Public Advocate VP Mark Clayton Demands Criminal Investigation Into Nashville Public Corruption
Photo Credit: Instagram Post of I'AesHea Myles and Megan Barry Endorsement
Nashville journalistic muckraker and former Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate (2012), Public Advocate Vice President Mark Clayton files a Sworn Statement in a continuing effort to petition for investigations into apparent public corruption in Nashville, Tennessee.
Mark Clayton, Vice-president of Public Advocate Statement
I,
Mark
Clayton,
Vice
President
of
Public
Advocate,
am
requesting
an
investigation
into
potential
violations
of
18
U.S.C.
�
242
by
I'Aeshea
Myles,
a
public
official
in
Nashville,
Tennessee
and
former
candidate
for
chancellor
(seat
on
Nashville
Court).
Background: On February 1, 2018, I issued a public statement calling for the resignation of then-Nashville Mayor Megan Barry and an investigation into her potential misuse of public funds and official misconduct (see attached statement). This statement prominently featured a criminal accusation against Megan Barry, stating, "Clayton says 'Megan Barry has been accused of also misusing her office to intentionally divert flood water into my home of in violation of T.C.A. 39-14-104(2) for the benefit of a neighbor of mine who has intentionally, in willful violation of Metro Codes, dammed water and flooded my home in ongoing codes violations.'"
Following this, Mayor Barry pled guilty to crimes which I, Mark Clayton, thoroughly enumerated in the request for investigation and which appear, in lay terms, to be the basis for the charges against Megan Barry to which she subsequently pled guilty.
Current Concerns: Upon information and belief, it is not merely possible but probable, given the public record, that I'Aeshea Myles, former candidate for chancellor (seat on Nashville Court) , worked directly with Megan Barry to intentionally divert flood water into my home, curtilage, and driveway in possible criminal violation of T.C.A. 39-14-104(2). This appears to be an act of political retaliation for my successful request for a criminal investigation against I'Aeshea Myles' apparent co-conspirator, Megan Barry.
Notably, Megan Barry openly endorsed I'Aeshea Myles, and I'Aeshea Myles prominently featured Megan Barry's endorsement on her campaign website. Given the indisputable public record, I'Aeshea Myles seems to knowingly and publicly attach her own actions to the conspiracy to defraud me and destroy my property.
Furthermore, there are indications that I'Aeshea Myles, former candidate for chancellor (seat on Nashville Court), may have conspired with election officials to improperly remove her only opposition, Johnny Ellis, as a candidate for chancery judge. As a voter in that election, I was deprived of my right to vote for my chosen candidate due to the Ultra Vires communiques from I'Aeshea Myles' co-conspirators to remove her only election opposition. This candidate removal has no basis in law and should be investigated for violation under 8 U.S.C. � 242, and all parties involved should be investigated and prosecuted, including I'Aeshea Myles; and I am ready to testify under oath against I'Arshea and her co-conspirators in any legal proceeding.
The removal of the candidate, Johnny Ellis, from the ballot runs afoul of (including but not limited to) the public function test established in Chapman v. Higbee Co., 319 F.3d 825 (6th Cir. 2003). The public function test is used to determine whether a private entity's actions constitute state action under Section 1983 and, by extension, Section 242 and the public function test under Chapman v. Higbee as well as the Tennessee state case of Morrison v. Crews, the latter of which is cited in cases nationwide for persuasive authority and specifically deals with judicial elections.
In Chapman, the court held that "a private entity may be held to constitutional standards when its actions so approximate state action that they may be fairly attributed to the state." The court further explained that the public function test is satisfied when "the private entity exercises powers which are traditionally exclusively reserved to the state."
Applying this test to the removal of Johnny Ellis from the ballot should include the following aspects of a thorough criminal investigation into all related co-conspirators:
Conducting
elections
and
regulating
access
to
the
ballot
are
functions
traditionally
exclusively
reserved
to
the
state.
The
U.S.
Constitution
grants
states
the
authority
to
regulate
the
time,
place,
and
manner
of
elections.
Deviations
from
this
method
not
only
carry
civil
penalties
with
civil
remedies,
criminal
penalties
are
also
in
place
to
prevent
fraudulent
elections
such
as
I'Aeshea
Myles
fraudulent
theft
of
the
seat
of
Chancellor
in
Davidson
County,
Nashville
Tennessee.
If
I'Aeshea
Myles
conspired
with
election
officials
to
improperly
remove
Johnny
Ellis
from
the
ballot,
which
the
public
record
plainly
demonstrates
that
she
did,
this
means
that
a
private
entity
(Myles
and
her
co-conspirators)participating
in
a
traditionally
exclusive
state
function
(regulating
ballot
access).
It
is
not
a
believable
proposition
that
I'Aeshea
Myles
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
removal
of
her
only
opponent
on
the
ballot,
thus
rendering
the
so-called
"election"
a
total
fraud,
not
just
from
the
perspective
that
someone
from
Davidson
county
sent
in
an
Ultra
Vires
letter
to
remove
Johnny
Ellis,
but
that
I'Aeshea
Myles
is
and
was,
as
the
public
record
shows,
a
part
of
that
conspiracy.
I'Aeshea
Myles
knew
that
it
was
illegal
to
remove
her
only
opposition
candidate
and
she
co-conspired
anyways
to
steal
the
position
of
Chancellor
without
a
valid
election,
which
I'Aeshea
Myles
knew
to
be
fraudulent
under
all
applicable
civil
and
criminal
laws.
By
removing
Ellis
from
the
ballot,
Myles
and
the
election
officials
may
have
deprived
voters,
including
Mark
Clayton,
of
their
constitutional
right
to
vote
for
their
chosen
candidate.
If
a
thorough
criminal
investigation
reveals
that
I'Aeshea
Myles
former
candidate
for
chancellor
(seat
on
Nashville
Court)
conspired
with
election
officials
to
improperly
remove
Ellis
from
the
ballot,
this
necessarily
satisfies
divergence
from
the
public
function
test
under
Chapman.
Consequently,
Myles'
actions
are
then
attributed
to
the
state,
making
her
liable
for
violating
voters'
constitutional
rights
under
�
242.
Additionay,
throughout
the
entire
process,
Johnny
Ellis
may
have
violated
Tennessee
Code
Annotated
��
23-3-105
and
23-3-107
against
Mark
Clayton.
However,
since
this
is
a
criminal
matter
and
even
though
I,
Mark
Clayton,
identify
as
the
victim
in
this
crime,
Johnny
Ellis
is
innocent
until
proven
guilty
in
a
court
of
law
and
should
have
the
rights
which
Johnny
Ellis
conspired
to
deprive
of
Mark
Clayton
during
his
successful
victory
criminal
defense;
therefore
Johnny
Ellis,
although
ethically
and
morally
unfit
to
hold
the
office
of
Chancellor,
legally
had
the
right
to
run
for
the
office
of
Chancellor
as
the
only
opposition
to
fraudulent
candidate
and
fraudulently
seated
so-called
"Chancellor"
I'Aeshea
Myles.
Request: I, Mark Clayton, formally request a thorough criminal investigation by the appropriate authorities into whether I'Aeshea Myles and Megan Barry aligned co-conspirators, acting under color of law, willfully subjected me and other voters to the deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. � 242 and T.C.A. 39-14-104(2).
Additionally, Johnny Ellis should be criminally investigated for violations of Tennessee Code Annotated �� 23-3-105 and 23-3-107 against Mark Clayton, who is the victim and that I, Mark Clayton testify to a grand jury, presenting facts and evidence regarding Johnny Ellis' criminal violations.
Specifically, I request an investigation into:
I'Aeshea Myles',former candidate for chancellor (seat on Nashville Court), role in the intentional diversion of flood water into my property, potentially in retaliation for my lawful actions, and her public ties to Megan Barry, whom I, Mark Clayton, publicly accused of the same continuing violation starting in 2018. This is all part of one conspiratorial political vendetta and has far crossed over the line of criminal activity.
I'Aeshea Myles' publicly documented conspiracy with election officials to improperly remove a candidate from the ballot, infringes upon voters' rights and violates � 242.
A thorough criminal investigation into the conspiracy involving both former Nashville Mayor Megan Barry who pled guilty to a felony under the authority of a legal memorandum drafted by Mark Clayton and sent to the Nashville District attorney, Amy Hunter (Megan Barry best friend) who is a DUI drunk Nashville District Attorney who supervised and ordered false facts as a person and not an attorney during her failed prosecution of Mark Clayton, and I'Aeshea Myles who seeks with her co-conspirators to continue in violation of � 242 to defraud Mark Clayton of his civil rights and property rights in retaliation for Mark Clayton's public and thoroughly well-documented expertise and efforts to prevent frauds such as I'Aesha Myles from removing qualified candidates from the ballot so that she could "win" her fake election to become a fake chancellor by removing the only opposition candidate. (Note: Fraudulent Judge/Chancellor I'Aeshea Myles has the audacity to hold herself out as the "first black" woman elected as a Tennessee Chancellor when she herself participated in the conspiracy in violation of the Klu Klux Klan Act to remove the only opposition candidate, Johnny Ellis, who has not yet been prosecuted for Tennessee Code Annotated �� 23-3-105 and 23-3-107 violations, and was therefore technically, albeit ethically and morally unfit, qualified to run for Chancellor.
Attorney Johnny Ellis' conduct, by representing both sides in the same legal matter, violates Tennessee Code Annotated �� 23-3-105 and 23-3-107 of the Tennessee Code Annotated. These statutes collectively aim to maintain high ethical standards and prevent conflicts of interest in the practice of law. The penalties of Johnny Ellis' rejection of testimony, misdemeanor charges, and disbarment, should not be met with incredulity and a cover-up by his colleagues. Johnny Ellis knew exactly what he was doing when he did it and thought that he would get away with it and not get caught. Furthermore, Johnny Ellis conspired with Mark Clayton's counsel in the criminal case against Mark Clayton which DUI drunk Amy Hunter both brought lost for the State of Tennessee (while personally fabricating evidence and supressing exculpatory evidence) to have Mark Clayton's attorney withdraw in a vain attempt to cripple Mark Clayton's ability to defend himself, while during the entire process Johnny Ellis himself was in possession of a vast tome of exculpatory evidence for the related matter (and instead of presenting the exculpatory evidence Johnny Ellis knowingly on the public record in front of God and everybody swore out false testimony on the public record against Mark Clayton)
We
demand
that
I'Aesha
Myles
publicly
apoligize
for
violating
the
Klu
Klux
Klan
act
against
Nashville,
Davidson
County
voters
in
her
criminal
and
fraudulent
so-called
"election"
to
Chancellor
and
to
turn
herself
in
to
the
authorities
for
Section
242
criminal
violations.
We demand that all facts be presented to a grand jury regarding Johnny Ellis' Tennessee Code Annotated �� 23-3-105 and 23-3-107 violations and that I, Mark Clayton be afforded the right to present facts and exhibits to the grand jury regarding the criminal acts of Johnny Ellis against Mark Clayton. Additionally, Johnny Ellis has also sent sexually harassing communiques to Mark Clayton and should be independently investigated and sanctioned for this.
I am prepared to provide any further information or evidence to assist in this investigation. Thank you for your attention to this serious matter.
Signed
Sincerely, Mark Clayton Vice President, Public Advocate
links:
ORIGINAL VIDEO POST SIX YEARS AGO THAT BEGAN THIS WHOLE SAGA
Attachment: Public Advocate Statement, February 1, 2018 (Note: Article was reposted with a new date to discuss the applicability of the Tennessee AG opinion as persuasive authority for the state of Georgia to adopt regarding the misuse of funds - article is for educational use regarding misuse of public funds and the potential criminal penalties for public officials who do so).