Ed Kramer keeps Gwinnett deputies hopping with grievances

DragonCon founder is a “whiner of some magnitude” says Gwinnett sheriff

20 Comments

DragonCon co-founder Ed Kramer has been a busy man. A news story that aired a month ago on WAGA-TV showed that Kramer was inundating the Gwinnett Sheriff’s office with complaints, grievances and requests—three a day, on average—as he sits in jail awaiting trial on child molestation charges. Today, an AJC article suggests he’s still at it.

Kramer, 52, has been under lock and key in Gwinnett since being extradited in January from Connecticut, where he was arrested on charges of child endangerment for sharing a hotel room with a 14-year-old boy in violation of his Georgia bond.

As soon as he was back in the Gwinnett jail, Kramer began filing formal complaints, many of which involve claims that he’s being denied the right to practice his brand of Orthodox Judaism. His requests for turkey sandwiches, religious candles and his own typewriter have all been rejected—but not before being reviewed by a deputy, a process that can often consume several man-hours of research time.

Not content with working through the jail’s grievance system, Kramer also has filed a lawsuit against the jail over many of the same issues. From the AJC:

“He appears to be a whiner of some magnitude, but that’s just my opinion,” said Sheriff Butch Conway. “It’s got to the point it’s harassment with my staff.”

Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter said Kramer appears to be manipulating the system.

“We’re obligated by federal law and our own liability coverage that we have to follow up on every complaint, and he knows that,” Porter said. “There’s no question that it can be used for harassment.”

When last we heard from Porter, he was still attempting to schedule a new medical exam for Kramer in order to prove that the defendant has been faking many of the life-threatening ailments that have so far kept him from standing trial. Porter plans to call witnesses to say they saw Kramer—who typically appears in court in a wheelchair using an oxygen tank—hiking around rural movie sets carrying camera equipment.

Related Content

Comments

  1. George Burdell

    May 29, 2013 at 10:18 pm

    Just how long must this farce perpetrated by Gwinnett County go on before some other authority takes over and tries Kramer? While it certainly looks like Kramer is guilty, it’s pretty damn obvious that Gwinnett IS guilty of incompetence. I hope Porter and company are now sufficiently embarrassed and motivated enough now to do their jobs!

    Reply

    1. Nancy A. Collins

      June 3, 2013 at 5:18 am

      I don’t know. How long must the farce of DragonCon fans refusing to admit that Kramer’s profits from the convention have played a major role in him avoiding justice go on?

      According to the Georgia Court of Appeals, Sherry Henry, wife of current con-chair Pat Henry, and a DragonCon board member herself, was at Ground Zero for Kramer’s “I’m Too Sick To Be Stand Trial” defense.

      http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-court-of-appeals/1207434.html

      ” Finally, Kramer emphasizes that his attorneys failed to submit in the federal case the affidavit of SHERRY HENRY, a registered nurse who had evaluated Kramer while he was confined at the GCDC. In her affidavit, Henry describes Kramer’s deteriorating medical condition during his confinement and goes on to opine that detention center officials breached the standard of care in failing to provide Kramer proper medical treatment so as to prevent the deterioration in his condition.”

      There’s PLENTY of blame to go around. DragonCon just has to man up and admit it’s role in the fiasco.

      Reply

      1. Nancy A. Collins

        June 3, 2013 at 5:22 am

        Sorry, that should read “I’m Too Sick To Be STANDING Trial.”

        Reply

      2. Uriah Moore

        June 5, 2013 at 8:36 pm

        Ms. Collins,

        You appear to be somewhat misrepresenting the facts here. The claim that Sherry Henry was, as you say, at “Ground Zero” for this fellow’s claims that he was physically incompetent to stand trial do not appear to be supported by any of the medical opinions given by Sherry Henry that are cited in this document. The document you link to also says the following.

        “The same information about Kramer’s deteriorating medical condition, however, was contained in his GCDC medical records, the affidavits of the two detainees discussed in Division 2(c), and the transcript of the November 6, 2000 bond hearing, all of which were part of the summary judgment record before the federal district court.   Since the district court was aware of the same information contained in Henry’s affidavit at the time the court ruled on the summary judgment motions, the affidavit would not have changed the outcome. “

        This means that her examination of this fellow was prior to November 6, 2000 and the medical opinion on the matter was also given before then. This would indicate that her opinion was in reference to either this fellow’s chronic psoriasis, his supposed complications from arthritis, including a
        blood borne seeding of a diseased joint, or both. These would be relatively minor ailments and the complaints appear to be no more than requests to have his claimed ailments properly treated.

        The claims of being physically incompetent to stand trial were based on an alleged event that took place in the jail in December of 2000 and the supposed physical deterioration that followed in the ensuing years. I’ve also seen some documentation referring to a later automobile accident that this fellow claimed additionally aggravated his condition. Even if he may have later exaggerated his ailments to delay trial, the fact that the damage was to some degree serious appears to be borne out by the fact that he later underwent surgery because of it.

        Further, I am unable to find Sherry Henry’s medical opinions listed in any later records concerning this fellow’s claims of physically incompetency outside of one reference to her prior statements about his various skin conditions. This would seem to indicate that she was no longer involved with these matters by the time such claims were being pursued. If you have links to any such documentation showing this not to be the case, please provide it. I would truly be interested in reading it.

        Reply

        1. Nancy A. Collins

          June 6, 2013 at 6:04 am

          This article is actually 12 years old. But for some reason it has been republished by CREATIVE LOAFING, with a June 3 dateline. It’s so old I’m 1) still married to my 2nd husband, and 2) my ex-husband is still alive.

          But it IS jam-packed with damning statements from DragonCon con chairman Pat Henry that puts the lie to EVERYTHING they’ve said about cutting ties with Kramer.

          “But if Kramer is exonerated — and Henry believes he will be (“We’re talking about a guy I’ve been to strip clubs with.”) — the door is wide open for him to return to the realm of Dragon*Con. Because, in no small way, Kramer’s own vindication seems intertwined with that of the fantasy convention itself.”

          And DragonCon’s con-chair Pat Henry calls the victims liars. I’m sure their civil lawsuit will address this, when the time comes.

          ‘Pat Henry believes the alleged victims’ accusations are part of a setup: “I’ve heard from the mother’s lips that you can’t trust a word those kids say.” ‘

          http://clatl.com/atlanta/the-wizard-of-dragoncon-stands-trial/Content?oid=1235454&storyPage=1

          Reply

      3. Laughing Gas Joker

        July 9, 2013 at 2:43 pm

        Ed is finally not part of Dragon*Con anymore as of July 8th 2013. The other founders along with their lawyer finally figured out a way to cash him out and remove him entirely from the company. So now Nancy you can CRAWL BACK IN YOUR HOLE. Other good news for you Nancy, they are making Twinkies again! I know you will stock up. Gotta keep that incredible figure you have going strong. Fat rolls for your fat fetish friends.. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!1!11!!!11!… Look for The Joker at Dragon*Con

        Reply

  2. Laughing Gas Joker

    May 30, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    It is funny how Ed is outsmarting these knuckleheads and manipulating the system to his advantage. That’s what happens when you deal with a genius level manipulator like Ed. It is like a game to him.

    Reply

    1. Laughing Gas Batman

      December 3, 2013 at 1:50 pm

      You tell ‘em, Laughing Gas Joker! The world and child molesters need more HEROES like yourself! You’re braver than a WWII vet, and our country’s greatest shame is you’ll never get a parade…

      Reply

  3. Chi town girl

    May 30, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    Nothing a quick bullet to the head won’t solve…

    Reply

  4. Uriah Moore

    May 31, 2013 at 11:52 am

    I practiced law in two countries for almost thirty years before retiring a few years back. In all of that time, I have never seen a case as poorly handled as this one. The manner in which this fellow has been allowed to manipulate the system for so long should be an embarrassment to all involved.

    Reply

  5. Nancy A. Collins

    June 3, 2013 at 4:49 am

    He’s using our freedoms and laws against us, just like terrorists do. Your DragonCon membership fees at work.

    Reply

    1. Laughing Gas Joker

      June 4, 2013 at 3:25 am

      Settle down Witchy-Poo. Don’t drag DragonCon into Ed’s mess.

      Reply

    2. Uriah Moore

      June 4, 2013 at 7:06 pm

      The level of hyperbole in your first sentence is beyond spectacular and more than a little ridiculous. The second sentence is merely ridiculous. What this fellow is doing here has nothing to do with any fees or profits he receives from anything. The jail is required to allow him to make such complaints/requests and to supply him with the materials to do so. They are also required to respond. It costs this fellow nothing other than time out of his day and it is something he could still do even after a trial and conviction. This is not Dragoncon membership fees at work. This is our tax dollars and our system at work.

      Ms. Collins, may I make a suggestion? Get yourself and your movement and your movement’s statements under better control.

      I have no horse in this race. I do not attend such conventions (too big and impersonal) and have never had any professional ties to Georgia. My only interest in this is purely academic. But from what I have seen from the two sides in this debate so far, I would be more likely to be supportive of the other side.

      You and your side tend to throw around simple sloganeering that makes no contextual sense, as you did here, in place of intelligent debate. I’ve also seen a great deal of hearsay, unsourced or unsubstantiated statements, and theories about events based on nothing factual whatsoever regularly put forward as salient discussion points. You also seem to have acquired many in your following whose first recourse in debate is ad hominem insults and hurling invective before then lower their level of discourse further.

      If your cause is as correct as you claim and the facts as self evident as you claim; should you not simply be keeping your discourse to those facts? Certainly more representatives from the other side of the debate that I have seen, the above “Joker” fellow being an obvious exception, are doing so. If I were scoring this on points, they would be ahead right now and their long-term game looks to be the more promising and successful of the two sides.

      Again, I have no stake in this. I’m merely an interested observer who is somewhat horrified at seeing how easily this fellow has manipulated the system and at how poorly the system has handled and countered his games. The only real “side” I am on here is the one that wishes to see this fellow finally face justice. And while I am heartened to see that his games are being met with greater resistance in recent years, I do not see where your present tactics and actions are greatly helping this to happen.

      Reply

      1. Nancy A. Collins

        June 6, 2013 at 5:59 am

        This article is actually 12 years old. But for some reason it has been republished by CREATIVE LOAFING, with a June 3 dateline. It’s so old I’m still 1) still married to my 2nd husband, and 2) he’s still alive.

        But it IS jam-packed with damning statements from DragonCon con chairman Pat Henry that puts the lie to EVERYTHING they’ve said about cutting ties with Kramer.

        “But if Kramer is exonerated — and Henry believes he will be (“We’re talking about a guy I’ve been to strip clubs with.”) — the door is wide open for him to return to the realm of Dragon*Con. Because, in no small way, Kramer’s own vindication seems intertwined with that of the fantasy convention itself.”

        Oh, and the current con-chairman of DragonCon also calls the victims liars:

        ‘Pat Henry believes the alleged victims’ accusations are part of a setup: “I’ve heard from the mother’s lips that you can’t trust a word those kids say.” ‘

        http://clatl.com/atlanta/the-wizard-of-dragoncon-stands-trial/Content?oid=1235454&storyPage=1

        Reply

        1. Uriah Moore

          June 9, 2013 at 7:52 pm

          What you present here simply shows that people stated their belief in his innocence in the first 18 months after his arrest. These statements would all appear to have been made before his most serious claims of physical incompetency began and certainly before any trial. I can count on one hand the number of cases I’ve seen where it was not the case that many of the family, friends and coworkers of the accused did not say the same. It is something that you will even see in extreme ways in some cases. A friend of mine prosecuted a case some years ago now where a man raped the college-aged daughter of the woman he had been living with. The evidence of his guilt was overwhelming and he was ultimately found guilty. The mother of the young woman sided with the accused throughout the entirety of the trial.

          There has been more than enough time for people to legitimately reevaluate their positions based on new information and withdraw their support. I am unclear on how doing such constitutes proof of a lie in regards to statements or actions made in the latter half of the 11 years since that article saw print. The writer of the article in question also paints a very unflattering picture of you. Would you condemn him as a liar if he were to state that he saw you in a different light now or would you accept that the passage of time has allowed him to see things in a different light?

          This also in no way backs the initial accusations you seem to have been making here. Your initial statement made it seem as though you were making the accusation that Sherry Henry was directly involved with this fellow’s later claims of being physically incompetent to stand trial. One could also assume that you were making the accusation that she gave false testimony with regards to the medical opinion she provided since it is clear based on recent events that his claims have been greatly exaggerated. One could also assume that there is an accusation of conspiracy by the involved parties based on the medical opinion being given by the spouse of a friend and business partner of the accused. These are serious accusations to publicly make and one would expect some level of evidence for them beyond the referencing of essentially unrelated statements made by her husband. Certain one would expect you to demand more from someone making such accusations directed at either you or someone close to you.

          But this just comes off as an attempt to distract.You made a claim that is not supported by the facts you presented. When asked for supporting facts you provide information that is unrelated to your initial claim and still provides no support for it.

          The statements that you first cited do not support the claim that you made. This article, while an interesting read, does not support the claim that you made. If you can provide such materials to support the original claim, please do do.I would be interested in seeing any article or legal document that does support your claim.If you can not provide such materials we are done here. I have no interest in looking at distraction after distraction in pursuit of what should be simple to provide facts in support of your claims.

          I do wish you success in finally seeing this fellow face justice. However, I would also caution you not to allow your hatred of this fellow blind you to the fact that some tactics and actions can ultimately harm your cause and gaining support for it more than helping it.

          Valere, bonum domina.

          Reply

          1. Nancy A. Collins

            June 14, 2013 at 8:58 pm

            Pat Henry has yet to publicly retract his libelous statements about Kramer’s victims who, at the time he made them, were still children.

          2. Uriah Moore

            June 16, 2013 at 8:04 pm

            What you have is an 12 year old quote where someone who was directly connected to this fellow prior to his arrest states in a less than civil or classy manner that he believed the charges to be false. While I do not quite mean to come across as blasé as I undoubtedly will, that’s just par for the course in court cases. I spent the majority of my adult life in courtrooms. I have never seen a case, not so much as one, where such accusations were not leveled by one or both sides or by the people connected to those who were directly involved in the case. I would be more surprised if such statements did not exist in this case from the time closely following the charges and arrest.

            I am sure that your apparent deep personal involvement in this case makes such things seem to be of greater importance to you than they might actually be. I am also sure that such things serve as excellent red meat to those predisposed to support your cause and for your attempts at trying the entire organization in the court of public opinion. However, to anyone familiar with even basic legal proceedings, such statements represent the norm. They show poor class and are certainly not the type of comments that anyone with any decency is proud of in later years, but they are hardly outside of the norm.

            I am also somewhat less kindly disposed towards being moved by such information as that is not what I asked you for. You made a very serious accusation with very serious ramifications and cited a source of information that did not support the accusation you made. Twice I have requested that you produce information that would support your initial accusation. Twice you have shown that you either will not do so or that you can not do so and have attempted to substitute a new discussion in its place. Since there is no logical or rational reason for you to choose not to present such information if you had it, it is now quite clear that you can not do so. I have no interest in a third attempt at obtaining such substantiating information from you and am now quite done wasting my time here.

            This exchange has been very informative for me with regards to both your chosen tactics and your movement’s tactics. I thank you for that. While I wish success for the mutually desired goal of seeing this fellow tried and punished for his crimes, I will in future certainly view your movement’s claims with a much more skeptical eye.

          3. Matt Dunham

            June 27, 2013 at 8:28 am

            @Nancy A. Collins Basically what Mr. Uriah Moore is saying is: You are making a bunch of claims. He asks you to show him some factual proof of your claims. You send a link to some old info that doesn’t really say much in the way of factual proof. He asks you again for information. You provide yet more accusations with no evidence other than non factual accusations. He says your tactics are questionable because you cannot provide proof. Then he politely tells you that he feels you have a hidden agenda and he is done wasting his valuable time with you. He has no interest in siding with Ed and has never been to or has any interest in going to Dragoncon. So he is unbiased, unlike you.

            Look, we all want to see Ed go to court and be tried. It should have happened a long time ago. If someone is being accused of a crime then let them have their day in court and be tried with all the evidence presented by the two sides. Is Ed guilty? We don’t know. It has not gone to court. We need to see the evidence. He needs to be tried. Why don’t you put all your energy in to making sure Ed goes to court, instead of going after the organization he helped start as a founder over 25 years ago. Keep in mind that he was not the only founder. DragonCon has since grown into something much more than what Ed helped to start. He is not part of it anymore and has not been for quite some time. It might not seem fair that he still gets money, but this is the law in America. You should understand this better than most. If you are a writer or a contributing creator of a successful work, then you are legally owed a percentage of the monetary rights. The only way to get Ed out of his right to his portion of the money is to sell the company and he would still get a large percentage of that.

            We all want to see this thing go to trial. There is no question about that. It just seems to me and others that you need to pick your battles better. You are trying to cause this huge uproar directed at Dragoncon and it really isn’t doing as much as you think. In fact it is really making you and the others really involved look quite idiotic, no matter how many Gandhi quotes you try to divert from the real subject. Maybe the attention that you are trying to acquire from all of this is not going to help you any. Let’s just all agree that Ed needs to be brought before a court of law and tried very soon. Only then can we really move forward and figure out what the right thing to do is.

    3. Laughing Gas Joker

      June 5, 2013 at 4:48 pm

      After that nice post I have one word for you Witchy Poo Nancy A Barn-bus Collins… : PWN3D

      Reply

      1. Nancy A. Collins

        June 6, 2013 at 6:01 am

        Thank you for proving my point, nameless coward.

        Reply