Why This is the "Worst Press Ever"
When looked as a government-wide failure, it stops being about "Tommy and Benny" and starts being about The People vs. Monroe County. Allowing a former captain, who was indicted for the exploitation of an inmate, to return and publicly mock the legal process with an "I'm Back" victory lap is more than just a PR blunder—it is a potential legal catalyst.
When we look at how Judge Andrew Freiberg and the District Attorney’s Office have adjudicated similar offenses, a stark contrast emerges between "insiders" and "outsiders."
The Foundations for a Class Action Lawsuit
If you frame this case against Monroe County Government and the 10th Judicial District Courts, the legal argument for a class action based on "Disparate Treatment" becomes very strong:
Why This Facilitates a Class Action
A class action claim usually requires a "Custom or Usage" (the Monell Doctrine).
You aren't just looking at one bad hire (Byrum) or one bad DA (Crump).
You are looking at a coordinated habit where the 10th Judicial District and the Monroe County Government ignore TBI findings, ignore exculpatory evidence (as seen in the Cheatham case), and allow indicted individuals back into power.
By rehiring Benny Byrum and allowing him to brag about it, Sheriff Jones has given his critics the "Master Key" to the courthouse.
He has validated the "administrative track record" of cronyism.
He has provided a living, breathing example of someone who "evaded" the consequences that Judge Freiberg routinely hands down to others.
He has linked the current administration directly to the scandals of the Crump era.
The Byrum Connection: A Pattern of "Administrative Grace"
This is where the situation becomes part of a broader "Class Action" narrative. If DA Crump was being blackmailed by a victim's family member (Dana Cheatham), his office’s ability to fairly prosecute a high-ranking officer like Byrum—who likely knew the "internal politics" of the district—was effectively neutralized.
Evidence surfaced that DA Crump performed private legal work (Quit Claim deeds) for his alleged blackmailer, Dana Cheatham, while prosecuting her sister-in-law's case. if the DA's office was using its power to handle "private" problems, it explains why an indictment as serious as Byrum's (sexual contact with an inmate) was allowed to sit for years before he eventually "re-appeared" as if nothing happened.
- The "Suppression" of the Audio recording: The core of the petition was a recording where Dana Cheatham bragged about her affair with Crump and her threats to "mess up his whole life" if he didn't secure a murder conviction.
The Exculpatory Evidence: Miranda Cheatham’s defense argued this was classic exculpatory evidence (Brady material) because it proved the lead prosecutor had a massive personal incentive to ignore self-defense claims and push for a conviction to keep his blackmailer quiet.
The "Hair-Brained" Logic: If the DA’s office was aware of this recording—as Sgt. Evie West of the Cleveland Police Department suggested—and failed to disclose it, they knowingly subverted the rights of a defendant to protect the DA's reputation.
- If a District Attorney was being blackmailed or embroiled in a "massage therapist" scandal, his ability to impartially prosecute a powerful Sheriff's Captain (Byrum) was compromised.
This isn't just bad press; it is a documented admission that the 10th Judicial District and the Monroe County Sheriff's Office operates as its own legal island, separate from the laws of Tennessee and the oversight of the TBI.
Contact with an Inmate, and Introduction of Contraband into the Jail is a matter of public record, the specific judge assigned to the final resolution of the case is often less publicized when cases are resolved through "stipulations" or quiet dismissals.
The Disparate Treatment Argument
The "trove" of information specifically facilitates a class action by comparing how the case was handled, Byrum versus other defendants: If Judge Freiberg or the DA's office allowed Byrum's felony charges to be settled in a way that preserved his ability to work in law enforcement (as evidenced by his recent "I'm Back" claims), it demonstrates a level of judicial leniency not afforded to the general public.
If the court record shows that the "Blackmail" era of DA Stephen Crump coincided with a lenient resolution for Byrum, a class action could argue that the court and the DA operated under a "Custom of Protection" for MCSO officials.
The Investigation
In August 2016, the 10th District Attorney General requested the TBI to investigate allegations against Byrum. At the time, he held the rank of Captain. The investigation focused on:
Sexual contact with an inmate.
Introduction of contraband (specifically a telecommunication device) into a penal facility.
Legal Outcome
In June 2018, a Monroe County Grand Jury returned indictments against Byrum (who was 65 at the time of the indictment). He was charged with:
Official Misconduct
Sexual Contact with an Inmate or Prisoner
Introduction of Contraband into a Penal Institution
If Judge Andrew Freiberg or the DA's Office provided a path for Byrum to return to a position of power while simultaneously imposing standard or harsh sentences on non-officers for similar offenses, it creates a "class" of people who were denied equal justice. The "trove of information" exists in comparing Byrum's sentencing/resolution records to every other T.C.A. § 39-16-408 case in the district.
Federal court is often the only venue where a "custom or policy" of selective prosecution or administrative misconduct can be addressed without the local influence of the DA’s office or the Sheriff’s department.
Regarding T.C.A. § 39-16-408 (Sexual contact with a person in custody) becomes a powerful weapon in federal court through the following mechanisms:
