Brian Allman, Democratic nominee for sheriff
Brian Allman is on the November ballot as the Democratic nominee for Sheriff.
As the public gets to know a candidate, it questions the background and policies that the candidate supports and hopes to implement once elected.
Brian is no different.
Last Thursday evening at the Democratic Committee meeting at the fire house, many Democratic Committee members had questions for Brian.
This is an ongoing dialogue the Committee conducts to learn what to expect from a candidate.
The occasion for the discussion was that Brian wanted to join the Democratic Committee as a member.
In order to become a committee member, the candidate must be nominated at one meeting (last week), and then the Committee votes approval (or not) at the next monthly meeting (in June).
Several questions at the May meeting had to do with the number of law suits that Brian has filed himself.
Of course, court is how we settle disputes that can’t be settled any other way.
But a large part of any lawyer’s practice is discouraging litigation and encouraging settlement. And the job of Sheriff is not only to enforce the law but to be a peace officer as well, to calm rather than to disturb troubled waters.
The Members’ questions focused on one particular case that Brian filed.
According to Court papers, Brian had a company, “Triple A Trash,” and he “target[ed] [Republic Services Incorporated] as [a] competitor,” claiming Republic’s fees were a “rip off.”
A Richmond attorney, Douglas Nabhan, filed a demurrer, attacking the sufficiency of Brian’s legal action as a matter of law, and refused Brian’s entreaties to allow Brian to amend his motion for judgment to meet the defect. The Court agreed with Mr. Nabhan’s motion, granted it and wouldn’t allow Brian to amend his claim either. Afterwards, Brian called Mr. Nabhan and spewed forth an array of insulting and indecorous remarks.
A criminal prosecution and conviction followed, based on what Brian said to counsel, but that conviction was reversed on appeal because of arguments Brian made himself attacking the conviction.
What remained disturbing, however, was Brian’s use of demeaning sexual and sexist innuendoes, questioning Mr. Nabhan’s manliness, when leaving a message for this counsel.
Brian said, according to the court record, “he [Brian] chose the words he did because he ‘just really wanted [Nabhan] to know what I thought of him. I thought he was a sissy. I didn’t appreciate the way things had taken place so far in the litigation. He doesn’t like me and I don’t like him.”
When asked about the matter the other evening by a former Democratic Party Chair, Brian confirmed that he said those things. It’s this behavior that the Committee members found distressing. What if he didn’t appreciate “the way things … [took] place” as Sheriff?
At the conclusion of the meeting, it appeared Brian “didn’t appreciate the way things had taken place” at that very Committee meeting, and had words with a Committee Member who had questioned him.
The open question for Brian is, did you threaten to sue that Committee Member ?
Also, have you threatened to sue any other Committee member before or since?
Indeed, since you began your campaign for Sheriff, have you threatened to sue others, any citizen, entity, or any member of the media?
You don’t lose the right to sue by becoming a candidate for public office but the reason and manner of any threat to sue, given the past incident, certainly makes it a fair job interview question before the November election.
Don’t you agree, Brian?
Why did you leave out, in your article, the part that you were at the LCDC meeting, asked me a question, video recorded the entire meeting, witnessed the entire event and clapped at the end?
Or
the part that I have already informed you that you were going to be called as a witness at the trial of this matter?
I was arrested for calling a lawyer “a pussy” over the telephone. Most citizens laugh when they hear the story. The Virginia Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed my conviction because my language was not obscene. Since it was not obscene, it did not violate the statute.
Your reference that my language had “demeaning sexual and sexist innuendos” is your opinion but not the opinion of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
You are certainly entitled to express your own opinion and if you feel it had demeaning sexual and sexist innuendos, you are free to express that,.the same way I was allowed to express my opinion that the lawyer was “a pussy”.
IF elected Sheriff, I will make damn sure my fellow citizens are not beaten and killed by rouge Loudoun County cops and that they are free to exercise their constitutional protections without being harmed or arrested.
Lastly, I am looking forward to discovery in my defamation law suit against Mr. Roeder and counting the days to when I get to take your deposition!
Brian Allman