Hamilton County: Role of candidate associates in sheriff’s race debated

Hamilton County sheriff candidate Jim Hammond is upset by his opponents’ repeated mentions of his relationship with convicted felon Lonnie Hood because it has nothing to do with how he would run a department, he says.

But political analysts say it is not uncommon — or unethical — for a candidate’s associates to be used as a barometer of his or her character.

“We see that at the presidential race level, and we see it at local levels,” said Bruce Oppenheimer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. “Very often a candidate will emphasize who their supporters are when they think those supporters have a positive sway on voters. So if they do that, isn’t it fair game for opponents to publicize the supporters who might have a negative impact?”

Bob Swansbrough, a political science professor at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, believes the practice especially is common in races in which one candidate appears to pull ahead in public donations and support. Campaign finance reports are due today, and they likely will show that Mr. Hammond, the Republican candidate, is the frontrunner when it comes to money, Dr. Swansbrough said.

During a telephone interview Wednesday, Mr. Hammond said he has raised about $120,000 for his campaign.

While Mr. Hammond is able to pay for public exposure through billboards and other advertisements, Dr. Swansbrough said, the other candidates may feel forced to stir up negative publicity in order to generate free media coverage for their campaigns.

Political underdogs “are more likely to try to make news and attack. Otherwise, you’d just get run over,” he said. “But it has to have some credibility.”

Sheriff candidate Greg Beck, a Democrat, said discussion of Mr. Hood “is fair game.”

“All of us are up for public scrutiny, and it's as fair as anything else,” he said.

Mr. Hammond’s opponents — Mr. Beck, independent candidates Jim Winters and Tim Akins and write-in candidate Fred Fuson — all have criticized his tenure at the sheriff’s department, which lasted from 1978 to 1994. He was chief deputy when he left the department after Republican John Cupp was elected sheriff. At that time, Mr. Hood was working under Mr. Hammond as a deputy.

Mr. Hood pleaded guilty in 1998 to conspiracy to traffic steroids, conspiracy to commit extortion, conspiracy to launder money and three counts of conspiracy to commit tax fraud, according to records from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. He served 51/2 years in prison, a reduced sentence for his cooperation with authorities, according to records.

Mr. Hammond believes interest in the case has been nothing more than “dirty politics” and emphasized his distance from Mr. Hood.

“He’s not on my campaign staff,” Mr. Hammond confirmed. “He’s like a thousand other volunteers out there that have tried to put signs up, or go out and speak to their neighbors... I felt bad that his name had to be brought back up.”

Repeated attempts to contact Mr. Hood at home and at work Tuesday and Wednesday were unsuccessful.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregg Sullivan, who prosecuted the case, called Mr. Hood “the centerpiece” of an investigation into a web of corruption at the Hamilton County Jail. A total of 21 people were indicted in the case, Mr. Sullivan said, including two other sheriff’s deputies, a federal probation officer, a former police officer and a security officer at the U.S. Department of Energy facility in Oak Ridge, Tenn.

Mr. Hammond never was charged in the case, confirmed Chuck Stevens, an FBI agent who helped investigate it and since has retired. But suspicions around everyone employed by the department before Mr. Cupp’s arrival have swirled within both law enforcement circles and public opinion, Mr. Stevens said.

“There was a general feeling that something was wrong with the sheriff’s department,” he recalled. “There was a general feel that it was not a good department.”

Mr. Hammond said he resents any association with that case, which was prosecuted after his departure. He also resents any allegations of impropriety within the department’s upper ranks, and explained that he didn’t know anything about the illicit activities while he was chief deputy.

“How can you expect a guy to know the personal life of 400 employees?” he said. “I think people see that, professionally, I conducted myself in the proper way.”

Though previously Mr. Hammond has called Mr. Hood a friend whom he would defend, he said Wednesday that he would not socialize with him. Mr. Hammond said he never would pay Mr. Hood to work for his campaign, nor would he ever consider giving him a job in the sheriff’s department if elected.

Associating with a known felon is prohibited by departmental conduct code.

But to Mr. Winters, raising issue with Mr. Hood is essential to understanding Mr. Hammond as a candidate.

“I think people are a product of their environment,” Mr. Winters said. “Who he takes money from, who he’s got supporting him, it has an effect in my eyes.”

Tim Akins, also an independent candidate, agreed. Bringing Mr. Hood into the debate “has nothing to do with politics or anything,” he said. “It’s the person he is. You can tell a lot about a person by the people he hangs out with.”

Mr. Fuson said he was surprised that Mr. Hammond would discuss Mr. Hood at all, knowing that his opponents likely would make issue of it.

“I don’t know why he would want to shoot himself in the foot for associating with people like that," he said. “I am a Christian and I understand the importance of forgiveness, but if I knew somebody — even a relative — who was a convicted felon, I wouldn’t want them anywhere near my campaign.”