To whom does the TBI report? Their website says they're an independent agency, but their director is appointed by the governor.

If there were an all out push to get the rest of the TBI report released, should it be directed toward the agency or governor? Does Burchett have any power in this equation?

With an apparently incestuous judiciary and complacent law enforcement, the answers as what's going on will have to come from an outside source. The TBI holds the keys to what voters should know, so how do the people that fund their service unlock their information?

,or you wouldn't worry about the TBI results if you could keep them indefinitely under wraps using the ruse of an "ongoing investigation". Never mind the investigation was centered on a person whose judgment has long since been rendered. 

As for something to hide, what's the DA's stance on the TBI report now?

Satterfield reports that McClain told her assigned TBI agent about a KCSO deputy that ignored her evidence. The agent attributed that to the officer getting above his "pay grade". I'd think many in law enforcement, on all levels, understand their "pay grade".

As for the report, I'm guessing it's going to be so arduous it won't happen before the next election for DA and Sheriff. 

There are very significant issues of privacy and governmental power that are in play with regard to investigations. The idea that TBI files should be open to public inspection because they are created with public funds is at best simplistic. Were that to become policy, it would constitute a major expansion of state power and erosion of individual liberty.

Angry mobs do not make good policy, and anyone contemplating policy changes based on this particular episode needs to step back to first principles rather than just reacting to the case at hand.

I realize that the information came from a second hand source and not the doctor - but it seems much of the detailed medical info should have been covered by HIPPA or at least privacy respected by the employee. Made me a little uneasy. I would have been OK with just a comment that there were medical reasons the judge had been prescribed the pills.

Otherwise - great article and kudos to Ms Satterfield.

(link...)

n He insisted the file does not cast light on the questions of "who knew what when" raised by the News Sentinel in an investigative story published last month.

"It wasn't a file like Watergate — what did they know and when did they know it," Blackwood said. "What you're not going to find is a great big conspiracy among officials to protect Richard Baumgartner."

If you believe that, we should at least now know there is apparently no Tennessee agency or court capable of letting voters know "who knew what when".

Chairman Hammond shouldn't waste his time with writing his letter to the State, the commission's request for help should be addressed to the FBI and/or the DOJ.