The following is a video from a February 2011 Sussex County Executive Committee. Take note of many of the faces, they are still in the committee, and some of those supporting the write-in candidate against an endorsed GOP candidate. Take note that the first audience member to speak is Larry Mayo, take note that he is upset that in his view the state GOP did not “FULLY” support Christine O’Donnell after her primary win. Also take note that Larry mayo is now a SCGOPEC member and is fully and publicly supporting the write-in candidate.
Also take note that the current “CHAIRMAN” John Rielley of the SCGOPEC speaks as well about the lack of support and seems to think that former Chairman Ross should do something about it, maybe like resigning?
I am posting this for the people who were involved in this video, and who may not remember their roles, can refresh their memories. And if they have an ounce of integrity they would resign as well.
How wonderful (sic) that the woes of division in Sussex GOP have made headlines at the NJ now, all over the illustrious Sheriff Christopher, looking out for all the serfs and other oppressed people. What is the point of having a Party, if you can’t support the your own candidate? Why have a primary? What will be next, if the Sheriff loses the election, will he reason it’s OK to stage a coup to stay in power? Will he declare “null and void” the results of the election because the people weren’t informed enough?
This constant “drip drip drip” from Sheriff Reed and Sheriff Christopher whining over powers they never had, nor has any other Delaware Sheriff had in anyone alive’s lifetime? Time to give it up…
I’M REALLY TIRED OF THE PEOPLE THAT KEEP SAYING NEVER HAD.
From the Delaware Archives. Look up the information yourself before putting foot in mouth.
SHERIFF
Kent and Sussex County Sheriffs were authorized in 1905 to commit certain classes of prisoners within their counties to the New Castle County Workhouse beginning in 1907.60 In 1913, it became the responsibility of sheriffs to transport, provide camps, and care for convict chain gangs.61 In 1933, Kent and Sussex County Sheriffs became responsible for keeping a daily record of each prisoner’s behavior. For each month of good behavior the sheriff could reduce the prisoner’s sentence by five days. After one year of good behavior sentences could be reduced seven days for each month. Following two years, sentence reduction was nine days for each month. After three years, ten days for each month. Sheriffs could deduct earned time for violation of rules and discipline or for want of diligence and fidelity. In addition, sheriffs could recommend for pardon and restoration to citizenship any prisoner who passed the period of his sentence within five days of the completion thereof provided said prisoner had no record of a violation of rules or discipline.62
In 1935, sheriffs became jointly responsible with the Police Department for seeing that all practitioners of chiropody in the state were legally registered and report to the Attorney General those in violation.63 Sheriffs were also empowered in 1935 to arrest any person operating a business establishment without a certified license.64 Also in 1935, sheriffs were ordered to subpoena witnesses called before the Temporary Emergency Relief Commission.65
In 1937, the Kent County Sheriff was required to witness the inauguration of a new seal and breaking of the old for the Supreme Court and the Superior Court of Kent County.66 Also in 1937, sheriffs in all three counties were authorized to seize and sell the grounds and buildings of owners not paying their sewer bills.67 Sheriffs were empowered to serve notices of estate settlements for the Orphans Court in 1939.68 That same year sheriffs were authorized to summon a jury of inquest for the Escheator to settle the estates of the deceased tht had no heirs.69 Finally in 1939, Sheriffs were ordered to transmit all arrest information and photographs to the newly created Bureau of Identification within the State Police Department within forty-eight hours after receiving said information.70
In 1941, Kent County Sheriffs received permission to work prisoners and apply their wages to fines imposed by the court at the time of the sentence.71 Also in 1941, the Kent County Sheriff witnessed the destruction of old and institution of a new seal for the Kent County Register of Wills while the New Castle County Sheriff witnessed the seal ceremony for New Castle County Prothonotary’s Office.72 New Castle County Sheriffs were empowered to serve and execute writs, rules and processes of the New Castle County Court of Common Pleas in 1941.73
In 1943 an act made sheriffs’ salaries in all three counties equal.74 Another law reaffirmed the sheriff’s duty to serve eviction notices.75 In 1945, election duties and responsibilities were transferred from the sheriff’s office to the newly created Department of Elections.76 A law of 1949, required sheriffs to keep their offices and records open at all times, including Sundays throughout the year with Saturdays during the months of July and August excepted.77 By 1951, the previous law was amended to except Saturdays and Sundays throughout the year.78
No significant changes occurred until 1980, when Senate Bill No. 477 proposed that the terms of office for the Sussex and Kent County Sheriffs be changed to two years. New Castle County Sheriffs served for four years. No sheriff could serve consecutive terms.79 In 1982, the above proposed amendment was enacted.80
OK, interesting post. Do you realize that in each instance the duties were expanded by an act of a legislative body. That was a significant factor in the Supreme Court’s opinion. The sheriff’s authority emanates from the legislature. What the legislature gives, it can take away.
The latest claim these EDC’s and RDC’s who support the Sheriff are bragging about is Ted Nugent endorsing Christopher.
OathKeeper, what OSCN actually said was, never had, ” in anyone alive’s lifetime?” But hey, like your demi-god Christopher, don’t let the facts stop you.
You should look up why the Workhouses were taken away from the Sheriff’s in 1956 and the Department of Corrections created. Corruption. And, none of what you describe in any of the above is police patrol work…
Oathkeeper1:
The term “conservator of the peace” in the 1776
Delaware Constitution and each successive Delaware Constitution has
always been used only to describe a changing variety of public officials.
That generic collective description has never defined the powers of any
specifically named constitutional office holder. The Sheriff’s argument to
the contrary is without merit.
Nine years after the enactment of the 1897 Delaware Constitution,
Judge Victor Woolley published his seminal treatise on Delaware law. He
described the office of sheriff as follows:
Sheriffs. Sheriffs are ministerial officers, who execute and
carry into effect the orders and the judgments of the court.
The sheriff is the officer to whom all process is directed,
unless there be some cause of exception to him, in which case
the Prothonotary may direct the process to the Coroner. The
sheriff is the proper officer to execute all writs whether original
or of execution, except where he himself is a party defendant.
When the framers of the 1776 Delaware Constitution created the
office of sheriff by name only, they conferred upon that office those
generally recognized legal powers, duties and functions belonging to the
office at the time. In 1776, Delaware sheriffs were an arm of the courts, not
general law enforcement officers. Although Delaware sheriffs had common
law power to arrest for offenses committed in their presence, that power was
exercised only as ancillary or incident to performing duties for the courts.
In 1981, the General Assembly enacted 11 Del. C. ch. 84 establishing
a comprehensive regulatory scheme to train police officers. The General
Assembly excluded sheriffs and their deputies from this comprehensive
training scheme, and precluded anyone who did not meet the training
requirements from enforcing the laws of the State. To eliminate any
ambiguity concerning whether the office of the sheriff retains any common
law power to investigate or arrest, the General Assembly enacted HB 325 to
clarify and specifically provide that no such powers are vested in that office.
That affirmative act of the General Assembly extinguished any general
investigative or arrest powers that the Sheriff might otherwise have claimed
under the common law, however the General Assembly expressly preserved
that authority of the Sheriff to take into custody and transport a person when
specifically so ordered by the Superior Court.
The only limitation on the General Assembly’s right to modify or
eliminate a common law power of the sheriff is that a statute cannot abrogate
the substance of the office itself. Eliminating the sheriff’s common law
power of arrest does not abrogate the substance of the office of sheriff.
it is within the General Assembly’s authority to statutorily regulate the undefined, incidental
common law powers of a name only constitutional office, such as the sheriff.
Sanity Check, you are wasting you time, I have been having this debate with these people for three or more years, they hear nothing but their demi-god Christopher and his idol, book whore Mack. But the effort is appreciated.