A state court judge has denied the request to dismiss a case against former Smith State Prison Warden Brian Adams and another former employee for their alleged actions in a conspiracy that led to the murder of Tattnall County native Bobby C. Kicklighter.
It’s the latest blow to the state-funded attorneys defending two former Smith State Prison employees in a civil suit stemming from the chaos at Smith State Prison.
Background
88-year-old Bobby Kicklighter was murdered in his home on January 30, 2021 in a botched murder-for-hire scheme intended for Kicklighter’s neighbor, a corrections officer at Smith State Prison.
The GBI investigation into Kicklighter’s death led to the arrest of four individuals – Nathan Weekes, Christopher Sumlin, Keisha Jones, and Aerial Murphy – and eventually uncovered a multimillion dollar criminal enterprise operating from behind the walls of Smith SP in Glennville. At the center of the enterprise was a steady influx of contraband, including cell phones, designer clothing, jewelry, drugs, and other items – most often brought into the prison by complicit staff. Over the course of two years that followed the murder, additional murder victims were revealed, including Jesup father and commissary delivery truck driver Jerry Lee Davis, and another former corrections officer, Jessica Jean Gerling. Court records name other GDC staff who were targeted by the criminal enterprise and outline other staff who were arrested on related charges.
Ireon Moore, a GDC employee since March of 2020, was arrested in April 2021 for entering Smith State Prison with $29,000 in cash. While her vehicle was being searched by GDC investigators, her cell phone received a call from an inmate using a contraband phone inside Smith SP. Criminal indictments and court records allege that Moore was romantically involved with at least one inmate at the time of her arrest. She was terminated by GDC following her arrest.
(Tattnall County Sheriff’s Office)
The unraveling of the conspiracy culminated with the arrest of Warden Brian Adams and an excavation of the pond at his residence on GDC-property, which revealed buried contraband.
Weekes, Sumlin, Jones, and Murphy were all charged in Kicklighter’s death, among other things.
Adams was charged with False Statements and Writings, Violation of Oath by a Public Officer, Bribery, and Criminal Attempt – RICO Act.
The criminal cases are still pending.
The Lawsuit
The lawsuit filed in Tattnall County State Court seeks damages from former Warden Brian Adams and former Smith SP Corrections Officer Ireon Moore.
Specifically, the lawsuit contends that the contraband items, including cell phones, narcotics, weapons, designer brand clothing, jewelry, and tobacco should have been noticed by Warden Brian Adams. It also alleges that Ireon Moore was paid to participate in the conspiracy and the financial arrangements were carried out through text message.
“These illegal acts of communicating a plot against a correctional officer for standing up to the blatant criminal conspiracies taking place at Smith State Prison were facilitated by defendants [Adams and Moore], who allowed, tolerated, and assisted in the illegal use of mobile phones to engage in the criminal conspiracy to kill a non-complicit and not corrupt correctional officer.”
Citing previous knowledge of Weekes’ possessing a cell phone at Smith SP, the suit asserts that Adams and Moore participated in the actions, it was foreseeable that Natahn Weekes would “coordinate violent criminal activities from the poorly and negligently supervised confines of Smith State Prison, including but not limited to assault, battery, home invasion, and murder.”
“Had Defendants enforced federal and state law, and GDC=s operating procedures, this conspiracy would not have been carried out and the danger posed to Bobby Kicklighter would have been prevented,” the suit reads.
Defense of Adams & Moore
Two months after the filing of the lawsuit, Ireon Moore submitted a handwritten note to the Clerk of Court, which reads:
“I am pleading not guilty. I am unaware of anything that took place in that case. I had no involvement with any parties involved in the case. I am truly sorry for the lost of their father but I do not feel I should pay for others’ actions I had no knowledge of.”
The State of Georgia later appointed Paul Henefeld to represent Moore since the suit addresses Moore in her official capacity as a state employee. Alpharetta-based attorney Annarita McGovern represents Brian Adams. Judge Ronald Hallman, who is the state court judge in Evans County, was appointed to serve as the State Court Judge by Designation in this case due to a conflict of interest by Tattnall County State Court Judge Hugh McCollough.
Attorneys for both Adams and Moore have argued that the two are immune from civil suit and cannot be held liable because they were acting in their official capacity. Further, they say that even if the two did act outside the scope of their duties, they could not have foreseen the botched murder-for-hire event and, therefore, are still immune.
In Henefeld’s filings asking the court to dismiss the case against Moore, he cited Davis v. Standifer, in which a female plaintiff claimed that she was sexually assaulted by a Trooper with the Georgia State Patrol. “Although assault is not in the job description of a Georgia State Patrol Officer, the job description is irrelevant. The Davis court determined that Standifer [the Trooper] was acting within his official duties and was immune from suit…” Henefeld wrote.
Savannah attorney Brent Savage, who represents the family of Bobby Kicklighter, argued that Adams and Moore are liable because not only were corrective actions not implemented as staff, they were active affiliates of the gang and “contributed to the schemes.” He also argued that state immunity protections only apply when acting in the scope of employment and when “performing the regular duties of employment, during regular hours of employment, at regular site of employment.”
“Being involved in the Yves Saint Laurent (YSL) gang does not fall under the scope of his employment as warden of Smith State Prison, even though it placed him in a position to become involved with the gang,” Savage wrote in response to defense attorneys.
In July 2024, Hallman denied Adams’ and Moore’s Motion to Dismiss the suit and McGovern and Henefeld requested review by the Georgia Court of Appeals. The higher court denied the request to review the case in August 2024.
In October 2024, Annarita McGovern, attorney for Adams, asked the court to stay the discovery process and further court proceedings until Adams’ criminal case is resolved.
McGovern argued that pausing the civil suit would ‘save’ judicial resources because the court would not have to expend resources in ‘determining motions relating to discovery and disclosure of testimony based on an objection that the materials and testimony are part of an ongoing criminal proceeding.”
Henefeld filed a Brief in Support on behalf of Moore shortly thereafter, but Judge Hallman denied both Motions to Stay.
In early 2025, the case was placed on the trial calendar with jury selection scheduled for May. McGovern and Henefeld both filed motions asking the court to delay the process still and to dismiss the suit altogether via a Motion for Summary Judgment. Simultaneously, both defense attorneys filed objections to requests for courtroom media coverage by TheGeorgiaVirtue, a quest that was ultimately unsuccessful.
In May, oral arguments on the Motion for Summary Judgment were made before Judge Hallman in open court. Hallman denied the Motion for Summary judgment (dismissal) and said a formal order would follow.
Hallman’s Order Denying Motion for Summary Judgment
Hallman’s June 12 Order states that while the defendants are relying on official immunity, the Georgia Tort Claims Act, and the lack of proximate cause, the arguments are “unpersuasive” and the Court “finds that genuine disputes of material facts exist on multiple issues, thus precluding summary adjudication.”
Hallman’s Order also states:
- [N]either defendant met the burden of showing the actions they are alleged to have done fell within the scope of their official duties or employment. He noted that both Moore and Adams invoked their Fifth Amendment right and chose not to answer questions about the scope of their employment and job duties in depositions.
- (Case law is clear that use of the Fifth Amendment privilege creates an adverse inference which can be used against defendants in a civil case.)
- Defendants’ deliberate failure to engage in robust, truthful discovery has led to an incomplete record which should not permit the defendants to escape liability
- As the record currently exists, there is evidence tending to indicate the involvement of Defendants with the YSL Gang, smuggling contraband into Smith State Prison and profiting privately from their efforts.
- Common sense indicates that this egregious conduct of defendants could not have possibly come within the scope of their employment with the Georgia Department of Corrections. Job duties would not allow participation in gang activities or facilitating distribution of contraband within the prison.
“As alleged and demonstrated by the record in this case, Defendants acted in concert with the YSL Gang run out of Smith State Prison, potentially being members themselves. Therefore, the actions of their co-conspirators cannot be said to be unforeseeable so as to break the causal chain between their actions within the conspiracy and the end result of its completion. In other words, Defendants cannot prevail on their motions simply because they were not the actual shooters of Bobby Kicklighter. Proximate cause is generally a question for the jury, and that should be the case here.”
Attorneys for Adams and Moore previously expressed their intention to appeal, further delaying the case.
*Note: The reference to YSL Gang is erroneous. The gang operating in Smith State Prison and referenced in the criminal case is the ‘Saint Laurent Squad’ whereas the ‘YSL Gang’ is a criminal street gang near metro Atlanta.
