Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Legal Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Litigator tells Jefferson County commission state charging by 'information' violates U.S. Constitution
Summary
A visiting litigator identified in the transcript as Tam Bugatti (also giving the name Downey) delivered a public-comment notice alleging that some states permit charging by 'information' instead of grand jury indictment, which he said violates the U.S. Constitution; commissioners responded that the county's authority is limited.
During the meeting’s public‑comment period, a visitor identifying himself as Tam Bugatti and later as Downey addressed the commission, delivering a legal notice alleging that state charging by “information” rather than grand jury indictment violates the U.S. Constitution and that prosecuting officials who follow state law to the contrary are acting unlawfully.
The commenter said the group had submitted affidavits and notices to attorneys general and that he is preparing litigation for the U.S. Supreme Court, naming the case as “Downey versus Washington.” He said, “the state of Alabama, unfortunately, is an activist's own alternative legislation that permits the prosecuting attorneys or police officers to charge by what's called information, not by indictment. That would be unconstitutional.”
He urged county officials to stop “paying public officials to break the law,” saying the commission — as the entity that funds county law enforcement — should address the issue. The commenter also referenced the U.S. Constitution, including Article I, Section 10 and the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment’s grand‑jury protections.
The chair responded by clarifying the county commission’s limited role: “The only thing that this county commission can do is formulate the Jefferson County Sheriff's budget. We have no enforcement capabilities,” the chair said in the meeting transcript. County staff also noted the county maintains the jail, but did not agree to take enforcement action. No formal action or referral resulted from the public comment in the transcript.
The exchange in the meeting record is a public comment; the transcript does not show any subsequent county legal action, referral to the county attorney, or initiation of an investigation based on the notice provided during the meeting.
