Burke County Sheriff Alfonzo Williams is facing yet another lawsuit – this time from a Georgia-based media company.
The Georgia Gazette LLC is suing Alfonzo Williams in his individual and official capacity over allegations of violations of the Georgia Open Records Act. The suit seeks compliance with the Act, the imposition of civil penalties, and damages and attorney’s fees caused by the noncompliance.
The Georgia Open Records Act (ORA) is a ‘sunshine law’ which promotes transparency by allowing access to government documents except in very narrow and specific circumstances. The state statute applies to every governmental agency in the state and the actors within those agencies.
The suit, filed in Burke County Superior Court, alleges that Williams and John Does 1-3, employees of the Burke County Sheriff’s Office, have violated the ORA and are taking unlawful actions against TGG based on Williams’ personal feelings on the media entity.
The Georgia Gazette (TGG) states that the company filed ‘routine open records requests’ without issue until August 10, 2025. In an effort to obtain records as it had done previously, TGG began submitting daily records requests, prompting an outright refusal by the Burke County Sheriff’s Office to even respond to the requests for public records.
The suit also states that:
- On June 13, 2025, Williams contacted TGG ‘expressing concern’ about content posted on the TGG social media pages, specifically the Facebook page ‘BURKE COUNTY CRIME,’ because not all of the crime on the page occurred in Burke County.
- TGG responded to Williams by explaining that TGG covers 105 counties in Georgia and that some stories cross county boundaries.
- Two months later, on August 15, 2025, Williams responded to TGG, calling the content ‘clickbait’ and threatening not to honor any future open records requests.
- An employee identified in the lawsuit as ‘Col. Richard P. Elim’ told TGG on September 2, 2025 that the Burke County Sheriff’s Office had opened an investigation into TGG’s publishing practices as it relates to the law on booking photos. Elim wrote that “until the investigation is complete, no further inmate information will be forwarded.” Elim then went on to accuse TGG of violating state law without any evidence to support such a claim. Notably, Elim is the same individual who plead guilty in Richmond County after a 12-count indictment charged him with Violation of Oath by a Public Officer, 10 counts of Making False Statements, and one count of Theft.
- On September 3, an attorney for TGG contacted county attorney Frank Adam Nelson of Fleming & Nelson, Sheriff Williams, the records officer Kimberly Briscoe, and Col. Elim, but after more than three weeks, none of the individuals had responded.
As of the date of the filing of the suit – September 26, 2025 – the Sheriff’s Office had not confirmed receipt of any requests by TGG, had not provided the statutory exemptions which would allow the office to withhold records, and had failed to fulfill any requests – all of which are required by law.
The Georgia Open Records Act is clear: materials related to an open criminal investigation are shielded from public release, but ‘all records’ in possession of an agency cannot be withheld simply because the Sheriff’s Office has, by its own admission, opened an investigation into an entity which requests records. What specifically the Sheriff’s Office is investigating with regard to TGG remains unclear.
“The BCSO’s refusal to provide records appears motivated by Sheriff Williams’ personal disagreement with TGG’s reporting practices and his desire to punish or deter TGG’s First Amendment rights,” the lawsuit reads.
The suit asks for a Superior Court Judge to intervene and order Williams and his office to immediately comply with the law. The ORA also permits the imposition of a civil penalty of up to $1,000 on the person who negligently violates the law. Penalties of up to $2,500 per violation can be assessed for each additional violation within the same twelve month period. Whether or not TGG is entitled to attorney’s fees will depend on the outcome of the suit, however, the Act allows a complaining party to recoup reasonable fees and litigation costs incurred when seeking enforcement of the ORA.


They think they are above the law. I’m glad someone is fighting back