10/22/2026
🤡🤡🤡🤡😂😂😂😂
The Good ole boys are at it again!!!!!
🚨 KNOX COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE CONSPIRACY CASE: FORMER SHERIFF CANDIDATE AND THREE CO-DEFENDANTS FIGHT TO KEEP FBI STATEMENTS OUT OF COURT
KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE | OCTOBER 21, 2026
An investigation into the alleged misuse of hundreds of thousands of dollars in public resources has taken another turn inside the Knox County courthouse.
And this time, the battle isn’t over what investigators uncovered.
It’s over what four law enforcement officers told the FBI — and whether prosecutors should be allowed to use those statements against them.
David Amburn, a longtime Knox County Sheriff’s Office veteran, former Chief of Detectives, and former candidate for sheriff, is challenging the admissibility of statements he made during a federal investigation that ultimately led to criminal charges against 11 current and former KCSO employees.
At the center of the case are allegations that sheriff’s office funds and law enforcement services were improperly used between 2011 and 2018.
The defendants face charges including conspiracy to commit theft exceeding $250,000, theft of property exceeding $250,000, and theft of services.
All 11 have pleaded not guilty.
THE INVESTIGATION THAT EXPOSED THE ALLEGED SCHEME
According to court filings, the FBI began investigating suspected misuse of government resources in August 2019.
Special Agent Emily Celeste was assigned to the investigation, which involved cooperation from KCSO leadership under then-Sheriff Tom Spangler and Chief Deputy Bernie Lyon.
As federal investigators examined the allegations, Amburn participated in four interviews between April 2020 and February 2022.
Two took place in person, including one in the parking lot of an auto body repair business on Maynardville Pike and another at the sheriff’s office asset lot on Bernard Avenue.
Two additional interviews were conducted by telephone.
Amburn also supplied photographs and other evidence to investigators.
But years later, his attorneys are challenging whether that cooperation was truly voluntary.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
On October 12, Amburn filed a motion asking the Knox County Criminal Court to suppress statements he provided during the investigation.
His argument centers on a 1967 United States Supreme Court ruling known as Garrity v. New Jersey.
The ruling established that public employees cannot be forced to surrender their constitutional protection against self-incrimination under threat of losing their employment.
Amburn’s attorneys contend that KCSO policies required employees to cooperate with investigators and answer questions truthfully.
According to the motion, those expectations placed Amburn in an impossible position:
Remain silent and potentially jeopardize his career, or cooperate and risk providing evidence that could later be used against him.
His defense argues that he was never given the necessary assurances that compelled statements could not be used against him in a criminal prosecution.
But whether those interviews were legally compelled is precisely what the court must determine.
A departmental requirement to cooperate does not automatically establish that every statement made to outside investigators is protected.
A FORMER SHERIFF’S SUPPORT BECOMES PART OF THE DEFENSE
The motion also relies on an affidavit from former Sheriff Tom Spangler, dated August 16.
According to the filing, Spangler believed the federal investigation had concluded following the indictment of deputy David Henderson.
Spangler reportedly took no adverse employment action against other employees implicated in the investigation.
Instead, Amburn was promoted to Chief of Detectives.
Spangler also endorsed Amburn’s campaign for sheriff.
The defense points to those circumstances while arguing that Amburn’s cooperation occurred within an environment where employees were expected to assist investigators.
THREE MORE DEFENDANTS CHALLENGE THEIR FBI INTERVIEWS
Amburn is not the only defendant seeking to prevent prosecutors from introducing statements made during the investigation.
Three additional current or former KCSO employees have filed similar motions.
James Hammond, a KCSO captain, is challenging statements from two FBI interviews conducted in April 2020.
Lake Lowry, a former sergeant, wants statements from a June 2020 interview at the Knoxville FBI Field Office excluded. His attorneys argue that the FBI’s interview documentation does not establish that he received constitutional warnings or waived his protections.
Curtis Cole, a former narcotics detective, is seeking to suppress statements from three FBI interviews in 2020. His motion alleges that Chief Bernie Lyon explicitly communicated that cooperation was expected.
All four defendants are requesting evidentiary hearings to determine whether their statements were obtained under circumstances that violated their constitutional rights.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The original indictments were returned in May 2026, followed by a superseding presentment on August 12 that revised certain statutory references and witness information.
Now, before the case reaches trial, the court may have to determine whether investigators obtained evidence that prosecutors are constitutionally prohibited from using.
If the defense succeeds, some statements and potentially related evidence could be excluded.
That would not automatically dismiss the charges, but it could affect the evidence available to prosecutors.
The allegations themselves remain serious: an alleged conspiracy involving public funds, government services, and individuals entrusted with enforcing the law.
Yet the legal dispute raises another significant issue.
When law enforcement officers become the subjects of a criminal investigation, where does their duty to cooperate end and their constitutional right against self-incrimination begin?
That question now sits before the Knox County Criminal Court.
The defendants remain presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
CRIME SCENE DAILY
Following the evidence. Questioning the powerful. Seeking the truth.
