
James P. “Jim” Knight is a longstanding figure in Russellville, Arkansas, known primarily as the founder and CEO of Real Practices, Inc. His work spans healthcare management, real estate, and local economic development. His public profile is increasingly examined in the context of his family legacy and early career experiences.
Russellville Realty was founded by James “Jug” Knight, the father of James P. Knight, and has long been a fixture in the local real estate market. Notably, the younger Knight worked at Russellville Realty alongside his father. This early involvement in the family business not only provided him with a foundation in real estate and local commerce but also exposed him to the contentious dynamics that later became part of his public narrative. Numerous community insiders report that the relationship between father and son was at times contentious, with critics suggesting that James P. Knight’s later public positions—including his stance in the anti-casino debate—may partly be an effort to redefine his personal brand and distance himself from, or capitalize on, the longstanding legacy of Russellville Realty.
Knight’s close association with the First Baptist Church in Russellville has provided him with a prominent platform. As an active church leader, he has long promoted the church’s stance against casino gambling. Although this connection has helped him portray himself as a defender of community values, critics argue that his activism appears more aligned with protecting his personal and business interests rather than purely serving local morals.
Knight first emerged in the public arena by supporting lawsuits and organizing petition drives intended to maintain local control over casino development in Pope County. His early efforts were broadly characterized as grassroots campaigns designed to uphold the 2018 vote against casino expansion.
Recent investigations and community discussions have revealed a more complex picture of Knight’s involvement:
A May 31, 2024, opinion column by Mike Goad in The Courier outlines several contentious issues regarding the anti-casino petition:
It is important to note that the FairPlayForArkansas website does not serve as an official portal for the anti-casino movement. According to its creator, the site was established expressly to oppose the anti-casino efforts and to provide information in support of casino development. This clarification reinforces that the online narrative around the campaign is highly contested, with significant efforts on both sides to shape public opinion. Critics have used such platforms to argue that Knight’s leadership is more about self-interest than genuine grassroots activism.
Local social media discussions provide additional context:
Knight’s early contributions in Russellville earned him significant local support. However, recent evidence and community commentary have led to a more controversial legacy:
The controversy over Issue 2—and by extension, Knight’s role—continues to spark intense public debate:
James P. Knight’s public legacy in Russellville and Pope County is increasingly viewed as a complex interplay of local activism, external influence, and personal ambition. While his early efforts in mobilizing opposition to casino expansion earned him considerable local credibility, recent investigations indicate that his role in the Issue 2 campaign is largely symbolic. Operational control appears to reside with lobbyists and legal professionals connected to Capitol Advisors Group, and the campaign’s heavy reliance on Choctaw Nation funding raises serious questions about its grassroots authenticity.
Furthermore, the contentious legacy of Russellville Realty—founded by his father, James “Jug” Knight—and the fact that the younger Knight worked closely with his father, add further weight to criticisms that his public positions may be driven more by personal financial interests than by a genuine commitment to local community values. As legal challenges and community debates continue, Knight’s story is increasingly scrutinized through the lens of self-interest and external influence, challenging earlier portrayals of him as a pure advocate for local control.
Sources and References:
Note: This report synthesizes information from public records, media analyses, social media commentary, and firsthand community insights. As this controversy continues to evolve, further updates may be warranted as new evidence emerges.
The conversation is from the “Russellville, Arkansas. Then and Now” Facebook group, a public group with 5,000 members dedicated to sharing memories of Russellville, Arkansas. The thread, initiated by Mike Goad, focuses on pinpointing the location of the Sinclair Mini Mart, a site of Ronald Gene Simmons’ 1987 murder spree, and expands into personal recollections and historical details about the event. Below is an evaluation of the facts presented and a summary of the discussion.
The conversation begins with Mike Goad, an “All-star contributor,” asking about the precise location of the Sinclair Mini Mart on East Main, where Ronald Gene Simmons attacked in December 1987 during his infamous murder spree. Commenters debate its spot, converging on it being near Car-Mart or Whitson-Morgan, across from Walmart (once the Lamplighter Mobile Home Park), with Rusty Taylor pinpointing 2400 East Main and Mike Goad settling on the future Aldi site. Variations like AutoZone or Dollar General arise but are less supported.
The thread expands into vivid recollections: Cyndi Johnson and Jana White Olson recall Simmons’ politeness as a clerk, Ron Hughes shares apprehending him at Woodline Motor Freight after witnessing his breakfast at Brown Derby, and Ragena Moore details his bank visit. Victims like Roberta Woolery (survivor), Jim Chaffin, and Kathy Kendrick are mourned, with personal stories highlighting the tragedy’s impact. Simmons’ spree, ending on December 28, 1987, is confirmed as the U.S.’s deadliest familicide, backed by references to Zero at the Bone, a podcast, and a documentary.
The discussion blends factual location-hunting with emotional memories, reflecting a community grappling with a dark chapter. Mike Goad actively refines details for Wikipedia, showcasing collaborative historical preservation.
This evaluation and summary are based solely on the provided text, cross-referencing within the thread for consistency. The current date (March 18, 2025) is irrelevant to the historical focus.
In a vibrant comic book alternate universe, three diabolical masterminds join forces to plunge the nation into chaos, each wielding their unique brand of villainy:
The Chaos King (Trump):
Towering at the center of this sinister cabal, the Chaos King unleashes blustering tirades and outrageous executive orders that tear at the very fabric of national unity. He sows discord and division with every pompous, direct, repetitive, informal, simple speech and interaction with public media, threatening to drive the country to the brink of anarchy. His presence alone is enough to send ripples of panic through the corridors of power.
The Clockwork Charlatan (Elon Musk):
Dressed in an ostentatious ensemble of brass and steam-powered gadgetry, the Clockwork Charlatan heads his so-called “Department of Government Efficiency.” Behind his dazzling façade lies a ruthless reformer who’s been firing thousands of bureaucrats and shuttering entire federal agencies with the precision of a steam-powered guillotine. His contraptions—more spectacle than substance—serve as both diversion and instrument of systematic collapse.
The Ghastly Gatekeeper (Stephen Miller):
Cloaked in dark, high-collared menace, the Ghastly Gatekeeper is a soulless, outspoken ghoul whose incendiary policies know no bounds. With venomous rhetoric and a willingness to trade even his closest kin for the promise of impenetrable borders and power, he fans the flames of prejudice and fear. His relentless pursuit of division leaves communities isolated and vulnerable to his devious machinations.
Synopsis:
Together, these three villains form the ultimate force of disruption. The Chaos King’s oratory shatters societal bonds, while the Clockwork Charlatan dismantles established institutions with his ruthless inefficiency. Meanwhile, the Ghastly Gatekeeper orchestrates a campaign of exclusion and xenophobia, ensuring that distrust and isolation become the nation’s new norm. United in their quest to remake America in their own dark image, the Triumvirate of Turmoil stands as a cautionary emblem of chaos and discord—a retro comic book nightmare come to life.
Compare the number of Bronze Stars awarded against the number of Purple Hearts awarded during the US participation in the Vietnam Conflict.
During the US participation in the Vietnam Conflict, research suggests around 700,000 Bronze Stars were awarded, compared to approximately 351,000 Purple Hearts. This means Bronze Stars were awarded roughly twice as often. The Bronze Star recognizes heroic or meritorious achievements, often for service in combat zones, while the Purple Heart is given to those wounded or killed in action, explaining the difference in numbers.
The Bronze Star’s broader criteria, including both valor and meritorious service, likely led to higher awards compared to the Purple Heart, which is specific to combat injuries. An unexpected detail is that some Bronze Stars were given for administrative roles, not just combat, highlighting the medal’s wide application.
For more details, see Purple Heart Wikipedia or Bronze Star Medal Wikipedia.
This section provides an in-depth examination of the number of Bronze Stars and Purple Hearts awarded during the US participation in the Vietnam War, comparing the two and exploring the criteria, statistics, and implications. The analysis aims to offer a thorough understanding for readers interested in military history and awards systems, drawing from various sources to ensure a robust overview.
The Vietnam War, spanning from 1955 to 1975 with significant US military involvement from 1965 to 1973, saw extensive awarding of military decorations. The Purple Heart, established by George Washington in 1782 and revived in 1932, is awarded to any member of the US Armed Forces wounded or killed in action against an enemy, with eligibility expanded by the early 1960s to include advisors in Vietnam (Purple Heart Wikipedia). The Bronze Star Medal, established by Executive Order 9419 on February 4, 1944, is awarded for heroic or meritorious achievement or service in connection with operations against an armed enemy, with a “V” device for valor or without for meritorious service (Bronze Star Medal Wikipedia). This dual purpose allowed for broader application during Vietnam, often recognizing sustained service in combat zones.
Research suggests that during the Vietnam War, approximately 351,000 Purple Hearts were awarded, aligning with US military casualties of approximately 58,000 killed and 303,000 wounded, totaling around 361,000 potential awards, though the USO article estimates 351,000 (9 Things You Need to Know About the Purple Heart Medal · United Service Organizations). For Bronze Stars, a Reddit discussion estimates over 700,000 were awarded, based on 2.7 million US participants, suggesting about 26% received the medal, compared to 3.5% in World War II (r/AskHistorians on Reddit: Why was their such a dramatic increase in Bronze Medals being awarded in Vietnam?). This high number reflects the medal’s liberal use, with many awards for meritorious service rather than valor.
To illustrate the comparison, consider the following table:
Medal | Estimated Number Awarded | Criteria | Key Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Purple Heart | ~351,000 | Wounded or killed in action | Matches 58,000 killed, 303,000 wounded; some delays in awards (VA Salisbury Health Care Story) |
Bronze Star | ~700,000 | Heroic or meritorious achievement/service | Includes valor and service; about 26% of 2.7 million participants (r/AskHistorians on Reddit) |
This table highlights that Bronze Stars were awarded roughly double the number of Purple Hearts, reflecting their broader criteria.
The issuance of Purple Hearts involved documenting wounds and submitting recommendations, often with delays, as seen in cases like Theo Muhammad, awarded his Purple Heart in June 2024 for injuries from June 1969, a 55-year delay (VA Salisbury Health Care Story). Bronze Stars, awarded at various command levels, sometimes had generic citations, especially later in the war, with some veterans feeling the medal was devalued due to high numbers (r/AskHistorians on Reddit). The lack of a centralized database for both medals, as noted in A Heart of Purple | National Archives, complicates exact counts, but estimates are based on historical records and discussions.
An unexpected detail is the inclusion of administrative personnel in Bronze Star awards, such as Ronald Gene Simmons, an Air Force master sergeant, likely receiving his for meritorious service given his clerical role, alongside the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross (Wikipedia: Ronald Gene Simmons). For Purple Hearts, the recognition of Navy nurses, like the first women awarded in January 1965 for injuries from a Communist bombing, highlights the medal’s extension to support roles (KN-10517: Purple Hearts awarded to U.S. Navy Nurses, January 1965). These details underscore the medals’ broad application, with Bronze Stars often recognizing non-combat contributions, explaining the higher number.
The high number of Bronze Stars, about 700,000, compared to 351,000 Purple Hearts, reflects the war’s prolonged nature and the military’s approach to recognizing service, though it has sparked debates about the Bronze Star’s perceived value, with some feeling it was devalued by frequent awards (r/AskHistorians on Reddit). This comparison highlights the different purposes: Purple Hearts for direct combat casualties, Bronze Stars for a wider range of contributions, aligning with the war’s decentralized and challenging environment.
In summary, research suggests approximately 700,000 Bronze Stars and 351,000 Purple Hearts were awarded during the US Vietnam War participation, with Bronze Stars awarded about twice as often, reflecting their broader criteria for heroism and service versus Purple Hearts for wounds or deaths. The evidence leans toward administrative challenges causing delays in Purple Heart awards and liberal use of Bronze Stars, with unexpected details like awards to administrative personnel and nurses. For further reading, explore detailed histories at Purple Heart Wikipedia or Bronze Star Medal Wikipedia.
There were five bodies lying inside the house and several more buried or otherwise hidden outside the house. Ronald Gene Simmons slept, ate, drank, and passed the time for two days while those bodies lay and his macabre urges were still festering. He woke up the morning of December 28th, 1987, the first Monday after Christmas, and grabbed a pen and paper. He jotted down these words: “Dear Ma, sometimes you reap many more times what you sow. You have given so much to this family; this is just a little token of our appreciation. Keep it in remembrance of us. Love, Gene and family.” Simmons mailed that letter and $250 in cash to May Novak, his mother-in-law in Colorado. May had seven children and many more grandchildren and great-grandchildren. She did not know it yet, but even before that letter was mailed, she’d lost a daughter, seven of her grandchildren, and four of her great-grandchildren.
Simmons used winter coats and whatever else he could find to cover the corpses in the house, but the one he treated with the most care was Sheila, his oldest daughter. He’d moved her body near the Christmas tree, folded her arms across her chest, and draped a blanket over her. All of the carnage the previous week occurred on Mockingbird Hill, the name Simmons gave to his desolate 13-acre property north of Dover. No one other than Simmons knew the gruesomeness of what lay inside and outside that mobile home. Later that morning, Simmons was preparing to take a drive to Russellville, about 9 miles south of Dover. Gene grabbed his two handguns, a Ruger and a snub-nosed revolver, and headed out the door. He hopped in his son’s Toyota and pulled onto Broomfield Road toward Arkansas Highway 7. In his mind, there were still some scores that needed settling.
Presented by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, you’re listening to “The Devil of Pope County: America’s Worst Family Massacre.” The city of Russellville had a population of nearly 20,000 people in 1987 and sits about an hour northwest of Little Rock. The home of Arkansas Tech University, it’s the largest city in Pope County. It’s located in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains near the Arkansas River, a desirable place for those who like to be close to nature but also a city that’s populous enough for those who don’t want to feel cloistered. David Eddie has lived and practiced law in Russellville for close to 40 years. “It was a really, and still is, a really good town,” he said. “It was small-town oriented; people knew each other, people got along, and really there were not any major problems that I remember back then. It was just a peaceful small town and a good place to live, and still is.”
On that December 28th morning, Gene Simmons drove to the home of Kathy Kendrick, a former coworker of his who was young and attractive. Simmons was infatuated with Kathy because she reminded him so much of his oldest daughter, but Kathy rejected him at every pass. That morning, Simmons wanted to make sure Kathy’s car was not parked outside her house. Seeing it was gone, he knew where he wanted to go next: to Kathy’s new workplace at Peele and Eddie, a law firm in downtown Russellville. Simmons had mapped out his escape route and went step by step in his mind about what he was going to do; that was his modus operandi—meticulous planning. Simmons parked the Toyota in the lot of the law firm on Glennwood Avenue, about a block south of East Main Street, and kept the motor running. He walked toward the front of the building and saw someone through the glass door—the very woman he came to see.
David Eddie was one of Kathy’s bosses; his office was across the hall from the lobby where Kathy’s desk was located. David was one of the partners at the law firm, which specialized in estate cases. He still remembers the details of that particular morning before any blood had spilled. “I remember what the weather was like,” he recalled. “It was a Monday morning after a Christmas weekend. It was a crisp, clear, sunny day, best of my memory, pretty cool. I remember going to the courthouse to do something and coming back somewhere around 10:00. Oh, I remember all this vividly. I came in; my office was next to the reception area where the front door was, where people came in. I was right there; my door was right there, adjoining the hall. I remember coming into my office, putting my stuff down, going into the library, which is at the end of the hall, and pouring a cup of coffee and turning around. Kathy came around the corner, and we just met. I almost spilled my coffee all over. I said, ‘I’m sorry, Kathy, that was close,’ and we talked a minute. She went, I went to my office, and she did her thing.”
A woman was in the lobby waiting to speak to one of the other attorneys in the office. Kathy was back at her workstation, which was in the lobby close to the door to the hallway. Around that time, Simmons entered the building through the front door. Kathy did not immediately look up when Simmons entered. Simmons stood directly in front of her, and when she did look up, she saw Simmons pull a gun out of his pocket. Then he pointed the gun at Kathy’s face. Kathy rose out of her seat; the first bullet entered her head, and she fell back onto her chair. Simmons fired three more times. “It’s hard to describe what hearing gunshots inside a building just a few feet away does to you,” David said. “It’s a numbing experience. I remember it; I knew it was gunshots, and they’re a lot louder inside. I’d hunt and shoot guns occasionally. I knew then something bad had happened, and it was just a few feet from me on the other side of the wall in the lobby. I remember my secretary and I could see in that room across the hall; she stuck her head out and looked at me, and I looked at her. I could hear the door open or shut, and I knew I’d never heard that door shut, so I knew whoever shot those shots was still outside my door, and I could not go out the door without being in plain view of them.”
“I sat there a second,” David continued. “I thought this person’s going to go through the office and kill anybody; I can’t just sit here.” That female client seated in the reception area was frozen in fear as she watched a murder unfold about 15 feet in front of her. Simmons made eye contact with her but never raised his gun at her. David got out of his seat and stood behind the open door of his office, preparing to jump out and confront an armed gunman. A second or so later, David heard the sound of the front door opening and closing. That’s when he crossed the hallway and rushed into the lobby. “I don’t know why I thought that the lady sitting outside my door was the one shot,” he said, “but then, to my great surprise, Kathy was lying there on the floor behind the desk, bleeding from her head. I thought, ‘Oh my gosh.'”
Before he tended to Kathy, David peered out of the glass door and spotted a Toyota peeling out of the parking lot. He did not get a good look at the driver, but he did get a good look at the car. Meanwhile, someone else inside the office picked up the phone and called police. It was about 10:17 a.m. That hysterical caller was transferred to the lone dispatcher on duty that morning, Donna Stowball. “The very first call I got was from Peele and Eddie’s attorney’s office,” Donna recalled, “and it was another secretary. He was describing to me that a man had come in and had shot Kathy, and she just kept saying the word ‘Kathy.’ I kept trying to ascertain from her, find out from her, was Kathy still alive, and she just kept saying, ‘I don’t know.'”
While that was happening, David was kneeling over Kathy, who was sprawled on the floor. “I held her hand, and she was breathing in a very strained manner,” he said. “I knew it wasn’t good. I looked to see if she—I didn’t know where she was shot—and I found the wounds in her head. I thought, ‘I don’t know what I can do,’ but there was nothing I could do.” Moments later, in what felt to David like a few minutes, the city’s chief of police, Herb Johnston, was banging on the front door. Johnston and the other police officers at the scene were soon joined by EMTs. Kathy was taken out on a stretcher and driven by ambulance to the nearest hospital, where she was pronounced dead. She was 24 years old.
David Eddie told me that he doesn’t remember much beyond that; most of the day remains a blur. He remembered being interviewed by a detective but doesn’t recall any specific questions he heard or answers he gave. The only detail he remembers is that while he was still speaking to the detective, he reached for the coffee mug on his desk, which was still filled with the coffee he had poured for himself earlier that morning and had nearly spilled on Kathy. It was still warm. It struck him at that moment that so much had happened in such a short amount of time.
That same realization came into sharp focus for Donna Stowball too. A shooting inside a business was not a typical call for Donna, who at the time went by the surname Jones. She had been a police dispatcher for about two years by then. This predated Pope County’s 911 system by a few years, so it was all up to Donna to direct police and EMTs to that scene. “I had four officers on duty that day,” she said, “and one of them was a shift supervisor, and he had informed me he was on his way to that location. So I had contacted the ambulance, I contacted the officers, and kind of went back to my daily duties.”
After leaving the Peele and Eddie Law Firm, Simmons turned west on Main Street and drove about a mile to Taylor Oil Company, located at the corner of South Cumberland Avenue. Julie Money had just been hired at Taylor Oil; December 28th was her first day on the job. The owner was Rusty Taylor. Rusty would later tell police that he barely knew the man who had shot him that morning. Simmons had been a part-time employee for one of his customers. Julie came in that morning, and one of her new coworkers gave her a warm and friendly greeting—a driver by the name of James Chaffin, who was known by his friends as JD. The 33-year-old JD was a firefighter who worked part-time as a driver at Taylor Oil. Julie had a great first impression of JD, who seemed to her like a kind and humble man and a proud father.
Around 10:20 that morning, not more than five minutes after the first shooting, Simmons walked in through the front door of Taylor Oil. Rusty’s office was close to the lobby and within sight of anyone who entered. Simmons spotted Rusty through the open office door and fired at him. Rusty was shot twice, once in each shoulder. Julie was coming out of the bathroom near the loading dock; just like in David Eddie’s case, Julie recognized the sounds as gunfire. It was jarring. What happened afterward was horrifying. “I heard a shot—you know, bang, bang,” Julie recalled. “I heard two shots, and I knew it was a gun because I know guns. So I looked at JD; he was standing right by the office door, which was probably 15, 20 feet away from what I remember, because I looked at him and I put my arms up, and he just kind of shrugged and opened the office door. Well, when he did, there was a glass pane in the office door, ‘cause the door opened from the left to the right, outwards, and there was a glass pane in that door. And all I saw were two arms coming up with a gun, and he shot him, and he hit him right in his eye. It was a hollow-point; killed him immediately.”
The second after watching a man she had just met get shot through the glass window of a swinging door, Julie made sure not to stand and wait for something else to happen. She was about 15 feet away from a man holding a gun. He was sporting an expression that she’ll never forget. “He had this terrible grin on his face,” she said, “and it was a mad-dog grin. It was like, you know, ‘I’m going to get you, I don’t care.’ It was awful.” She instinctively knew that the next move the gunman was going to make was to shoot her, and that’s exactly what he tried to do. “Then he turned and he saw me,” Julie continued, “and so I went diving for the floor, and he shot at me, and he shot through my hair, and I felt the bullet, so I went down.” Julie was lying face down behind a stack of boxes. She placed her hand on her head to check for blood. She did not feel any blood, but for a minute or two, she remained in a state of confusion about whether she had actually been struck by the bullet.
Meanwhile, Simmons exited through the loading dock and got back into his car. Julie caught a glimpse of him while he made his exit. In the midst of all that confusion, Julie had the presence of mind not to remain lying on that warehouse floor. She ran into the office and called police. Donna still remembers that second emergency call that morning; it came while she was still decompressing from the first. “By that time, I had received another call,” she said. “I want to say they were less than 10 to 15 minutes apart, and that’s when the lady at Taylor Oil had called me.” It was a tense call between Donna and Julie, who was still rattled from having a hollow-point bullet whiz by her head. “When I came in, part of the story was I was on the phone with 911,” Julie said. “I told them where I was, and I said, ‘I’ve got to get off here, I’ve got to go help Rusty,’ and she kept saying, ‘Stay on the phone, stay on the phone,’ screaming at me. And I said, ‘I can’t stay on the phone, I’ve got to go help.’ So I set the phone down, the whole time not even knowing whether I was hit or not, because when I went up to grab my head after I felt the shot and I put my hands down, I thought, ‘Well, there’s no blood, I must be dead.’ And then I was going to look at the rest of my body, and I looked down and I thought, ‘No, don’t look, because if you see your own blood, you’ll faint.’ So anyway, I was just kind of, you know, taking charge and doing what I had to do, and I could hear her screaming at me on the phone.”
Donna remembers Julie’s voice being elevated. “She said, ‘I think I felt the bullet go through my hair,'” Donna recalled. “I mean, she was like, ‘I think I felt that,’ and I’m like, ‘Okay, are you hurt? Are you bleeding? Is everything okay?’ ‘Yes, I’m okay, yes, I’m okay,’ but sure, I would have been very excited also.” Donna remained on the line while Julie ran over to Rusty. A customer who was there, Craig Bailey, also was standing over Rusty. He was seriously wounded, but his injuries were not critical. Julie realized that Taylor Oil’s warehouse was away from view from the main road, so she urged Craig to stand outside and flag down the ambulance. “Well, I went in and got Craig,” she said, “and I said, ‘Go stand out on the loading dock and just wave your arms so they can see you, because we’re off the beaten path, and I’m trying to explain to them where we are.’ So I get back on the phone, and so Craig goes out there, and he’s just standing there waving his arms, and he was in shock too. And I went back in to Rusty, and I said, ‘Rusty, can you get out?’ because he was underneath this big old oak desk, and he said, ‘I don’t think so.’ So I said, ‘Hang on, I’ve got 911 coming, a pair of medics are coming,’ and I grabbed that desk, and I picked it up—just the one end of it—and I flung it against the wall. And the next day, when I went back in there, I couldn’t even lift the edge of that desk.”
After lifting and moving that heavy desk above Rusty, Julie got back on the phone with Donna. Julie was asked to describe everything she witnessed. “She is very excited,” Donna said. “I’m trying to get as much as I can from her. She was explaining to me that Mr. Taylor had been shot; she was explaining to me that the fireman, Jim Chaffin, had been shot. And at the same time, I was trying to find out from her, ‘Who was this?’ I was trying to figure out at that point, did we have the same person, or did we have separate incidents going on?” As Julie was describing the shooter, Donna asked her whether he was wearing a white cowboy hat—something that the first caller had mentioned. Julie confirmed that the gunman was wearing a white hat. She also saw the car that the gunman drove away in and recognized it immediately as a copper-colored Toyota Corolla, so she passed on that information to Donna.
Rusty survived his injuries, but one of the bullets that struck him remains lodged in his left shoulder. Rusty still lives in Arkansas. He told me over the phone recently that he’s put that experience behind him and declined to take part in this podcast. After police arrived and after Rusty was taken by ambulance to the local hospital, Julie was interviewed by police. Much of the interview took place in the police car while en route to the police station. It was during that car ride that Julie realized the extent of her fear of again seeing that same man with the mad-dog grin on his face. “As I’m talking,” she said, “I kept sliding further and further down in the seat, because he was driving to the police station, and I didn’t know where this guy had gone. So I was scared that he would maybe shoot at the cop car. So here I am sliding down, and the cop said, ‘What are you doing?’ I said, ‘I’m so scared, I just don’t want to be in a window where he sees me again.'”
So Julie had no idea what Simmons was doing, but she knew he was still out there. The police knew it too. When the car that Julie was riding in arrived at the station, it was under a lockdown. Meanwhile, Donna was still juggling numerous calls at once, and she was just as perplexed as anyone else about what the shooter was doing and where he could possibly be going. “By this time, I’ve got several officers on the way,” she said. “State Police has contacted me; they’re wanting to know if they should do something on the interstate because we didn’t know which way he was headed. We were getting telephone calls from individual citizens. It felt like he was zigzagging across town when, in actuality, he was not. Lots of people were getting him confused with others, but at Taylor Oil, she knew that Jim Chaffin was down, but she thought Rusty was still alive. So I had dispatched an ambulance, and Rusty was a fireman, so by this time, the fire department had contacted me, and they were trying to get there also. The Sheriff’s Office had called by that time, so there was a lot of activity. It was happening and going down really fast.”
All Donna knew with any level of certainty was that the suspect who entered Peele and Eddie and Taylor Oil was the same man. Donna was struggling to stay afloat with all of the calls she was making and receiving. She also had to be conscious about what she said over the airwaves; back then, a lot of people owned CB radios. She was careful about calling out names on the air in case a family member or acquaintance of one of the victims was listening in. The day was getting to her, but she hung in there. Her resolve would be further tested in a matter of minutes.
Simmons made it to his next stop, the Sinclair Minimart, where he had previously worked. It was located on Main Street, about three miles east of Taylor Oil. Simmons pulled into the parking lot, got out, and walked through the door of the store and saw a coworker, Roberta Woolery, turn and look out the window. The roar of sirens had piqued her curiosity. Simmons walked past her; he was holding a pistol in his hand. He headed straight toward the back, where his former boss, David Salyer, was seated at a table with his friend Tony Cooter. The two were sipping coffee. Simmons fired at David, who ducked; the bullet missed him. At that moment, David did not know whether he was really being fired upon or if it was some kind of prank. He even asked Tony whether it was a joke. Tony told him it was no joke. By then, the gunman was aiming for David’s head.
Roberta, who had been looking out the window when Simmons stormed in, screamed and reached for a telephone. Simmons was still standing a short distance from her, and after he heard her scream, he turned and opened fire on her. Two bullets struck Roberta—one on the chin and the other in her shoulder. David grabbed a chair and charged at Simmons, yelling, “Get out, you son of a bitch!” Simmons fired another round at David and struck him in the head. As he fell to the ground, David flung the chair at the man trying to kill him. David’s friend Tony, a burly but older man, grabbed what he could within arm’s reach—a six-pack of soda—and started hurling the cans one after the other toward Simmons while dodging the projectiles coming at him. The gunman fired a couple more wild shots in Tony’s direction and then left. Those shots missed their target.
Roberta, with a bullet wound just below her mouth, was on the phone with police. It was 10:39 a.m.—a total of 22 minutes had elapsed from the first emergency call to the third. Roberta’s frantic call was forwarded to Donna Stowball. “The first thing I remember her saying was that she had been shot and that she was bleeding,” Donna said. “She needed an ambulance. I’m trying to get a little bit of information from her, and she just keeps repeating, ‘I’m bleeding, I’m bleeding.'” Donna had only two ambulances available to dispatch, and both of them were tied up, but she knew the woman she was talking to on the phone was injured, and someone else inside the store had been shot. So Donna had to get one of those ambulances to the Minimart as fast as possible. Roberta told Donna at one point, “Please hurry, our blood is dripping everywhere,” while still on the phone.
Roberta, who by this point was drifting into a state of hysteria, called out to Tony and asked whether it was Gene Simmons who had come in and shot up the store. Tony confirmed that it was. He was tending to an injured David Salyer, telling him to remain still and calm. Donna was on the radio, trying to get an ambulance and a police officer to the scene of the Minimart. Then she got back on the line with Roberta. “I get back on the phone with Roberta,” Donna said. “She says, ‘I’ve thrown everything I can at him. I’ve thrown cans, I’ve thrown stuff.’ I said, ‘Roberta, please forgive me, I do have somebody on the way to you.’ I said, ‘Do you, by any chance, can you describe him?’ She said, ‘I know who he is,’ and I said, ‘Okay, who is he?’ And she’s the one who first gave me the name of Gene Simmons.”
Donna repeated the name; now she had something to work with other than “a man wearing a white cowboy hat driving a Corolla.” “But she described him,” Donna continued. “She told me that he lived at Dover. I’m trying to give all the officers all the information I have that she’s given me. By this point, I’m thinking I need to tell them who he is. Of course, everybody on their devices out there got it also, and so it got a little crazy after that.” Roberta and David were brought to the hospital, and both survived their gunshot wounds.
Simmons had one more place to visit, and it was not on the main drag. He headed south to Woodline Motor Freight on Airport Road. Woodline is where Simmons had worked and where he developed that crush on his coworker Kathy Kendrick. His bizarre antics had caused Kathy to report his behavior to their boss, Joyce Butts, who had reprimanded him. Simmons never got over the embarrassment that caused him. His last target that day was Joyce. He entered the building with both pistols; the Ruger was in a paper bag, and the revolver was in his pocket. He entered the office, stood by the Christmas tree, scanned the workplace, and spotted Joyce. He started walking toward her. He grabbed the snub-nosed revolver from his coat pocket and fired bullets into Joyce’s head and chest.
In an adjacent room, 31-year-old Vicky Jackson heard the shots. She immediately ran to another office where her coworker was seated. She told him someone had just been shot, and both of them ducked behind the door. The coworker headed for the rear door to the loading dock and screamed at Vicky to follow him. Just as she was about to run after him and through the open door, she saw Simmons enter. She froze. Simmons walked toward Vicky and stood over her. He gestured to her to stand up; he assured her that he was not going to harm her. Simmons and Vicky were former coworkers. Simmons spoke to her as though she was an old friend. He asked Vicky, almost sheepishly, why she never came to the Sinclair Minimart to see him. Vicky tried to keep Simmons calm while struggling to stay calm herself. She told him that she did come to the Minimart a few times, but it must have been on the days he wasn’t working.
Simmons told Vicky to call for an ambulance for Joyce and to ask for police to come. Simmons looked around and noticed that everyone he could see was cowering underneath desks. He told Vicky he was ready to turn himself in. Confused, Vicky asked Simmons what was going on. According to police transcripts, Simmons told her, “Nothing now that it’s all over with. I just wanted to kill Joyce. I don’t want to hurt nobody else. Just call the police.” Donna Stowball, who by that time was fully rattled by the morning’s developments, took one more emergency call. “Vicky had contacted me and told me that there was a Ronald Gene Simmons standing in front of her,” Donna said, “that he had shot one of her coworkers, that he had two guns, and I said, ‘Are you okay?’ And she said, ‘Yes, he’s not going to shoot me,’ and I’m like, ‘Okay, oh, how do you know this?’ ‘He’s not after me, he said he’s done.’ So he must have relayed some information to her about he had accomplished whatever task it was he was trying to finish, and then she proceeds to repeat what he’s saying, that he will surrender to an officer.”
Vicky told Donna that Simmons had two guns; he was holding one of the guns in his hand, but he wasn’t aiming it at her. She also told Donna that Simmons was ready to turn himself in, but he did not want police barging in; he wanted to surrender peacefully. Vicky was located in the interior of the building, so getting to her was a little bit like walking through a maze, and Donna had to handle that task while telling other police officers to stay off the radio. “That took a little bit of time,” Donna said. “Again, it felt like warp speed, but here’s the problem: when you’re trying to tell an officer something and another officer had a question, it was called ‘walking on each other.’ It’s when you would press down your radio to deliver something, and somebody else would press theirs at the same time, and nobody really got information; it was just a squelching noise. And so I kept reminding them that they were walking on each other and that I needed radio to be clear so that I could deliver all this. It was intense.”
“I didn’t really know what to say to her,” Donna continued, “and I kept asking her, ‘Do you feel like he’s going to hurt you?’ And she kept saying, ‘No, no, I think he’s done.’ So I don’t know what kind of conversation they had had, but he had assured her that she wasn’t in danger and that he was ready to give up.” Donna did not necessarily disbelieve Vicky when she told her that Simmons was not going to shoot her, but she was still inside an office with an armed man who had just shot six people, so it was still a dangerous situation. It was made all the more difficult by the fact that police needed help to find where the gunman was—all of that fell on Donna. She also asked Vicky during the call whether she was calm. Vicky told her no, in fact, she was not calm. Donna told Vicky, “Calm down as much as you possibly can. We’re going to get you through this. Believe it or not, we’re going to get you through this.”
Vicky did manage to remain poised during the ordeal. She gave Donna directions all while maintaining a soft tone and consoling demeanor with Simmons. The gunman had insisted on turning himself in to a uniformed officer, but Chief Johnston and his assistant chief were wearing civilian clothes. Donna explained to Vicky that the department’s two highest-ranking officers would be there to take Simmons into custody. “If some of the officers were still at other locations,” she said, “so really getting a uniformed officer there in time was not an option. We had some civilian detectives in their civilian clothes, and I feel like the chief and assistant chief didn’t want to put them in harm’s way. I feel like they thought, ‘This is ours; this is our job.'”
Vicky saw Johnston coming toward the office and assured Simmons that it was okay to turn over his guns to him. She told him that he was the police chief. Before the call was disconnected, Donna could hear a lot of screaming and other noise over the phone. The chief was standing face-to-face with Simmons. Vicky stood there, stunned, with a phone still in her hand and heard Johnston tell Simmons, “Give me the damned gun.” Simmons did what he was told and handed it over. The second gun was still inside the paper bag and had been placed on one of the desks inside the office. Simmons had no other weapons on him. He was apprehended, handcuffed, and brought to the Pope County Jail. The rampage was over.
Julie Money was still at the station. She still had no idea that Simmons had been to three other places and shot more people. She was brought inside a room with a semi-transparent window—known on network TV cop shows as a one-way mirror. Ronald Gene Simmons was in the other room. Julie looked at him through the window while flanked by a couple of police officers. “They said, ‘Is this him?'” Julie recalled. “And I thought in my mind, ‘Well, if I’m wrong, you know, I’m going to send some guy to his death.’ And I said, ‘I’m not sure. Did you get his cowboy hat? Can you put that on him?’ And the cop just looked at me and he said, ‘Just say yes, that’s him, ‘cause that’s him.’ I said, ‘Okay, that’s him.’ And then he said, ‘If it’s—if you’re wrong, we’ll straighten it out later.’ I said, ‘Okay.'”
Simmons’s original plan was to kill himself, but there were too many instances in which a single bullet wound was not enough to kill his victims. Four of the victims he shot that morning survived, including two who had suffered two bullet wounds. He did not trust the guns he had to do the job with a single shot to the head, so he ultimately decided during all of that chaos to let the state kill him. He was already resigned to that fate. Police did not know it yet, but he had actually aimed those guns at other people days earlier, and those victims were lying on a 13-acre property near Dover. It would be up to the Pope County Sheriff’s Office to find them.
Sheriff Jim Bolin was at the jail, and he confronted Simmons. The sheriff asked him about the whereabouts of his family. Bolin would tell the media that Simmons said nothing, only that his lip quivered after he was asked the question. Bolin and his deputies did not know what they were going to see next, but they assumed it was very bad. It wound up being one of the worst murder scenes ever documented on American soil.
Coming up on “The Devil of Pope County: America’s Worst Family Massacre”: “All the children were like little robots; none of them went near Gene. It was a trick he learned in Vietnam, designed to keep the animals away. The ceiling in this room also is blood-splattered.”
An outline of specific areas and details from “Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise,” based on the 922-page policy agenda by Project 2025. The document is divided into sections addressing overarching goals and detailed recommendations for various federal departments and agencies. Here’s a breakdown of key areas and specific proposals:
The document provides detailed plans for restructuring and redirecting nearly every federal agency. Here are highlights from key departments:
This outline reflects the document’s ambitious scope, aiming to fundamentally transform the U.S. government by aligning it with conservative principles. Each section includes actionable steps, often citing specific laws, regulations, or programs to target, making it a detailed playbook for a potential 2025 administration.
I asked Grok AI to compare Project 2025 with President Trump’s March 14 Speech at DOJ and assess the result using recent reporting that I provided.
Key Differences:
Using the provided articles (dated around March 2025), here’s a critical evaluation of Trump’s policies as reflected in the speech, juxtaposed with Project 2025’s goals and public/media perceptions:
Overall Critique: Trump’s speech reflects Project 2025’s core tenets—centralized power, law-and-order focus, protectionism, and cultural conservatism—but his implementation is erratic, personal, and short-term focused, diverging from its strategic depth. Economic data and polls (NYT, Reuters, CNN) suggest his tariff-driven approach risks instability, undercutting claims of universal success. Justice reforms lean toward retribution over reform, clashing with democratic norms (PBS, Vox). Immigration and crime rhetoric outpaces evidence, while foreign policy lacks Project 2025’s coherence. Public approval wavers (CFR, Fortune), indicating a disconnect between Trump’s triumphant narrative and a reality of mixed outcomes, economic anxiety, and institutional strain. Project 2025’s vision is partially realized, but Trump’s improvisational style may dilute its long-term impact while amplifying short-term controversy.
I told Grok AI to analyze and critique Donald Trump’s Speech at the Justice Department on March 14, 2025, and this time to be mean about it. Here it is:
Here’s a savage teardown of Donald Trump’s speech at the Justice Department, delivered as the freshly minted president after his January 20, 2025, inauguration. This rambling mess of a speech is a cesspool of ego, lies, and authoritarian flexing, and it’s high time someone called it what it is: a disgraceful power trip from a man who thinks he’s king.
Trump kicks off with his usual shtick: crowing about crowd sizes like a carnival barker desperate for applause. “I think we broke the all-time record”? What a pathetic opener. This guy’s so obsessed with his own hype he’d claim he invented oxygen if he thought Pam Bondi would clap for it. The self-praise is relentless—“a mandate like few people thought possible,” “won every swing state”—as if the 2024 election wasn’t a chaotic slog of recounts and lawsuits he barely squeaked through. It’s not confidence; it’s a delusion so thick you could choke on it. He’s not addressing the DOJ; he’s auditioning for his own statue.
The meat of this garbage heap is Trump’s hit list. He’s got the DOJ now, and he’s drooling over the chance to sic it on everyone who ever crossed him—Biden cronies, judges, prosecutors, the works. “Expel the rogue actors,” “expose their egregious crimes”—it’s not justice; it’s a dictator’s wet dream. He’s practically giddy naming names: Jack Smith, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, even Joe Biden himself, stripped of clearances like they’re contestants on a twisted reality show. “They’re never coming back”? Sounds less like law and order and more like a purge from a guy who binge-watched The Purge and thought, “Goals.” This isn’t a president; it’s a mob boss settling scores.
If you want proof Trump’s brain is a blender on frappe, just try following this speech. One minute he’s on crime, the next he’s yammering about Bobby Knight screaming at refs—because nothing says “justice reform” like a basketball coach throwing chairs. Then there’s the bizarre FBI headquarters detour: “Three hours away in Maryland, a liberal state, but that has no bearing”? Why bring it up, you dolt? It’s like he’s got a dartboard of topics and no aim. And the Hunter Biden laptop obsession? Still? It’s 2025—move on, you broken record. This isn’t a speech; it’s a stroke victim’s fever dream.
Trump’s crime-and-immigration rant is a masterclass in racist hogwash. “Mothers can’t walk their kids to the park without being shot or raped”? Absolute bull. Crime’s not some apocalyptic free-for-all—stats show declines in major cities, but facts don’t matter when you’re peddling panic. And the immigrant bashing—“stone-cold killers with tattoos all over their face”? It’s a cartoon villain stereotype, not reality. He claims “millions” of these boogeymen are flooding New York and Chicago, but where’s the evidence? Oh right—he doesn’t need it when he’s got a crowd dumb enough to cheer. This is propaganda, not policy.
Trump’s still flogging the 2024 election like it’s his personal fairy tale. “Won in a landslide,” “most consequential election in 129 years”? Give me a break. The guy clawed his way to victory through a mire of legal battles and razor-thin margins, yet he’s acting like he’s George Washington reincarnated. It’s a lie so blatant it’s insulting—designed to prop up his “mandate” for whatever authoritarian stunt he pulls next. Dangerous? Sure. Pathetic? Absolutely.
Pardoning “hundreds of political prisoners”? He means the January 6th goons who trashed the Capitol for him. Calling them martyrs isn’t justice—it’s a middle finger to the rule of law. And his smug pride in firing James Comey (again, really?) and other “disloyal” officials? It’s not a cleanup; it’s a tantrum. He’s turning the presidency into a loyalty test, and anyone who fails gets the axe—or a pardon if they’re sufficiently MAGA. This isn’t leadership; it’s a cult.
“Inflation’s down, interest rates are down, gasoline is coming down”? Sure, Don, and I bet you cured cancer too. Any economic dips started before he waltzed in, and his tariff obsession—slapping Mexico, Canada, and China to “stop fentanyl”—is more likely to jack prices up later. “Eggs down 35% in a week and a half”? Either he’s making it up or he’s personally haggling at the grocery store. It’s all bluster, no substance—a cheap trick to claim credit he doesn’t deserve.
This speech is a horror show:
Trump’s not here to govern; he’s here to rule. His promises to “purge” government, silence critics, and bend the DOJ to his will aren’t idle threats—they’re his playbook now that he’s got the keys. Anyone expecting a mellow second term can shove that hope where the sun doesn’t shine. This is a wannabe autocrat flexing his muscles, and it’s as ugly as it gets. God bless America? More like God help us—this clown’s running the circus now.
I used Grok AI to create the image of Trump.
I fed a transcript of tRump’s speech into ChatGPT and asked for an analysis and critique. Here it is:
Donald Trump’s speech at the Department of Defense is emblematic of his rhetorical style—marked by a mix of populism, grievance politics, and strong nationalist themes. The speech touches on numerous topics, including law enforcement, justice system reforms, border security, crime, and political persecution. Below is an analysis of the speech, including its key themes, strengths, and weaknesses.
Trump effectively uses personal anecdotes and emotional stories to engage the audience. His references to victims of crime, law enforcement officers, and grieving families create an atmosphere of urgency and moral righteousness. For example:
The speech reinforces Trump’s long-standing position as a strong advocate for law enforcement and a tough-on-crime approach. His appointments of individuals like Kash Patel and Pam Bondi signal his intent to overhaul the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI in a way that aligns with his political ideology.
Trump’s speech aligns with the grievances of many conservatives who believe the justice system has been politicized against them. By positioning himself as a champion against the so-called “deep state” and “radical left,” he maintains his outsider image, which resonates with his base.
By framing his administration’s actions as a fight against corruption and injustice, he reinforces the perception that he is battling entrenched political forces on behalf of the American people. This is a powerful and effective political strategy, particularly with voters who feel alienated or distrustful of government institutions.
While Trump makes bold claims about restoring law and order, his speech is largely devoid of specific policy details. He emphasizes his administration’s commitment to combating crime, but he does not lay out clear legislative or executive strategies to achieve his goals beyond executive orders and appointments.
Trump makes several claims that are either exaggerated or outright false. Some of the most notable examples include:
A recurring theme in Trump’s speech is the idea that he, his allies, and his supporters are being unfairly persecuted. While there are valid concerns about political bias in certain cases, his broad generalizations and claims that the justice system is entirely corrupt are overstated. This kind of rhetoric undermines trust in institutions without providing constructive solutions.
The speech is notably disorganized, often veering into unrelated anecdotes and long-winded stories that do not contribute to the main theme.
Trump openly states that he has removed security clearances from officials like Jack Smith and Alvin Bragg, along with members of the Biden family. This suggests a willingness to use government power to punish political opponents, which raises concerns about the potential politicization of the justice system. While there may be legitimate concerns about bias in the DOJ and FBI, the solution should be structural reform, not retaliation.
Trump’s speech is effective in rallying his base, but it falls short in providing coherent policy solutions. His appeals to law and order, personal anecdotes, and denunciations of political adversaries reinforce his strongman image. However, his exaggerations, factual inaccuracies, and digressions weaken the speech’s credibility.
A more structured approach, focusing on detailed policy proposals and avoiding unnecessary personal attacks, could have made the speech more compelling to a broader audience. His confrontational tone and claims of widespread corruption resonate with his supporters but risk alienating moderates who may be looking for practical solutions rather than rhetorical battles.
This site uses cookies for various nonintrusive purposes. See our <a href="https://exit78.com/privacy-policy/">Privacy Policy</a> for how they are used. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
This notice is a European Union requirement for sites with advertising or sales. The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.