Press Release
Press Release
Press Release
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
NATALIE PAINE
AUGUSTA JUDICAL CIRCUIT
BURKE, COLUMBIA AND RICHMOND COUNTIES
December 2, 2020
As required by Georgia law, the matter of Brandon Keathley was presented to a Grand Jury for review in
March of 2020. At that time, the Grand Jury requested that the case be presented for indictment. This
fact was both published by the Grand Jury in their March 10, 2020 presentment and publicized by the
media. Four days later, the Judicial State of Emergency was declared due to COVID-19, which shut down
all Grand Jury proceedings as of March 14, 2020. The State of Emergency was lifted at the end of
September and once my office was given the dates that Grand Jury would resume by the Chief Judge,
we sent a letter to Brandon Keathley. By law, the District Attorney is required to provide a law
enforcement officer with 20 days advance notice of any Grand Jury proceeding where their on duty
conduct is called into question. Mr. Keathley signed for his receipt of that notice on October 28, 2020.
On December 1, 2020, the second Grand Jury was presented with the case.
The Richmond County Grand Jury is comprised of 23 citizens of Richmond County who have the
opportunity to hear all of the evidence in a case before determining whether or not there is probable
cause to believe a crime has been committed. It should be noted that two separate Richmond County
Grand Juries were presented with the facts of this case. The first recommended an indictment, the
second returned one. This so-called “unorthodox approach” was required by the legislature in 2016
when Georgia Law was changed regarding Grand Jury inquiries into law enforcement conduct while on
duty. The law regarding notice and procedure was followed to letter of the law and if the Sheriff
disagrees with that process, he should address it with the legislature. While it is unfortunate that the
Sheriff of Richmond County takes issue with the citizens of Richmond County reviewing the conduct of
his officers, it is shameful to suggest that this was politically motivated.
In fact, the case was presented to the first Grand Jury long before the election. The officer received
notice regarding the second Grand Jury date prior to the date of the election as well. It was going
forward before anyone knew the outcome of the election. The assertion that I would falsely accuse a
law enforcement officer for some insignificant act of his employer is simply ridiculous and false.
My oath requires that I uphold the letter of the law without fear, favor or affection, which I have and
always will do.