In an appeal filed in Carroll County Superior Court, former Mt. Zion Police Chief Bradley Forrister charges that the Mt. Zion City Council violated his constitutional rights during an Oct. 13 hearing in which Forrister appealed his termination.

Forrister, represented by attorney Gary Bunch, has petitioned the court to review the constitutionality of the City Council’s proceedings. In his closing argument during the October hearing, Bunch described the proceedings as “a trial by ambush.”

“The way this case was presented makes a mockery of justice,” Bunch said in closing. “It’s not only wrong, but profoundly wrong, unfair and unjust.”

Bunch asserted in the petition that since the council acted as a decision-making body, it exercised judicial power. Therefore, Bunch stated the council was obligated to function under the rules of a courtroom.

The council’s attorney, Alan Miller, said those rules did not and should not apply to a city council meeting.

“He appeared before a city council, not before a court. The council is not restricted by the rules of evidence,” Miller said.

In the petition, Bunch outlined five reasons for Forrister’s appeal, citing two ways the council allegedly violated Forrister’s right to due process.

Bunch claimed one of the violations occurred when the council made its decision based on witness statements that were not entered into evidence, a component of due process.

“The consideration of such alleged statements made a mockery of due process,” Bunch wrote in the petition.

The council did not call any witnesses, which according to Bunch violated Forrister’s due process right of confrontation or the right to cross examine.

Therefore, according to Bunch, the council’s decision was “contrary to the evidence,” because neither live witnesses nor witness statements were entered as evidence.

Bunch also questioned the validity of the private statements.

“The alleged statements constituted blatant hearsay. And, under Georgia law, hearsay proves nothing,” Bunch stated.

Finally, Bunch stated that the hearing violated Forrister’s right “to impartial decision makers,” because Mayor Sue Bloodworth was allowed to participate in the meeting even though she was asked to step down. Bloodworth made the decision to fire Forrister.

Miller, however, said Bunch and Forrister had the opportunity to request the witness statements before the hearing or to call the witnesses themselves, one of whom was present during the hearing.

“They never requested to look at the statements and we believe that was done as a tactical decision,” Miller said.

Miller also emphasized that a city council is not bound by the same processes of a court.

“The requirement that would place on any city council to act according to how a judge would proceed would place an unnecessary burden on a council,” Miller said.

A court date for the appeal is pending, according to the Clerk of the Superior Court’s office.