DA warns more DUI cases could be dropped following GSP ‘PIT for Pay’ scandal

SAVANNAH, Ga. (WTOC) - The Chatham County District Attorney is speaking out after 27 DUI cases were dismissed last week when 4 fired Georgia State Patrol troopers failed to appear in Recorder’s Court to testify — and she says more dismissals are coming.

District Attorney Shalena Jones said to WTOC exclusively that her office has identified as many as 150+ cases that could be affected if the troopers continue to skip these court appearances.

“We rely heavily on law enforcement to show up and to testify to actually make the cases — we can’t, especially in traffic cases, we can’t do it without them,” Jones said. “But the second thing that’s alarming is 27 DUIs is a lot of cases to drop on one docket and so far the check that we’ve done, they’re going to be maybe 150 or more. That concerns me greatly because it creates a public safety issue.”

Troopers fired over ‘PIT for Pay’ scheme

The four troopers — Tyler Byrd, Joseph Curlee, Isaiah Francois, and Hunter Waters — were fired from GSP after an internal Department of Public Safety investigation found they collectively made nearly $100,000 by filing personal injury claims against drivers of vehicles they had PIT maneuvered during pursuits.

None of the troopers sought medical attention or informed GSP of any injuries, but claimed anxiety, stress, and soreness. Their supervisor was also fired for failing to report the behavior and for consulting on a claim himself.

Cases dismissed, 150 more at risk

Jones said subpoenas issued to the 4 troopers are court orders, not optional requests. Prosecutors depend on law enforcement testimony to move cases forward, and without it, the cases cannot proceed.

“Respectfully, as the prosecutor, we rely on witnesses to show up when we issue you a subpoena. It’s not an invitation. It is an order from the court,” Jones said.

Jones said her office has not received a definitive answer from the 4 troopers stating they will not appear, and is continuing to issue subpoenas and attempt contact while waiting to see if they show up.

“That just means that 27 people get to go back on the road scot-free, and as of yet, we don’t even know how many of those were first-time DUIs or habitual violators that needed to be treated as a felony,” Jones said.

Jones said her office is working with GSP to explore whether other troopers involved in the original cases could testify in place of the fired officers, particularly in cases involving defendants with multiple prior DUI offenses. She said that process is ongoing.

Savannah’s DUI caseload adds to concern

Jones noted that Chatham County carries one of the heaviest DUI caseloads in Georgia, a factor that amplifies the impact of the dismissals.

“Our office per capita gets more DUI cases here than any other jurisdiction in the state, just because we are Savannah, we have a high tourist population and we have visitors,” Jones said. “The more folks you have down here drinking and driving, the more we have to practice DUI enforcement and prosecute those cases — and we can’t if the officers don’t show.”

Jones also noted that DUI is an offense with frequent repeat offenders, and said that cases dismissed without prosecution increase the likelihood of reoffending.

Troopers’ absence called ‘off color’

Jones said she does not know why the troopers have chosen not to appear and has not been given a reason.

“I don’t know if their lawyers have advised them not to show or if they’re just flipping their nose at the court and at the system, but it’s certainly off color,” Jones said. “And I think out of character for the professionals that they are.”

Jones added that the situation should not reflect on law enforcement broadly.

“I want to remind people that this is a minority exception to a general rule,” she said. “We find that officers genuinely are compliant. We have some officers who take their DUI cases very seriously, but this is an anomaly. It’s the first time this has happened in my time here as a DA and as a line prosecutor.”

Criminal investigation not yet warranted, DA says

Jones said she is waiting on the findings from GSP’s internal investigation before determining whether her office needs to examine the matter further for potential criminal conduct.

“Is it unethical? Maybe. Does it violate departmental policy? Probably so. Is it criminal? That’s a different question,” Jones said. “And I need to know the facts to be able to make that assessment.”

Jones said that at this time she does not have sufficient information to request a GBI investigation.

“I just don’t have sufficient information to believe that there is a crime to investigate,” she said.

We will keep you up to date as more cases involving these troopers, head to court.