Judge denies motion to quash grand-jury subpoena for man who alleges deputy assaulted him

A Cheatham County judge denied a defense request to quash a grand-jury subpoena for Zachary Scruggs on grounds that the witness could be compelled to testify about alleged misconduct by Deputy Ryan (or Corporal) Creech, while preserving Scruggs’s Fifth Amendment right on any questions that would incriminate him.

The ruling came during a hearing on a motion filed on behalf of Scruggs to quash the subpoena, which his lawyer argued would “put him in a position of peril to incriminate himself.” The state requested the witness because neither Scruggs nor Deputy Ryan Creech had provided voluntary statements to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI), and the prosecutor said the grand jury otherwise had only hearsay and limited video evidence.

The judge framed the ruling narrowly: Scruggs may be required to appear and testify before the grand jury about whether Deputy Creech committed criminal acts against him, but Scruggs may invoke the Fifth Amendment when questions would expose him to criminal liability. The judge said the grand jury should limit its consideration to the deputy’s actions and that the state cannot use testimony given by a witness who appears before the grand jury as the basis to indict that witness without waiver. The court denied the motion to quash but admonished counsel that questioning should be confined to Scruggs’s account of alleged misconduct by Deputy Creech.

Why it matters: The decision preserves the grand jury’s ability to investigate potential criminal conduct by a law-enforcement officer while recognizing a witness’s constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. The state told the court it had requested a TBI investigation and said, without voluntary cooperation from key witnesses, it had limited evidence beyond body-camera footage.

Courtroom record and evidence: Defense counsel argued the subpoena would invite Scruggs to “testify before the grand jury about what he alleges officer Creech did to him” and risk self-incrimination; the judge and state discussed that Scruggs previously invoked the Fifth Amendment at a general-session preliminary hearing. The prosecutor, Jimmy Short, told the court that “there is video evidence of the entire events” but described the body-camera footage as incomplete when both men are in frame. Short said neither Scruggs nor Creech had agreed to voluntary interviews with the TBI and that the state faced the possibility of indicting someone without an available witness to testify at trial.

What the court ordered: The judge ordered that Scruggs’s grand-jury questioning be limited to the actions he alleges Deputy Creech committed against him. The judge explicitly preserved Scruggs’s right to invoke the Fifth Amendment if any question would cause him to incriminate himself. The court declined to quash the subpoena outright. The state noted it would not seek to hold Scruggs in contempt if he declined to testify.

Next steps: The grand jury will proceed with the limited questioning if the state calls Scruggs. The state told the court it needs cooperating witnesses to present a fuller criminal case and said the body-cam footage alone might not be sufficient to carry a prosecution to a jury without live testimony.