Thursday, January 20, 2011

Former Deputy Chief Don Frank Case Update

Former Deputy Chief Don Frank's federal bribery case moves on...ever so slowly.

Click here for more.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

It would seem to me that a certain Lieutenant should be indicted along with Frank.....

Anonymous said...

Indicted...based on what?

Reading the attached shows a lieutenant was called about a 42.... and some time later introduced Don Frank. Nothing illegal or nefarious that I can see.

Anonymous said...

There are more than a few officers who should have been indicted along with Don Frank. I hope he rats out his other little buddies to save his own hide. That would be typical of him.
Also, I saw on the news where he was working directing traffic at New Birth. Don, do you need any KY?

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:28,

I hope you're not being serious. If you are, please turn in your badge.

That document is not an indictment. It doesn't lay out the case against him. It's not supposed to. It is a motion to prevent Frank from bringing up certain things at trial.

Anonymous said...

Guilty as charged, and hell im not so sure ol Lt Durrett isnt as well.

Anonymous said...

yeah...that's just a document from their exclusion hearing...you know one of those things where the defense attorneys try to get all the evidence thrown out?

LoFlyer said...

I never have understood excluding any evidence at a trial. Evidence is evidence, why exclude it?

As far as Don Franks, he and and Vernon should of been prosecuted way back in 2002 of misusing GCIC, something that would of gotten anyone else on this board locked up for a year.

Vern must have some good dirt on a lot of people to have avoided prosecution for so long.

Anonymous said...

Just damn! As the late Royal Marshall. RIP, would have said......lobbing baseless, anonymous grenades is really unprofessional and tasteless.

Give it a rest.....Don Frank is the only one under indictment. Heck, a LOT of Dekalb officers knew/know Don Frank.

Anonymous said...

CROOKED AS A CORKSCREW !!!!

Anonymous said...

@Lowflyer

This was a motion filed by the prosecution to prohibit the defense from bringing up hearsay and irrelevant evidence. Why are those not allowed? First, hearsay is rarely admissible. "Guess what I heard happened" is of no use in court. Second, it's a common defense tactic to bring up irrelevant information in order to confuse the jury. If it has nothing to do with the case, it's irrelevant and is not allowed.

Anonymous said...

Don Frank....disco inferno.....BURN BABY.....BURN!!!!
You were dirty as hell 15 years ago. NO MERCY for you big guy. You made your bed.......lie in it.
Always remember what I told you..........

You know damn well who this is too!

Anonymous said...

I have a great idea! Let's bring back the same detectives to Homeland that got transferred without notice..and clean up this corrupt, dishonest, and racist department. Why did they get transferred? Seems to me it was a job well done...until they were told to "stop". Why? To save a few political people? They are like us..just #'s. For the ones "WAY UP ABOVE" that I have no control over...I know someone above you! His Name is, "Jesus". He allows hearsay and your day is coming sooner or later. Ask Frank...I bet he's closer to him than he has ever been..which is still at the bottom of the pile.