DA Ted Bell And Accountability….We Are Watching

Posted on December 29, 2022 by Deborah Keller

12/28/22

Mr. Bell was reelected to DA again this past November by approximately 30 % of the vote. He had no opposition in the general election so it was a foregone conclusion that he would gain the office.

Now I will be the first to admit that I do not know Mr. Bell on a personal level. I have heard accounts of him being a very good father and person. I do not in any way dispute those accounts.

I do however know what a bad job he has done as District Attorney. One can be a good father and community member and still be bad at their job. This apparently seems to be the case with Mr. Bell.

We have an opportunity to see a new era in law enforcement in our county but will it really mean anything if Ted Bell agrees to release criminals and puts off trials for years? Will it mean anything if he continues to “cover up” for his friends?

If the same players keep breaking laws and being released back into the general population with no more than the inconvenience of being arrested and making bond then what have we gained?

Rutherford County’s new Sheriff Aaron Ellenburg is determined to change the way things have been done here in the past but can he do that if blocked by DA Bell?

D.A.T0000000000000ed Bell with Judge Randy Pool

Let us not forget that this is the man who put off trials for more than six years. The man who has yet to try the Matthew Fenner case against Word of Faith Fellowship members for almost 10 years. The man who told the public that his friend, former Judge Randy Pool, did not commit any criminal acts even though the State Bar said in writing that his behavior was criminal. Bell, the man who admitted in court that he altered a video in an officer shooting incident.

This man, DA Ted Bell has multiple bar complaints against him for his behaviors and a pending lawsuit. Removing him from office is out of our (the general public) hands now but if he loses his license to practice law then he must resign and let someone else be appointed.

It is time to hold those in office accountable for not only what they do but also what they don’t do. 2023 will be a year of accountability. The new Sheriff is trying to be transparent and reporting on activities in his department. Do not hinder his efforts by your silence Mr. Bell.

It is way past time for accountability. No more “cover ups”, no more hidden SBI reports, no more protection of “friends.” Do your job and be accountable to those of whom you serve.

“Laws For Thee But Not For Me”- Ted Bell Does It Again

Posted on August 9, 2022 by Deborah Keller

August 10, 2022

Here in Rutherford and McDowell County we don’t have a choice for District Attorney in November. That decision was made by 13% of voters back in May in the Republican primary.

Ted Bell who has altered body cam video in a major death by officer case (verified in court) not charged any officer in that case, not released the official SBI report concerning this case or any other case involving the Sheriff’s office.

Ted Bell who let his friend Judge Pool off the hook for sexual misconduct on the bench.

Ted Bell who has as of yet to try the Word of Faith Fellowship cases after over 6 years.

Ted Bell who also refuses to show families the body cam video from questionable cases about the death of their loved ones until made to by a court order.

Ted Bell who reportedly has had numerous complaints made about him to the NC Bar association.

Ted Bell who lied about his political endorsements while campaigning knowingly endangering the positions of multiple law enforcement officials for violation of the Hatch Act.

Yes, that Ted Bell, our current District Attorney is at it again. He is not complying with election rules that all others must abide by. The question is why? What is he hiding? How much money he spent? Who donated it, and if so why? It is just habit for him now?

Or does he really truly think the laws don’t apply to him. Hummm………

The Board of Elections requires that all candidates turn in their campaign finance records. They have a set time for them to do this. The date this year was July 12^th. (29 days ago) This is DA Bell’s third campaign. He is fully aware of this yet as of today he still has not complied.

Of course as long as it takes him to hear a trial (unless it’s someone who complained about him to the bar) I guess we shouldn’t be surprised. The question is how long are the people of his district going to turn their heads the other way when it comes to Ted Bell?

You do not have to vote for him (even though he is the only name on the ballot in November) you can leave it blank and show the results. He still will be elected even if he only voted for himself and we all know he has many “friends” who seem to owe him so there’s that.

It is a shame and disgrace that he is representing this district. Our citizens deserve better but as we all know the “good ole boy network” is strong here. Hopefully the bar will address this for us and he will lose his law license and we can have an appointed DA but until then we need to watch and report every time he violates the oath and responsibility of his office.

It is hard to remove a sitting DA but not impossible. (see Henderson County….they did it) Judgement may be slow but it is coming Mr. Bell and if you continue to think you are above it all you will be sadly mistaken. It comes for us all.

Editorial: District Attorney fails to manage Fenner case mistrial investigation

Posted on April 19, 2018 by Gayle Clayton, BS, MA

RUTHERFORD COUNTY, N.C. — In June of 2017, the case of The State vs. Brooke Covington ended in a mistrial due to jury misconduct. Perry Shade, the jury foreman, was held in criminal contempt for improperly introducing documents into the jury deliberation process that were not admitted into evidence at trial and were not proper for the jury’s consideration. Questions immediately arose about this issue, including whether Shade acted alone or whether someone else may have been involved.

At the conclusion of the Covington trial, presiding Judge Gary Gavenus issued a “gag order” which prohibited any witnesses listed on either the State’s or the Defendant’s witness list from speaking with anyone about the case, including law enforcement officers or the lawyers involved in the case. This Order also included the members of the jury who, at the conclusion of the trial, would otherwise have been free to discuss any aspect of the case if they chose to do so.

Recognizing that the Judge’s Order prevented the State from conducting a thorough investigation of the jury misconduct issue, Assistant District Attorney Garland F. Byers, Jr., filed a written motion asking Judge Gavenus to allow criminal investigators to interview the members of the jury who were present for Shade’s presentation and discussion of improper documents and materials. Byers said that he believed the State had an obligation to follow-up on the issue to determine whether others were involved and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought in addition to the criminal contempt Order issued by the Court.

Garland F. Byers, Jr., had represented the State in the Covington case at trial and in all other related cases in all prior proceedings.

Judge Gavenus ruled on Byers’ motion by Ordering the State Bureau of Investigation to investigate the juror misconduct on the part of jury foreman Perry Shade and to determine whether he acted alone or whether others were involved. This was 10 months ago.

RC Catalyst spoke with the Public Information Officer of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation

earlier today regarding the investigation of juror misconduct. The SBI informed RC Catalyst that no

investigation had been done.

RC Catalyst spoke with former Assistant District Attorney Garland F. Byers, Jr., who is now a candidate for District Attorney in this District, about this matter and he stated:

Garland F. Byers, Jr.

“Mr. Bell dealt with the SBI after I filed and served the motion to lift the gag order to allow a criminal investigation into the juror misconduct issue. I was not allowed to know anything about Mr. Bell’s dealings with the SBI on this issue and it was never something I had authority to do. I saw the need for a follow-up investigation and I did everything that I had the authority to do to make sure that it happened. It is unfortunate that it did not. As to why Mr. Bell didn’t follow-up on the status of this investigation and make sure that it got done, that’s a good question for Mr. Bell.”

RC Catalyst has inquired earlier about the status of the juror SBI investigation. Mr. Bell said, “That case was finished long ago.” When I asked Mr. Bell if I might see it, he replied there were no findings and he wasn’t sure he still had the report. The truth is that there is no report from the SBI on the Fenner/Covington case, nor will there be.

In a brief communication with Mr. Bell, he stated that he missed the “SBI” in my question about a report and referred to the brief interrogation sheriff detective Marc Duncan had conducted when Shade was jailed for contempt of court.

Mr. Bell has, throughout his campaign for re-election, fashioned himself as an “administrator” and has publicly said that he would “do everything he could to see that crimes get investigated and prosecuted.” Yet, here is probably the most highly-publicized trial and case in the past 30 years in this district and he does not follow-up and make sure that a court-ordered investigation gets done.

One simple phone call to the SBI, by him, could have resolved this entire issue. Had he made one single call to the SBI, then he would have learned that the SBI was not investigating the jury misconduct – as ordered by the Court – and he could have taken the appropriate steps to make sure that it got done. Instead, he did nothing.

What is apparent from this revelation is one of two possibilities:

(1) Either Ted Bell doesn’t care about whether the issue of juror misconduct gets investigated or not and so he didn’t make a single call to find out the status of this investigation; or

(2) Ted Bell is ineffective as an administrator as shown by the fact that this very important criminal investigation (in the most high profile case in this district in at least the last 30 years) was not managed by him in his capacity as the elected D.A. and was allowed to go un-investigated despite a court Order.

Either one of these possibilities is unacceptable.

DA plays politics in opposing defense counsel release in Fenner/WoFF case

Posted on April 3, 2018 by Gayle Clayton, BS, MA

HENDERSON COUNTY — After a behind the scenes scramble. the hearing to release Krinn Evans as Word of Faith member Justin Covington’s defense counsel was held in Hendersonville at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday. District attorney Ted Bell had previously informed those involved Monday that the hearing was canceled.

This would have+9 been the second time Bell’s administrative duties have tried to delay the hearing. The first hearing fell apart as shown iun the emails below.

From: Bell, Ted <>
Date: Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:47 AM
Subject: Justin Covington motion
To: Krinn Evans <>

Krinn;

The notice of hearing for the motion to withdraw in the Justin Covington case is for Feb. 16. I’m supposed to be out of town that day so I wanted to see if you would be ok with doing it on a different day. Also, I called the Clerk’s office in Buncombe to see if it had actually been calendared and they still haven’t even entered the case into their system, nor had they calendared anything on it. Our Clerk, Steve, is going to reach out to their Clerk to see if he can’t get them moving on that. So, if you are in agreement with doing it on a different day, my thought was to have an email discussion with Judge Pope, you, and I on when to set it for hearing. Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks,

Ted

Ted Bell

District Attorney
McDowell and Rutherford Counties

Date: Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 2:52 PM
Subject: St. v. Justin Covington
To: “Crawford, Cindy” “Pope, Marvin P.” <
Cc: “Krinn EvansYour Honor;

Please except my sincerest apologies for our not being in court for the motion in this matter today. I had spoken with the Buncombe County Clerk’s Office several times about the calendaring of this hearing, and was told by their Superior Court Division that their interpretation of the change of venue order was that it was only a change of venue for trial, and not for any other matters. They have refused to key the file into their system- I even went their in person to talk to them about it and noted that the entire file is simply sitting in a metal bucket on a window sill in the Clerks Office. I spoke with them s as recently as two days ago, and each time they led me to believe that the Motion to Withdrawl [sic] noticed on for today was not calendared and would not be heard in Buncombe County. I had also emailed Your Honor on 8 January asking if this matter was to be heard on today’s date and whether I needed to procure a commission from Mr. Hoke. I did not receive a response to that email, which also reinforced my understanding that this matter was not on any calendar. I reached out to Mr. Evans on 7 February and explained the problem we were having with the Buncombe Clerk’s Office’s interpretation of the Change of Venue order and my understanding that this matter had not been calendared. Additionally, I was originally supposed to be out of town today, and asked Mr. Evans, based on those two facts, if it would be ok to have the hearing at a different time. He agreed, but I did not do a motion to continue based on the information I was given that the matter had not and would not be calendared. Hence, Mr. Evans’s absence today is entirely my fault, and I very much regret wasting the Court’s time. I have been drafting an email to the defense attorneys in the four matters that were transfered [sic] to explain the problem with Buncombe’s interpretation of the order and to get their approval to email Your Honor, cc’ing them, to explain the situation and ask for Your Honor’s clarification of the order. Had I remotely suspected that the matter would possibily [sic] be calendared today I certainly would have been there.

Thank you,
Ted

Ted Bell
District Attorney
McDowell and Rutherford Counties

(emphasis added)

Judge Marvin Pope, Jr. presided in Courtroom 2 in the Henderson County Courthouse. Pope’s first question was to DA Bell as to whether he had arranged for a clerk to be at the hearing. Since Bell had not, Pope asked one of the Henderson County Clerks of Court to be present.

In the State of North Carolina versus Justin Brock Covington, the defense attorney, Krinn Evans, made a motion to withdraw representation. The motion for withdrawal of counsel was because the office of Krinn E. Evans, P.A. had associated former case prosecutor ADA Garland F. Byers, Jr. on January 1, 2018 as an employee of that firm. Prior to leaving the district attorney’s at the end of 2017. Byers had been directly responsible for the prosecution of Justin Brock Covington while serving as an Assistant District Attorney. Evans argued there is a conflict of interest (or imputed disqualification) that cannot be resolved.

Lawyers are governed by the NC STATE BAR. The NC State Bar publishes ethical rules that attorneys must comply with in their practice of law. These rules are known as the Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 1.10 applies to this situation and provides as follows:

NC Bar Rules of Professional Conduct

RULE 1.10 IMPUTATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: GENERAL RULE

(a) While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules 1.7 or 1.9, unless the prohibition is based on a personal interest of the prohibited lawyer, including a prohibition under Rule 6.6, and the prohibition does not present a significant risk of materially limiting the representation of the client by the remaining lawyers in the firm.

Evans had reported that he and Byers had discussed the ethical problem of Evans continuing to represent a defendant in the WoFF as a court appointed attorney when Byers joined the firm.

District Attorney Ted Bell objected to Evans release stating that this was the only case Evans had asked to be released. He then cited other cases that had been set for trial by Byers and Evans had not objected.

Evans countered by stating that since, that Byers had left the DA’s office, he had received very generous offers from Mr. Byers’ replacement in cases that had been for trial while Byers was in charge of Superior Count.

Vernon Taylor – charged Statutory Rape, pled to Indecent liberties. That would have been a life in prison case if he was convicted. Some of them include

John Hodge, Jr. – charged multiple Indecent liberties, pled to consolidate into either 2-3 counts

On several occasions Bell stated that this motion was purely because Garland Byers was running against him for the office of district attorney. Bell later stated:

“This is purely a political ploy. Having someone in the firm represent a Word of Faith member would be politically damaging.”

Judge Pope allowed Justin Covington to express his feelings about a possible change.

“I have gained confidence in Mr. Evans and I wish him to be retained as my counsel.”

After arguments of counsel, Judge Pope disagreed with Mr. Bell and ruled that Evans would be released as counsel for Mr. Covington. Sometime prior to the hearing yesterday, Judge Pope had already arranged for Covington to have new counsel, Brian Gulden. Gulden was present in the courtroom.

DA Bell then informed the judge that there would be no movement on the remaining Fenner cases as he had not received the SBI or FBI reports.