Mac Haddow’s “Waiver”

As our regular readers know, the Muckraker has thus far not done a substantive post on the felony conviction of Mac Haddow, Gainesville Supervisor Pete Candland’s mentor, sometime staffer, spouse and father-in-law of sometime staffers, appointee on the County Strategic Planning Committee, chair of the Gainesville-Brentsville Budget Committee, denigrator of county staff, character assassin, and de facto leader of the Haddow-Candland cabal and, we believe, its house organ, the Sheriff of Nottingham blog.

We’ve taken a lot of grief for not doing so, and that grief reached a fever pitch when Haddow went online with his own spin on his felony conviction (despite us not having done a post on it) and his involvement in discussions with the families of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103. The result was us having been forwarded what would be literally boxes of information that appear to contradict representations that have been made by Mac Haddow over just the past couple of weeks. In other words, information that appears to confirm that Haddow is up to the same old tricks of concealment and unethical conduct that got him in trouble in the first place.

As we said, there are literally boxes of this information that will keep us busy for 365 days a year. Today, we’re going to talk about Mac Haddow’s so-called “waiver” and let you be the judge of the truth.

We’ll let you read on your own Mac Haddow’s description of his “waiver” and its relevance to his felony conviction; it exhibits his characteristically lengthy, tortured and convoluted logic designed to obfuscate the actual facts. But to summarize, we believe it fair to say that Haddow basically argues that he was essentially innocent of wrongdoing because he had a waiver from HHS Secretary Margaret Heckler.

Well, the court transcripts paint a significantly different view of the waiver that seems quite inconsistent with Mac Haddow’s representations. Again, there is tons of this stuff and it will take us a while to wade through it, but we wanted to give you a taste now so the public has a better idea of the type of people we’re dealing with in the Haddow-Candland cabal. Here is court commentary on the waiver:

“This waiver, which incidentally if it was signed by the Secretary, was given on the mistaken premise that there was no financial benefit individually to Mr. Haddow in his participation in T-Bear, came on January 25th, 1985. Prior to that time on April 3rd, ’84, on May 8th, ’84, on June 7th, ’84 and in September of ’84, $17,000 had been paid over. In fact, after the waiver there was simply two transactions totaling 8500. That that is what led the defendant throughout to understand that even if he had a written copy of the waiver he couldn’t cover the past where he had been in conflict. The Court has determined that the guilty plea on count four must stand.”

As this shows, the Court essentially eviscerates the story that Mac Haddow and other members of his cabal have been peddling in just the past couple of weeks about a so-called “waiver” and his innocence. According to this court transcript, if Secretary Heckler signed the waiver (if the “if it was signed” language struck you as odd, you’re not alone – we’re looking into exactly why the Court would say “if”) it was on the belief that Haddow would derive no financial benefit, which turned out not to be the case. Additionally, the court notes that any such waiver wasn’t given until four payments totaling $17,000 had already been made as far back as almost 10 months prior.

There is a great deal more to this, including an incredibly bizarre account of how this “waiver” eventually materialized. Stay tuned. You can’t make this stuff up, and it tells the public a great deal about the ethics and integrity of Haddow-Candland cabal members.


4 comments on “Mac Haddow’s “Waiver”

  1. -

    I’m glad you’re finally covering this. I’m very familiar with the details of the Haddow conviction [edited out]. The stuff Mac Haddow is posting is not the truth and the public needs to know about it. I have additional information that I will send you confidentially.

  2. -

    ‘Bought time Muckraker. Bravo!

  3. -

    This is exactly what needs to be done! Thank you for taking on the project of exposing these frauds. It’s a lot of work to do this kind of investigation but we really appreciate it and you are performing a major public service. You will never have to worry about running out of material to write about.

  4. -

    I just can’t believe that anyone would want a person like this attached in any way to their office. As a voter I am disappointed in the BOCS for allowing his appointments to any committee. It’s time to change the appointment policy. No felons please

Comments are closed.