|
|
|
|
|
|||
 |
|
 |
 |
Wimley felt shunned after supporting Taylor As the $2 million lawsuit by a former sheriff’s department employee against Sheriff Jackie Matheny and Warren County got under way yesterday, the defense claimed the lawsuit is all the result of a disgruntled employee. Meanwhile plaintiff Christy Wimley says she’s not disgruntled at all, only unfairly punished for her support of former sheriff’s candidate Kenny Taylor. “I took pride in my job,” testified Wimley of her leaving the position in July 2006 after her superiors ordered her to move to night shift. “They knew I couldn’t take nights because of my small children. I cried, I guess I was hysterical, when they told me that.” Wimley believes she was being punished for voting for Taylor who ran against Sheriff Jackie Matheny in the Democratic Primary in May 2006. A sign was posted in her yard and Wimley believes word got around of her political leanings, even though she says she did not actively campaign for Taylor. “There was no purpose (in moving her shift) other than I voted for someone I thought would do a better job,” Wimley testified before the five-woman, three-man jury. “This wasn’t just my job, it was going to be my career.” Wimley said she was called into a meeting with two other employees, Bud Bouldin and John Macey, where the three were lectured about rumors going around the sheriff’s department. It was during the meeting Wimley said she was told she would have to take the night shift, even though her supervisors knew she could not work nights. “Patti Boyd (jail administrator) told me it didn’t matter if it was fair or not,” Wimley recalled. “She told me ‘You didn’t support the sheriff.’” Both Macey and Bouldin backed up Wimley’s recollections, saying they heard Boyd give that as a reason for the shift change. The defense pointed out it was merely a comment by Boyd and not the official reason for her being transferred. In actuality, the defense pointed out the sheriff had no idea who Wimley was supporting since she never told anyone at the sheriff’s office, although Wimley said “word got around” about the signs in her yard supporting Taylor. In addition to maintaining Wimley was singled out, Wimley’s attorney, Michael Galligan, noted the other two employees called in for the meeting had prior write-ups but were not punished. They were not called in for supporting Taylor, but for allegedly spreading gossip. “I started to feel shunned,” Wimley recalled of how she was treated prior to the meeting once other employees became aware of the sign in her yard. The defense suggested Wimley had become a problem employee despite no write-ups, noting she took extensive smoke breaks and was not doing her filing work efficiently. “Generally her attitude was not good,” the defense maintained in opening statements. “This is about a disgruntled employee who does not deserve to recover boo-coodles of dollars as she’s asking to do.” Meanwhile, Wimley wants the jury to award damages for emotional distress and punitive damages for the sheriff’s “reckless indifference” in her treatment.
|
