Erik Cooper Statement on Dunn and Marsh Indictments
August 28, 2026, 5:44 p.m.

Sevier County Grand Jury’s True-Bill Presentment of James
“Jimmy” Bruce Dunn and William Brownlow Marsh

SEVIERVILLE, TN - I am grateful to the citizens who served on the Sevier County Grand Jury and took seriously the evidence and testimony I presented to them. I also thank the Honorable Don R. Ash for addressing the difficult procedural and conflict issues I presented to the Court so that I could have access to a Grand Jury process free from the conflicts I had identified. And I thank District Attorney General Pro Tem Stephen Crump for ultimately carrying out the Grand Jury’s request that he prepare the Presentment the Grand Jury chose to return.

I want to be clear at the outset about two things.

First, James Bruce “Jimmy” Dunn and William Brownlow Marsh are accused of crimes. They have not been convicted. They are entitled to the presumption of innocence and to every protection afforded an accused person under our Constitution and laws. I expect those same protections in the criminal proceeding presently pending against me.

Second, because I remain a criminal defendant, I will not use this occasion to discuss the charges pending against me, the evidence relating to those charges, my defenses, or other matters that should be resolved in court. The criminal case against me and the Grand Jury’s Presentment involving Mr. Dunn and Mr. Marsh are separate proceedings, and I intend to respect that distinction.

What I can address is why I have spent years fighting for the ability of ordinary citizens to reach a Grand Jury without unlawful interference, and why the events of this week are important far beyond me.

How This Began

My involvement with the Fourth Judicial District Attorney General’s Office did not begin in 2023.

Beginning in approximately 2018, I worked as a litigation consultant with attorneys pursuing federal litigation arising from the November 28, 2016 Gatlinburg wildfire.

Through that work, I encountered evidence that I believed demonstrated criminally negligent homicide under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-212 and implicated the conduct of public officials, including then-Gatlinburg City Manager Cindy Ogle, former Gatlinburg Police Chief and current City Commissioner Randy Brackins, Assistant


Gatlinburg Police Chief Gary Waldroup, former Gatlinburg Fire Chief Greg Miller, and former Sevier County Emergency Management Director John Matthews.

Among the evidence I reviewed was information that led me to believe these public officials knew by approximately 1:15 p.m. on November 28, 2016 that the wildfire presented a danger of leaving Great Smoky Mountains National Park and threatening Gatlinburg and surrounding communities. The wildfire ultimately did leave the Park, devastated this community, and killed at least fourteen people.

Those were my conclusions from the evidence I reviewed. They are not findings of guilt by a court, and I do not present them as such.

But my efforts to report evidence of what I believed to be criminal conduct ultimately brought me into contact with the Fourth Judicial District Attorney General’s Office and, eventually, into a years-long dispute over something much larger: whether an ordinary Tennessee citizen can actually reach a Grand Jury when the allegations concern public officials—including prosecutors themselves.

Tennessee Law Gives Citizens Access to Their Grand Jury

In 1978, the Tennessee General Assembly enacted what is now Tenn. Code Ann. § 40- 12-104. It permits a person possessing knowledge or proof of a public offense to invoke a procedure for presenting that information to the local Grand Jury.

The Tennessee Supreme Court’s commentary to Rule 6 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure describes this statutory procedure in particularly important words: it was designed to give citizens “free access to the local Grand Jury.”

For years, however, citizens seeking to use that law in Sevier County encountered procedures that the statute did not require. Citizens were required to submit written applications. Those applications had to be submitted by a deadline. The District Attorney General’s Office participated in controlling the scheduling of citizens’ appearances. And in my case, I was presented with a written “Waiver of Constitutional Rights” before I would be permitted to proceed.

I challenged those practices in court.

In July 2023, the Sevier County Circuit Court determined that § 40-12-104 did not require me to submit a written application, did not require me to apply by a deadline established by the District Attorney General’s Office, and did not require me to schedule my appearance through that process. The Court also determined that I was not required to execute the written Waiver of Immunity in order to invoke § 40- 12-104.

Those rulings mattered to me.

But they should matter more to every other citizen of the Fourth Judicial District.

What Happened in March 2023

On March 27, 2023, I appeared to present information to a Sevier County Grand Jury Panel.

Assistant District Attorney General Ronald Crockett Newcomb presented me with a document titled “Waiver of Constitutional Rights.” I declined to sign it.

I subsequently alleged under oath that Mr. Newcomb told me I had to waive my constitutional rights before I would be allowed to testify, that I refused, that a vote was then conducted concerning whether I would be permitted to proceed without signing the Waiver, and that I was denied the opportunity to provide my testimony.

The next afternoon—March 28, 2023—I went to the Sevier County Sheriff’s Office and made a written report concerning what I alleged Mr. Newcomb had done. I provided the Sheriff’s Office with a sworn affidavit supporting my allegations.

I believed I had witnessed crimes committed during an official Grand Jury proceeding. I reported those allegations to law enforcement.

When those allegations were not investigated by Sheriff Hodges or his Sheriff’s Office, I continued trying to use the process Tennessee law gives citizens to place evidence before a Grand Jury.

On May 1, 2023, I again appeared before a Sevier County Grand Jury Panel intending to present allegations concerning Mr. Newcomb.

I was arrested as I left that proceeding. Because charges against me remain pending, that is where my public discussion of the May 1 events must end.

Three Years of Litigation

I did not stop.

For more than three years, without an attorney representing me in these proceedings, I pursued civil cases seeking judicial interpretation of § 40-12-104, appealed adverse decisions, sought public records, and continued trying to determine how citizens had been treated when they attempted to exercise the same statutory procedure. That litigation established something important.

The written application was not required. The District Attorney General’s deadline was not required. The District Attorney General-controlled scheduling procedure was not required. And the Waiver of Constitutional Rights imposed upon me was not required. I remain grateful to Honorable Rex Henry Ogle for the court’s rulings.

The Tennessee Court of Appeals has itself recounted the July 2023 order establishing those propositions.

My concern, however, has never ended with what happened to me.

What About the Other Citizens?

These procedures were not created for me on one particular day.

They were practices used to regulate citizen access to the Sevier County Grand Jury over a period of years.

That leaves questions I have been trying relentlessly to answer:

- How many other citizens tried to report crimes and encountered barriers Tennessee law did not require?
- How many people were discouraged and simply went home?
- How many crime victims believed that a written application, a prosecutor-imposed deadline, or prosecutor-controlled scheduling was the law because government officials told them that was the procedure?
- How many citizens never reached a Grand Jury at all?


That is one reason I have pursued public records concerning these practices. I want to learn who else was subjected to them and whether there are other victims who still do not know that the barriers placed between them and the Grand Jury were not required by Tennessee law.

I know what happened to me because I kept fighting.

What I still do not know is how many other people were turned away, discouraged, or prevented from reaching a Grand Jury by procedures Tennessee law never required. Those citizens matter too. Finding them and finding the truth is one reason I have refused to stop.

I Asked Tennessee’s Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti to Investigate This problem was not hidden from state government.

In September 2023, I personally provided Tennessee Attorney General and Reporter Jonathan Skrmetti written notice describing conduct I alleged constituted obstruction of Sevier County Grand Jury proceedings by District Attorney General Dunn and Assistant District Attorneys General Ronald Newcomb and Barry Williams.

I specifically asked Attorney General Skrmetti to exercise the authority of his office to seek an investigative Grand Jury so that my allegations could be substantiated or unsubstantiated through an independent investigation. My written request identified the officials and described the practices I was challenging.

Nearly three years have passed.

I am unaware of any investigation by Attorney General Skrmetti into the allegations I reported.

Meanwhile, Attorney General Skrmetti and attorneys from his office have actively opposed me in civil litigation concerning my efforts to obtain unobstructed Grand Jury access and related governmental records. I find that deeply troubling.

When a citizen tells the State’s chief legal officer that he believes prosecutors are interfering with citizen access to Grand Juries, I believe the proper governmental response should be to find out whether the allegations are true—not merely to oppose the citizen who continues asking the question.

August 24, 2026

After more than three years, I again sought access to the Sevier County Grand Jury.

This time, because the allegations implicated members of the local District Attorney General’s Office and because I believed the ordinary participants presented conflicts, I sought judicial intervention before appearing.

I thank Judge Don R. Ash for addressing those issues and providing a path by which the matter could proceed without the conflicts I had identified. My August 18 Petition specifically sought temporary prosecutorial substitution and other measures while expressly leaving to the Grand Jury the ultimate questions concerning whether criminal conduct occurred and whether probable cause existed.

On August 24, I presented my allegations and evidence through the process provided by Tennessee law.

I also provided the Grand Jury with my own proposed Presentment.

The Grand Jury made its own decisions.

When the Grand Jury requested that District Attorney General Pro Tem Stephen Crump prepare a Presentment on its behalf, Mr. Crump did so rather than altering the proposed Presentment I had submitted and treating my document as the Grand Jury's own. I appreciate that distinction, and I thank Mr. Crump for carrying out the Grand Jury’s request.

On August 26, 2026, the Grand Jury returned its True-Bill Presentment charging James Bruce Dunn and William Brownlow Marsh with criminal offenses. The Presentment includes charges of official misconduct, official oppression, retaliation for past action, conspiracy to commit official oppression, witness coercion, and civilrights intimidation. Those are the Grand Jury’s charges. They are not convictions.

Mr. Dunn and Mr. Marsh are entitled to defend themselves, challenge the evidence, confront the allegations through the judicial process, and receive a fair trial before an impartial tribunal.

There Is Nothing to Celebrate

I have spent years trying to get to this point, but I do not regard what happened this week as a victory to celebrate. Quite the opposite.

This is a sad day for the citizens of Cocke, Grainger, Jefferson, and Sevier Counties who relied upon the integrity and honor of the Fourth Judicial District Attorney General’s Office and its prosecutors to fulfill the duties and promises they made under oath to our communities.

A Grand Jury’s decision to accuse prosecutors of criminal conduct involving the exercise of governmental authority should concern every citizen. The criminal justice system must now do its work. Mr. Dunn and Mr. Marsh are presumed innocent.

I will continue to respect my obligations and protect my rights as an accused criminal defendant. I will also protect my rights as an alleged crime victim and witness in the proceeding arising from the Grand Jury’s Presentment.

And I intend to continue pursuing the truth about what happened to other citizens who tried to exercise their right of access to Sevier County Grand Juries.

There is nothing to celebrate here. There is only a responsibility to find the truth, protect the rights of everyone involved, and make certain this can never happen to another citizen