CLEVELAND, OH – Attorney Heather McCollough could rightfully be nicknamed “Willa Mae Hemmons, Jr.” for the way she criminally engages in legal malpractice in the name of the municipal corporation of East Cleveland. Instead of seeking a seat on the Cleveland Municipal Court, McCollough, like her “official document forging” mentor, Hemmons, should be facing criminal prosecution and an investigation by the Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio. East Cleveland taxpayers have every right to demand that its elected officials file malpractice claims against each of the “sisters of legal chaos.”
The May 22, 2025 “answer” McCollough filed with the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas as the political subdivision of East Cleveland’s response to an April 18, 2025 civil complaint Martaze Burrell’s attorney, Christopher McNeal, filed against indicted and convicted ex-cops, and Brandon King, was not approved by the legislative authority. East Cleveland city council did not pass a resolution giving McCollough permission to defend dirty cops Michael Cardilli, Kenneth Lundy, Larry McDonald, Travis Kesecker, Phillip Howell, Joseph Marche, Scott Gardner, Brian Gerhard and King.
McCollough, without having a discussion with the city’s officers and electorate during a public meeting, told the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas that East Cleveland taxpayers want to shoulder the costs of defending and paying for the crimes private citizens impersonating qualified civil service tested peace officers have already been convicted for committing against the city’s residents and visitors. The legal hood rat has also criminally obstructed interim Mayor Sandra Morgan from discharging her mandatory duty to obtain council’s approval before assigning the “director of law” to answer Burrell’s complaint.
McCollough is ridiculously choosing to defend Gardner against Burrell in a civil trial when the council didn’t pay to defend him in any of the three criminal trials that convicted him. More specifically, Gardner has entered his own defense and didn’t ask McCollough to represent him.
McCollough needed council approval to file an answer in the city’s name
Section 733.53 of the Ohio Revised Code, “Duties as to suits,” gives only the “director of law” the following duties to discharge after they obtain a resolution from council to proceed.
“The city director of law, when required to do so by resolution of the legislative authority of the city, shall prosecute or defend on behalf of the city, all complaints, suits, and controversies in which the city is a party, and such other suits, matters, and controversies as he is, by resolution or ordinance, directed to prosecute. He shall not be required to prosecute any action before the mayor of the city for the violation of an ordinance without first advising such action.”
McCollough signed her unauthorized answer as the “attorney for the city” and not as the “director of law” pursuant to R.C. 733.53. The unethical attorney has no oath of office, council approved bond, malpractice insurance or legal authority to discharge any legal duties for the city, let alone to file any answer in defense of Burrell’s complaint as the “director of law.” In State ex rel. White v. Davis (2003, 99 Ohio St.3d 319) the Supreme Court of Ohio held that unauthorized legal actions by municipal attorneys are void.
“R.C. 733.53 prohibits the law director from settling a lawsuit without legislative authority. Any such unauthorized settlement is void ab initio.” – 99 Ohio St.3d at 321.
In that same ruling the Supreme Court of Ohio made it clear to non-reading idiots like McCollough that law directors don’t direct how funds are spent as her mentor has admitted to multiple times in public writings and in speech. King told jurors during his criminal trial that finance employee Ponce Russell wrote a $6791 check to the Auditor of State to pay his and Ernest Smith’s finding for recovery on Hemmons’ orders.
““The director of law has no inherent power to compromise claims against the city. Such authority must come from the legislative body.”
In State ex rel. Gordon v. Rhodes (1952) the Supreme Court of Ohio confirmed that only council can authorize financial/legal obligations or approve legal settlements. The authority to appropriate public funds is not delegated to any administrative officer or employee like Hemmons, McCollough, Antonio Marshall, Deborah Black or even Judge William Dawson. Financial Planning & Supervision Commission chairwoman Barbara Mattei-Smith has no authority to direct the city’s funds to vendors council did not approve.
“The power to appropriate municipal funds is exclusively vested in the legislative authority of the municipality. No officer, board, or department shall expend any money unless it has been appropriated by the legislative authority.” – 158 Ohio St. at 135. “Any contract or expenditure made without proper appropriation is not merely voidable, but void ab initio.” – 158 Ohio St. at 136.
Council vacated the office McCollough once “held” as assistant prosecuting attorney by Resolution No. 11-23 on January 26, 2023 and she was not reappointed and administered a new oath of office by King to return. Hemmons’ law director’s job was vacated by Resolution No. 10-23 at the same meeting. No funds were appropriated by council to pay McCollough and Hemmons a dime in wages in the 2023 and 2024 appropriations ordinances.
All of the attorneys King “appropriated” funds to pay in 2023 and 2024, including the big named firms like Taft, Stettinius and Bricker & Eckler, were recipients of stolen funds council had not appropriated for their fees. After her appointment to interim mayor, Baker told this writer Morgan did not administer an oath of office for McCollough to discharge the law director’s duties that she filed with him as the clerk of council.
McCollough’s unauthorized answer is evidence she tampered with the city’s records
McCollough knows enough law as a prosecutor to comprehend, if she ever reads it, that R.C. 5705.38 makes her a thief who is usurping a public office. It’s a state law that prohibits expenditures beyond appropriated amounts. She knows about the laws she’s violated to criminally obstruct two criminal complaints that were filed against her.
When Burrell filed his April 18, 2025 complaint, McCollough should have delivered it to Morgan to transmit to former Clerk of Council Mansell Baker instead of concealing it. He should have placed Burrell’s complaint on the agenda for the next regular meeting of council as a “receipt of communication.” Without delay, the clerk of council should have transmitted Burrell’s complaint to council’s president, vice president and members.
The legislative authority of the political subdivision had 28 days to decide how it wanted the “director of law” to respond in time for the official to prepare the authorized answer. Council, not the mayor or department of law, determines if they want to indemnify current and ex-employees and assign the law director to defend them.
McCollough should have disclosed her conflict of interest to council in writing pursuant to Disciplinary Rule 1.7 of Ohio’s Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys. If council wanted her to answer Burrell’s complaint despite the conflict, a resolution would have been her permission in writing.
McCollough’s concealment obstructed council from scheduling an executive or standing committee meeting to discuss the litigation with the current or past employees who want East Cleveland taxpayers paying their legal expenses and damages. Had McCollough read or advised council and Morgan to read, State v. Weind (1984), 50 Ohio App.3d 86, they’d have learned the court’s belief that unauthorized signatures on official documents violated the tampering with records elements of R.C. 2913.42. McCollough depth of legal knowledge doesn’t extend this far.
Morgan, who is still learning the job, unfortunately has to somewhat rely on the criminally minded members of King’s organized crime gang, like McCollough, for advice. McCollough wasn’t going to advise Morgan to deliver all the records associated with the city’s past interactions with Burrell to council for them to investigate and question her own misconduct. The new mayor wouldn’t know to order McCollough to bring them to her office.
The ethically conflicted attorney was also not going to advise Morgan and council to obey the state’s indemnification law as she blindly repeated the criminally obstructive acts she’d learned from Hemmons. From McCollough’s perspective, it’s better to lead Morgan into committing the same crimes she aided King, Hemmons and Michael Smedley in committing with others.
Understanding the state’s indemnification law is beyond McCollough’s comprehension
Section 2744.07(A)(1) of the Ohio Revised Code describes the indemnification process as an “appropriation” since council has to appropriate funds for an employee’s defense and potential settlement if the employee acted lawfully. It is an act that does not occur automatically without a resolution of council.
“Except as otherwise provided in division (A)(2) of this section, a political subdivision shall provide for the defense of an employee, in any state or federal court, in any civil action or proceeding which contains an allegation for damages for injury, death, or loss to person or property caused by an act or omission of the employee in connection with a governmental or proprietary function. Amounts expended by a political subdivision in the defense of its employees shall be from funds appropriated for this purpose or from proceeds of insurance.”
The (A)(2) subsection of section 2744.07 of the Ohio Revised Code sets forth reasons, that if any applied, authorized council to refuse to indemnify an employee. Two of the reasons council would reject defending cops who have already been convicted, or about to be indicted, is because their acts or omissions occurred while the former and two current employees were not acting in good faith; and the acts or omissions occurred while the employees were acting manifestly outside the scope of their employment or official responsibilities.
What McCollough chose not to advise council and Morgan of is a Supreme Court of Ohio ruling in Fabrey v. McDonald Village Police Dept. (1994, 70 Ohio St.3d 351) that prohibits councils from indemnifying employees or officials who commit criminal acts.
Councilor Dr. Patricia Blochowiak obtained a copy of Burrell’s April 18, 2025 complaint around April 30, 2025 and shared it with Morgan in an email. On May 24, 2025 she directed another email to Morgan asking her about McCollough’s answer and her failure to obtain council’s approval to file it. McCollough is not “an attorney for the city of East Cleveland and named Defendants” as the payroll thief self-identified. She’s also conflicted from representing cops who have already been convicted for committing crimes against the city as if the city now supports their past criminal acts.
McCollough’s answer conceals her own offenses and conflicted interests
U.S. District Court Judge James Gwin labeled McCollough’s legally deranged mentor, Hemmons, as unethical for representing the interests of former cops Vincent Johnstone and the late Michael Perry against the civil rights claim Laurese Glover, Eugene Johnson and Derrick Wheatt filed against them and the city, separately. All three were innocent of the murder they’d been falsely accused of committing while Hemmons and McCollough worked as King’s constitutionally ignorant and “color of law violating” chief prosecutor and assistant prosecutor.
The essence of Burrell’s complaint involves criminal acts McCollough and Hemmons committed as prosecutors when they, along with King, allowed individuals without civil service tests and current Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy (OPOTA) certifications to impersonate peace officers and arrest citizens. Burrell’s claim alleges that none of the peace officers who arrested the citizens that McCollough and Hemmons charged and brought before Judge William Dawson were authorized to discharge law enforcement duties. The King administration failed to discharge the “proprietary functions” of government by failing to ensure that employees were trained, certified and obeying and enforcing laws and ordinances in compliance with R.C. 737.11.
“The police force of a municipal corporation shall preserve the peace, protect persons and property, and obey and enforce all ordinances of the legislative authority of the municipal corporation, all criminal laws of the state and the United States, all court orders issued and consent agreements approved pursuant to sections 2919.26 and 3113.31 of the Revised Code, all protection orders issued pursuant to section 2903.213 or 2903.214 of the Revised Code, and protection orders issued by courts of another state, as defined in section 2919.27 of the Revised Code.”
Ohio Revised Code 109.803(A)(1)(2) requires every Ohio law enforcement officer, peace officer, sheriffs and troopers, all who carry guns, to complete 24 hours of continuing professional training every calendar year. The state has mandated that they learn and relearn, annually, how to engage in only lawful acts when they encounter citizens. Failure to complete the training by the 15th of December renders them ineligible to discharge law enforcement duties and wear weapons by December 31st. No exception. The instructions are found in the Ohio Administrative Code at 109: 2–18-06(A).
“Pursuant to division (B) of section 109.803 of the Revised Code, any peace officer or trooper who, in any calendar year, fails to complete and report continuing professional training in accordance with the requirements set forth in rules 109:2-18-01 to 109:2-18-05 of the Administrative Code shall cease carrying a firearm and shall cease performing the functions of a peace officer or trooper until such time as evidence of compliance is filed with and approved by the executive director. This rule does not apply to peace officers or troopers for whom an extension of time has been granted by the executive director.”
The Ohio Attorney General had ordered thousands of cop impersonators to cease performing the functions of a peace officer for failing to take mandatory annual tests about mandated law enforcement topics. All of the “cops” named in Burrell’s complaint did not take annual mandatory academic and gun requalification tests. Though McCollough and Hemmons knew they were presenting charges against citizens from arrests made by uncertified private citizens impersonating civil service tested and certified law enforcement officers, neither acted to protect the rights of citizens or the city’s taxpayers from liability.
Burrell’s lawsuit provided a September 18, 2018 letter from the executive director of OPOTA, Mary Davis, to uncertified ex-chief of police Cardilli. Davis demanded a return of $10,140 for training from Cardilli after learning that all the training records were forged. King and Hemmons had fostered an environment that encouraged public workers to create fraudulent city records and forge signatures.
Cardilli and Gardner concealed Davis’ correspondence from council as a “receipt of communications” and repaid the $10,140 from the law enforcement trust fund council doesn’t know police use as hidden slush fund. The mayor is required to provide council with a monthly report of the police department’s seized assets forfeiture transactions. Council approval is needed to spend all law enforcement trust fund dollars.
McCollough and Hemmons knew about the training issues in 2018 and were familiar with Burrell’s arrest by convicted ex-cop Larry McDonald and soon-to-be-indicted cop Kenneth Disalvo Scott aka Kenneth Disalvo Lundy. Hemmons testified during Burrell’s 2020 suppression hearing that McCollough had reviewed hundreds of pages of police training records and acknowledged she lacked the intellectual ambition to comprehend them.
McCollough knew Lundy had visited Burrell’s Facebook page without a search warrant and determined that he was a murder suspect in the death of Stevie Swain. He decided to arrest the then 17-year-old at gunpoint without a warrant, with McDonald and the other cops in front of East Cleveland city hall. Burrell was snatched out of his girlfriend’s car while he was on his way to work,
McCollough knew the juvenile was literally kidnapped by Lundy and McDonald and taken to city hall where he was questioned by Lundy without a parent or attorney present. Lundy refused to let his mother and grandmother, both of whom were present, into the room where he was questioning the minor. Lundy, like now convicted McDonald, had been appointed as a peace officer by King without any civil service testing or verification of his OPOTA credentials.
Lundy had read a Facebook post that homicide victim Stevie Swain tagged Burrell in about a car he had stolen. They were friends but Burrell had nothing to do with Swain’s car theft or social media post. Somehow a social media “tag” in Lundy’s mind was evidence of murder confession. A jury found Burrell not guilty of all charges McCollough had filed against him two years after his ridiculously unlawful arrest.
McCollough knew all of the facts above, but Burrell’s grandmother is Chasing Justice activist Mariah Crenshaw, a constant critic of East Cleveland’s uncertified peace officers, as well as Hemmons and McCollough’s malicious prosecutions. There are Facebook posts of McCollough harassing Crenshaw for demanding civil rights accountability between the prosecutor’s office and police. McCollough was stupid enough to declare Burrell guilty on her Facebook page before his trial began.
Lundy is currently involved in a controversy that’s exposed flaws in his investigation of Jamarr Forkland’s homicide at the alleged hands of Jerry Sims. Lundy told Sims’ girlfriend, who allegedly witnessed the killing, that Sims might kill her. He offered the alleged killer he was investigating’s girlfriend his personal protection as his live-in lover for the next five years.
It was a relationship Lundy never disclosed to prosecutors as he trained her testimony to convict the ex-boyfriend he was getting out of the way by lying him into prison. A city hall source told this writer Lundy gave Sims’ girlfriend a handgun from police evidence. Lundy’s theft of Sims’ girlfriend created evidentiary issues for Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney Michael O’Malley that resulted in Sims being set free. There is no logical reason council would indemnify him now when members like Blochowiak and Twon Billings are voicing concerns about police certifications.
During Burrell’s suppression hearing McCollough learned that even after cheating on his OPOTA training tests, Lundy only scored a 50 and still failed. According to the Ohio Attorney General, Lundy has no authority to discharge law enforcement duties and wear a weapon.
McCollough knew council passed a law demanding police be certified
Two years after Burrell’s arrest, newly-elected Ward 2 Councilor Juanita Gowdy in 2020 introduced the Tamia Chapmann Ordinance specifically aimed at giving citizens tools to verify the credentials of the peace officers who stopped and arrested them. She had also been demanding that police wear the bodycams to document the crimes they were committing against citizens McCollough and Hemmons were prosecuting.
With Gowdy publicly pushing for police reforms, council amended Ord. No. 525.03 and McCollough refused to apply it. One of the features of Gowdy’s amendments gave McCollough duties she failed to discharge pursuant to Ord. No. 525.05(h).
“In all prosecutions in the city’s Municipal Court, or in criminal prosecutions on behalf of the city in other courts, the prosecuting attorney shall, before presenting charges, affirm in writing that the arresting law enforcement officer(s) was administered an oath of office, was operating with valid Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy credentials, was lawfully licensed to operate a public safety vehicle; and that he/she did operate all equipment in compliance with federal and states; and operating federal and state criminal records history databases in accordance with Title 18, Section 534 of the United States Code; Title 5, Section 552a of the United States Code; Title 2913.02 of the Ohio Revised Code; all federal and state laws mandated in Section 4501:2-10 of the Ohio Administrative Code; inclusive of the FBI NCIC manual. The prosecutor’s affirmation and supporting documents shall be delivered to the Defendant and the Judge of the Municipal Court at the time of the arraignment; and sworn as to true by the prosecuting attorney.”
Gowdy and council approved an amendment that created a new subsection making it a first-degree misdemeanor for a law enforcement officer to discharge duties without valid or with fraudulent OPOTA credentials. A law enforcement officer operating in violation of a “cease” order from the Ohio Attorney General was made a criminal. So was a prosecutor who disregarded the above instructions and pursued criminal charges brought by an uncertified police impersonator against a citizen.
McCollough knows she’s never verified the credentials of any law enforcement officer or presented their oath and training certifications to defendants. During Burrell’s suppression hearing she testified that she did not review body and dash cams, or training records, before she filed criminal charges against citizens with the Cuyahoga County prosecuting attorney.
Morgan should know that McCollough’s unauthorized answer conceals her own crimes in office against Burrell, other criminal defendants she’s charged and the City of East Cleveland. The new mayor will allow a liability to be created for taxpayers if she doesn’t order McCollough to withdraw her statutorily unauthorized answer and have it stricken from the record.
