Understanding the Truth: Wakulla County Doxing Case Overview

The Tale of Two White Trucks

In late March of 2024 the a citizen of Wakulla County (who would later become a doxing victim) called WCSO to report that a white box truck had ran him off of the road. Deputy Newsome was dispatched to that complaint as the primary deputy. Subsequently, two days later, the proposed internet troll, “Thunder Lightening” made a post on Facebook that his wife was almost hit by a white truck in the Winn Dixie parking lot. Thunder Lightening also made a report about his separate incident a few days later.

Following, Kemp inquired to Deputy Newsome about the incident by flagging him down at a corner store close to the Sheriff's office and again during a phone call. Deputy Newsome, to who Kemp was inquiring, had originally been dispatched to the call for the first report from the would be victim. Newsome stated in his interview that he believed he was later cancelled form that call. During the one of the investigation's interviews, Newsome also seemed to be confused by the two white truck incidences.

During his investigation interview Newsome disclosed that he did look up the information for the victim’s incident after Commissioner Kemp inquired about the details. He explained to the the detective that Kemp wanted to know what happened and who was involved. Later the detective asked Newsome if he knew who Ms. Whaley was and if he was aware that Ms. Whaley had posted the victim’s voter information on the internet. Newsome could only identify Whaley as the administrator of the Wakulla Citizens Page and did not seemingly even know what the detective meant by “voter information”.

The detective asked Newsome if he was communicating that Commissioner Kemp called him and led him to believe that he was investigating a citizen complaint. Newsome responded in the affirmative. However, when Newsome was asked to detail Commissioner Kemps questions, he was unable to recall the specifics. He did disclose that he remembered Commissioner Kemp asking him the name of the person involved.

The Mix Up and the Missed - Dox

The investigation revealed that on April 23, 2024 Commissioner Ralph Thomas searched the Web Elect system for the victims name. Web Elect is a subscription only platform that offers Florida voter data and services for political candidates. The sign up feature requests a committee or campaign name indicating the individual accessing will need some type of sponsorship or affiliation. The next day, Kemp began using the victim’s name on social media when communicating with Thunder Lightening indicating Kemp thought he had identified the perceived internet troll’s real identity.

Ms. Whaley is a well known community figure and formerly the administrator of a Wakulla citizens Facebook page. She has many allies and is generally viewed as a community pillar. On May 6, 2024, at 8:04 AM Whaley sent a message to then Commissioner Kemp asking for Thunder Lightening’s name in order to “bust him out”. Kemp replied by sending a screen shot of the information provided my Commissioner Thomas with additional dialogue that he registered in 2022 and hasn’t voted in a local election since. Unknown to Whaley and Kemp, this was not Thunder Lightening's personal information ad the victims had just moved to the area two years ago. The voter record did not include any information from their home state.

Later that afternoon at 12:28 PM, Whaley publicly posted the victim’s voter information with the following narrative, “Introducing Thunder Lightening to you all from public records, registered to vote in 2022 according to the records and data shows he’s never voted! I am a super voter since 1977 and even voted from overseas while away from home due to military assignments. Show your face and own your truth. You still have time to register to run for office.” Below this statement was a photo of the victim’s Voter ID card showing his personal information. During her first interview, Whaley told detectives that she feeds seniors, children, and families in Wakulla county and that she intended to close down the Wakulla Citizen’s page. Whaley contended that Thunder Lightening attacked her in a way she felt was personal by calling her pro growth, pro commissioner, pro law enforcement and the administrator of another large group which took his posts down. She admitted that the perceived internet troll made her angry and that she set out to determine his true identity. She also had to be coaxed by the detectives to reveal that Mike Kemp had sent her the record, by writing his name down on a piece of paper.

Later that evening at 10:23 PM the victim’s wife messaged Whaley and asked her to take the post down. Whaley would describe this message in her interview as “scathing”. Whaley stated in her interview that she went to bed around midnight, as the post remained. The following morning, May 7, 2024, at 6:20 AM she removed the post then messaged the victim’s Wife. At 6:38 AM the victim called WCSO to make a report about his personal information being posted to Facebook.

Drive By Disaster

At 6:52 AM Whaley calls Kemp and speaks to him twice over the next 40 minutes or so. Kemp then hangs up with Whaley and calls Ralph Thomas. At 7:39 AM Deputy Smith arrives at the victim’s home to address his call. At the request of Commissioner Kemp, Whaley sends a public records request to WCSO at 7:44 AM requesting “any and all Sheriff’s reports made by the victim regarding an incident in the Winn Dixie parking lot on or about May 20, 2024 through April 30, 2024, Deputy Hinson wrote the report”. The public record request did not return any records. When Whaley alerted Kemp that there were no records responsive to the request he responded with “Well good. Maybe he didn’t file a report and just talked to them. It’s not against the law anyways.”

At 8:19 AM Kemp calls Deputy Newsome and while they are on the phone, Newsome accesses the MNI entry for the victim. Kemp is engaged this entire time with phone calls to and from Whaley and Commissioner Thomas. At approximately 8:45 AM Kemp’s truck is captured on Deputy Smith’s body camera while he is conducting his investigation at the victim’s residence. Perhaps stunned by the appearance of Commissioner Kemp, the deputy’s body camera provides enough still footage for Kemps license plate to be captured and confirmed.

The deputy responding to the victims call subsequently called his supervisor, which was later confirmed by the detectives, and warned that he should call Kemp to discourage him from driving by the victim’s home. The deputy closed the victim’s case before he left the driveway, after telling the victim’s that he would forward the information on the case for follow up by CID. The victims were unaware that Kemp had driven by their home or that the case had been closed. A week later the victim followed up with WCSO.

Investigation is Initiated

On May 13, 2024 the victim arrived at the front lobby of the WCSO annex to provide additional information on the case. The victim demanded to speak to a detective and was apprehensive to speak to just anyone because of the personal connections within WCSO. Detective Ormerod met with the victim and was unsure if any crime was committed. The victim provided the detective with a statute. The last sentence in the detective’s CID comment for this incident entry states, “Over the next two months, I conducted as thorough investigation as I was able.”

Detective Ormerod visited the Supervisor of Elections office and followed up with the victim and his wife the next day (May 14, 2024). The SOE did not recognize the format of the information provided by the detective Ormerod and disclosed that the victim had also visited the SOE office. Following, Detective Ormerod and Sauls arrived at the victim's home to obtain additional information. During this time the wife of the victim apologized for having to involve the Sheriff’s office and explained that they had just moved here two years ago and were terrified because they didn’t know anyone and had found themselves the target of Ms. Whaley, who they had recently learned was an influential person in the community.

The victim’s wife explained that they didn’t know who Ms. Whaley was nor Commissioner Kemp. Where they moved from, County Commissioner’s aren’t a thing. She stated that about twenty minutes after Deputy Smith took their complaint, Commissioner Kemp personally contacted them. (At this time they still did not know Kemp drove by their home or that he was caught on camera.) The detectives assured the victim’s wife that neither of them were originally from this area and that they would provide an update after consulting the Assistant State Attorney.

The Whaley and Kemp Interviews

On May 15, 2024, Detective Ormerod had a meeting with Assistant State Attorney Deneen to discuss the case involving Ms. Whaley. Following a thorough review of the preliminary evidence, Deneen suggested that Ms. Whaley might be in violation of the statute, prompting Ormerod to proceed with an interview. During this initial request for interview, Ms. Whaley was notably distressed, frequently calling Sheriff Miller and even breaking down in tears at one point. Sheriff Miller allowed her the evening to consider her willingness to speak with Detective Ormerod. This incident raises questions about the treatment of ordinary citizens in similar situations, as it appears that Ms. Whaley, given her connections, is afforded a level of flexibility that may not be readily granted to others without such ties. It highlights potential disparities in how justice is administered based on one's social standing.

By the following morning, May 16, 2024, Whaley had secured the representation of Mr. David Kemp, Esq., and communicated this to Detective Ormerod when he contacted her for a follow-up regarding the interview. Later that day, Whaley and Kemp, Esq. arrived at the sheriff's office for the scheduled interview. When questioned about the source of her information, Whaley hesitated to disclose any details. It wasn't until Detective Lt. Sauls handed her a sheet of paper that she finally wrote down the name "Mike Kemp".

During Whaley’s interview she stated that Commissioner Kemp wasn’t the one who “dug up” the victim’s name but that he did send it to her. She insisted she didn't know who actually dug up the victim’s name. In this interview she also stated that Thunder Lightening attacked her in a way she thought was personal and that she was angry and wanted unmask him so that people would know who he was. The lead detective’s summaries of Whaley’s conduct over the course of the investigation is as follows:

On May 17, 2024 the detectives met with Major Wester and Colonel Whaley (Whaley is a distant relative of Becky Whaley but both claim to have never met each other). Colonel Whaley instructed the detectives to consult with ASA Deneen and interview Commissioner Kemp if it was necessary. This is after Becky Whaley wrote Kemp's name down on a piece of paper as the provider of the victim’s personal information. Ormerod later spoke to ASA Deneen, who approved the interview and urged the team to explore all legal avenues in their investigation.

This scenario raises significant concerns regarding the potential influence of the defendants' supporters on the judicial process. At this time in the investigation, Deneen appears interested in advancing the investigation; however, during the most recent court hearing, he mentioned his meetings with supporters of the defendants, which could complicate his impartiality. The unfolding events warrant careful scrutiny to ensure the integrity of the civic process remains intact amidst external pressures.

The interviews that follow are best described by the lead detective in the case, Ormerod. Below are snips of Kemp’s greatest moments during the course of the investigation (in no particular order). I encourage you to watch the videos and support the Panhandle Press and Valerie Crowder’s Substack. There is a paywall but you can also select a free sign up option.

Ralph Thomas Never Interviewed

Ralph Thomas was never interviewed but his name was mentioned in the 89-page report 127 times. A few clips from the areas where he was mentioned (in no particular order - yellow redactions indicate Thunder Lightening's true name redaction):

Investigation Integrity or Capability?

Despite numerous references to Ralph Thomas by the defendants and various interviewees, it is perplexing that no one considered the possibility of questioning him. As the creator of the document linked to the alleged crime, he appears entirely exempt from any accountability. The question arises: how could Kemp have accessed this particular information for dissemination? It seemed unlikely that he would have been able to utilize data from secure law enforcement databases acquired by Deputy Newsome. Without the document obtained from Ralph Thomas, would these events have unfolded in the same manner? This oversight raises significant concerns about the investigative process and the accountability of individuals who hold crucial information in such cases. The absence of scrutiny directed at Thomas ultimately calls into question the thoroughness of the inquiry and the implications surrounding responsibility for the alleged actions.

Judicial Junction

During the recent court hearing, David Kemp, Esq. represented both Whaley and Kemp, while Assistant State Attorney Andrew Deneen was also present. Kemp. Esq. expressed optimism about a non-judicial resolution, suggesting that there might be an “off ramp” for the parties involved. During the hearing, David Kemp clarified that he is not related to Mike Kemp. Later the judge states that the "last time he spoke to Michael Shawn Kemp he had told him that they are not related".

The interactions between judges and defendants are typically governed by strict protocols to ensure fairness and impartiality in the judicial process. It raises significant questions when a judge engages in conversation with a defendant outside of the formal courtroom setting. Such interactions could blur the lines of professionalism and lead to concerns about the integrity of the proceedings. It is crucial to examine whether Mike Kemp has ever appeared before this judge in court, as this context could influence the appropriateness of their communications. Furthermore, transparency is necessary regarding any behind-the-scenes meetings that may be taking place, as they could potentially affect the case's outcome. The curiosity surrounding these interactions underscores the importance of maintaining ethical standards within the judicial system to uphold public confidence in the rule of law.

The dialogue between David Kemp, Esq. and Assistant State Attorney Andrew Deneen revealed troubling concerns about potential external influences on the judicial process. When Kemp inquired about the timeline for the next hearing, Deneen mentioned that he needed 60 days due to an upcoming death penalty case. He further disclosed that there were developments in this case, stating that supporters of the defendants had reached out to him, and he had scheduled meetings regarding these interactions. This situation raises critical questions about the role that such supporter involvement plays in upholding the integrity of the judicial system. It prompts a deeper examination of how external pressures might affect the pursuit of justice and whether they undermine the principles of fairness and impartiality that are foundational to the rule of law.