By Jessica Dillon
A protective order filed by Mayor LC Jones against Council member Aaron Rawls was dismissed Jan. 22, while a petition to remove Jones from office was verified and sent to Commonwealth’s Attorney Patrick Flinn for review.
Jones filed the protective order following a heated Jan. 8 City Council meeting. He alleged Rawls posed a threat to his safety, citing a video in which Rawls could be heard saying he would “put them in the dirt” in reference to anyone threatening Council member Julian Mei.
Jones said he interpreted the comment as a threat against his own life. Rawls countered that Jones had been the aggressor on at least three occasions. Mei testified about the night Rawls made the comment and provided two additional examples of what he described as Jones acting “aggressively.”
After dismissing Mei, Rawls requested the court wait for a second witness who was en route, but substitute Circuit Court Judge Wallace Covington denied the request. Covington said he had “not seen a case like this,” but noted he had personal experience in politics.
Covington ruled there was no “imminent” threat to Jones, but told Rawls he had crossed a line with his comments and urged both officials to work together for the good of the city.
Later that evening, Flinn issued a press release confirming the petition to remove Jones had been verified. “The General Registrar was given a copy of the petition to certify it was properly filed; this included a review of the signatures. I have been informed that the General Registrar has completed that process and has certified the petition. Pursuant to VA Code 24.2-235(C),” Flinn said.
Flinn also filed a motion on Jan. 14, requesting that a special prosecutor review the case. He cited potential conflict of interest concerns. “I received a copy of this petition. I directly filed a motion with the Court. That motion was denied,” Flinn said.
Flinn said he is reviewing the petition himself. “I am now tasked to promptly review the petition and to determine if valid grounds exist. I have already started this review, and it is my top priority. Please note, there is not a time limit on this review. This review must be thorough. As required by the statute, I will act promptly.”
He asked the public for patience. “… This case includes multiple years of allegations that I must review. I would like to remind the community that” a previous matter “that was handed over to the special prosecutor had over a thousand pages of documents. That matter did not include recent allegations. Additionally, for the Chief Law Enforcement Officer to now be involved reviewing an issue that is related to the electoral process, requires careful and thorough consideration.”
