Thomas M. Davidson
WHITE CO. – The horrific tale of a young man who abducted an Indiana woman from her home, drove her to White County, and shot her in cold blood back in August 2013 has been reopened in that county, but not because of any flaw in the case and action on appeal - yet.
Instead, Thomas M. Davidson, 40, who is serving a 60-year sentence currently in Pontiac Correctional Center, has been submitting Freedom of Information Act requests (FOIAs) regarding his antics in White County…and now, he’s filed a lawsuit against county actors, claiming that they have not answered the FOIAs properly.
Davidson is seeking a judgment of $3,000 per count and fees as a result of the action, which purpose had not been stated until recent filings, and, up to that point and given a lack of explanation, has prompted some to surmise that Davidson is doing such a thing because he’s either bored, thinks he can make a quick buck at it, wants a however-many-days-trip from Pontiac to White County…or is prepping some kind of litigation action heretofore unmentioned in his multitudinous pile of paperwork filed in the case, all of it, he claims, is hand written by another inmate who apparently is some sort of self-styled jailhouse lawyer, as Davidson is apparently largely illiterate.
That conclusion could be reached by virtue of the fact that it appears White County has indeed answered his FOIAs appropriately and in full, submitting copious amounts of paperwork in response, and yet Davidson inexplicably maintains that they have not, all the while not indicating until a final set of filings what he believes is missing, so it’s questionable as to whether he can read as well as write.
Began in February
The paperwork began coming in to White County in mid-February of this year, when Davidson submitted a FOIA asking for “Any and all police reports related to me Thomas M. Davidson” to be sent to him by mail, this request made on Feb. 12.
On Feb. 13, he also sent a FOIA asking for “Any and all documents, rules, procedures and anything else related to mental health care for inmates at the White County Jail” to be sent to him by mail.
Davidson claimed that White County’s Sheriff (Doug Maier) “never responded to plaintiff’s Freedom of Information Act request…let alone within the five-day statutory deadline.”
He further claims that records were withheld from him as exempt when they were public, but didn’t initially specify which records he was claiming weren’t submitted.
So Davidson, through his jailhouse buddy who has neat printing for handwriting, claimed that White County had “willfully and intentionally failed to comply” with Illinois’ FOIA, and he’s requesting a civil penalty award of $3,000 for each count (there were two in the initial filing).
A hint as to what Davidson might be getting at comes in his paragraphs 14 and 15, where he states “A suit under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act ‘shall take precedence on the docket over all other causes and be assigned for hearing and trial at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way,’” citing Illinois FOIA 5 ILCS 140 in paragraph 14. Then in paragraph 15, he states he “has the right to access the courts under the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Illinois. Being that plaintiff (Davidson) is a prisoner, plaintiff requests the court to enter and direct Pontiac Correctional Center by order, to bring plaintiff to all court dates regarding this suit. This court has the authority to order Pontiac Correctional Center to bring the body of plaintiff to all court hearings under 735 ILCS 5/10-101 et seq.”
Davidson is asking as relief that a judge order that Maier produce the requested records; keep Maier from withholding non-exempt public records; order Maier to pay civil penalties in the amount of $3,000 for each count; award Davidson reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; assign the case for hearing and trial at the earliest practicable date; and award such other relief the court considers appropriate.
Response and more filings
On file are such pieces of evidence as Maier’s response to Davidson’s request (dated Feb. 20, which is actually what Maier said, on the response itself, was the day they received Davidson’s request, considering that mail is slow getting out of Illinois Department of Corrections, as well as slower going in); and thirteen pages of reports on Davidson’s dealings with the White County Sheriff’s Office dating back to 2011, up to and including the final incident that outlines the killing of the aforementioned Indiana woman, Sandra Burkhardt, in a cornfield in White County in August 2013.
This is what prompted Davidson to send his second set of paperwork to White, filed March 29 of this year.
Click here to view more product SPECIALS!!!
In that, he claimed that he “made it very clear” in his FOIA that he “wanted everything related to case number 2013-CF-93” (the murder of Burkhardt), but claims that the White County Sheriff “chose to send only a small portion of those records and withhold the rest from” Davidson, in violation of Illinois FOIA.
In this claim, he restated the previous demands for relief, including another penalty in the amount of $3,000.
Small Claims suit
And then, on April 24, the reason behind the filings finally became clearer: Davidson was “looking to exonerate himself,” but at the same time, he’s trying to blame pretty much everybody in White County, including filing a Small Claims suit against Sheriff Maier’s secretary, Sheila Headlee.
In this suit, Davidson claims that Headlee “willfully responded” to the FOIA requests Davidson made “even though Headlee was not qualified to do so, and Headlee knowingly concealed information that should have been included in the responses in an attempt to give an advantage to the White County Sheriff’s Department and the White County State’s Attorney from Davidson, who is gathering vital information to exonerate himself on his criminal case.”
He (or whomever has the nice handwritten print) goes on to define corruption, claim it against Headlee, describe in great detail what he believes she did wrong by responding to his FOIA, and complain she deliberately did all of this to violate his rights.
In this filing, Davidson finally indicates other cases he believes were overlooked, including a 2012 felony Burglary, a 2012 misdemeanor Battery/Disorderly and a 2013 misdemeanor Battery/Resisting. He complained about Headlee not having FOIA training as well.
He also complained that Headlee was the one who refused to provide information on the mental health care for inmates, as well as left out a necessary component in all FOIA responses: the right to appeal or seek judicial review of the response.
Continuing to harp on the “corruption” theme, Davidson brings this up several times, then states that Headlee should be ordered to pay punitive damages to Davidson in the amount of $1,750 per count (five of them), reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and that he be awarded other relief as ordered by the court.
Then he gets petty
In another couple of FOIAs issued at some point in time in February, which apparently Davidson neglected to add as evidence earlier on, in the file is a request for “Any and all press releases related to Thomas M. Davidson.”
The response to that was from Maier, who advised that he would have to contact the local newspaper office for any news releases, as his office didn’t have any on file. (It might be noted at this juncture that media outlets aren’t subject to FOIA, although it isn’t a stretch to think that Davidson might try.)
Another was a request for any complaints, disciplinary records or reprimands of Deputy Randy Graves. To this, Maier responded that his office didn’t release personnel files about employees.
Additionally, along with the Small Claims filing against Headlee, Davidson requested that counsel be appointed him because he is unable to afford one, the issues are “complex,” he is “mentally ill and another inmate at Pontiac Correctional wrote this suit for” him, but “that inmate goes home soon,” and Davidson “has limited knowledge of the law.”
On April 24, that request was denied…which will probably result in another flurry of whining paperwork from Davidson.
How it really goes
However, on May 4, White County State’s Attorney Denton Aud entered an appearance on behalf of Headlee…which he should, as the state’s attorney is the county’s counsel in all legal matters. And it’s a pretty good likelihood that Aud will make short work of the whole thing.
That’s because while Headlee might not be the “authorized FOIA agent” for the county (Aud, actually, is that agent), she doesn’t have to have “training” in order to access documents that are being sought by someone under FOIA, especially if those documents are under her control…which, by and large, everything Davidson requested is under her control.
Because the requests were made of the sheriff’s office in particular, and not to the county in general, the sheriff, with any assistance Aud may have to offer, can direct Headlee to locate and print out copies of documents requested – because as Maier’s secretary, they’re under her control. Headlee is the one who answers Disclosure’s requests for mugshots on a regular basis, and is the one who submits sheriff’s department activity reports to media at Maier’s request. This does not make her the one who “answers” the FOIAs; it simply means that because the material FOIAed is material under her control on a day-to-day basis, she’s simply the one who gets it delegate to her to either print it all out, or email it if it’s an electronic request, like mugshots or reports.
This is not something that Davidson would know, but it’s something that’s going to short-circuit his multiple shots at the county. And what he’s doing by pushing the issue is probably ultimately going to make it more difficult for other incarcerated individuals to obtain FOIA-able material, even if they go about it the right way and don’t presume to know who’s responsible for what in every county from which they might hail.
The likelihood that any of it is going to “exonerate” him for the murder of Sandra Burkhardt is very, very slim, even if he does get everything he’s requested.
No upcoming hearing date has been set for the Small Claims, nor the Miscellaneous Remedy cases (regarding the FOIAs, which fall under MR because there’s no other category for them); hopefully Aud’s entry into the matter will put an end to it and stop the stress that the convicted murderer is causing for the county as a whole.