized motion searching for damages and lawyer’s charges from Decide Glenda Hatchett—a survivor of a documented and adjudicated incident of sexual battery,” a spokesperson shared with BLACK ENTERPRISE.

The controversy stems from the GSA’s authorized submitting, which categorized Decide Hatchett’s withdrawn lawsuit in opposition to the group and Coody as “frivolous” and sought monetary recompense. This transfer comes despite the fact that former Sheriff Coody pleaded responsible to misdemeanor sexual battery in reference to the 2022 incident and subsequently resigned from workplace.

The signing sheriffs are characterizing the sheer audacity of the GSA’s declare in opposition to a sufferer as an unconscionable abuse of authorized course of. To weaponize the courtroom system in opposition to an individual who has already endured bodily violence and authorized proceedings for that violence represents a profound moral lapse.

The motion goes past simply authorized posturing; it alerts a devastating lack of empathy and prioritizes institutional protection over human dignity. It's a unprecedented demand for monetary sacrifice from somebody whose struggling has already been acknowledged by the legal justice system.

The signatories assert that the GSA’s determination dangers retraumatizing a sufferer whose assailant has already been convicted, whereas additionally sending a chilling message to different survivors contemplating coming ahead, particularly in circumstances involving high-ranking officers.

“Simply because you possibly can… doesn’t imply it is best to,” the sheriffs collectively wrote, utilizing an outdated adage to rebuke the affiliation’s authorized prerogative. “This plan of action sends a chilling message to survivors of sexual violence in Georgia and past.”

The sheriffs explicitly argue that the GSA’s pursuit of charges—that are sometimes awarded in circumstances completely deemed with out advantage—undermines the very moral basis of their occupation.

“Looking for lawyer’s charges from a sufferer of sexual assault—notably in a case the place the offender was one of many highest-ranking legislation enforcement officers of the state—undermines the ethical compass our group purports to uphold: justice, accountability, and help for the susceptible.”

Coody, who was sentenced to probation and group service, drunkenly groped Decide Hatchett’s breast throughout a GSA convention, an incident corroborated by the testimony of a former DeKalb County sheriff who bodily intervened.

The eleven sheriffs, together with Patrick Labat (Fulton County), Craig Owens (Cobb County), and Melody Maddox (DeKalb County), affirmed their dedication to restoring public confidence and upholding the dignity of survivors. They concluded their letter with an unreserved demand for a immediate reversal.

“We urge you, within the strongest potential phrases, to right away withdraw your declare for lawyer’s charges and to situation a public reaffirmation of your help for victims of sexual violence. This isn't merely a authorized matter—it's a ethical one.”