The warrant indicated Klonowski, a licensed professional counselor, is charged with engaging in sexual communications with a minor through use of technology.
The arrest warrant was issued June 23.
Monday, June 29, 2026
Joplin mental health counselor arrested on Oklahoma fugitive warrant
Probable cause: Arkansas woman attacks Freeman nurse, says voices told her to do it
A Garfield, Arkansas woman will be arraigned 1:30 p.m. Tuesday in Newton County Circuit Court after being charged with third-degree assault- special victim after allegedly punching a nurse at Freeman West Hospital.
Leanna Lee Wingett (DOB 2004) is being held without bond.
From the probable cause statement:
On June 27, 2026, in Newton County, Missouri, Leanna Wingett knowingly caused physical injury to a nurse employed by Freeman Hospital and acting within the scope of her official duties by intentionally charging at and striking her in the left forearm with a closed fist.
A security guard saw the incident, according to the report.
Wingett told the investigating officer she punched the nurse because "voices she hears tell her to threaten people."
The case was investigated by the Joplin Police Department.
Lamar woman charged with assault after allegedly biting boyfriend's face
A Lamar woman bit her boyfriend's face during an argument, according to a probable cause statement filed today in Barton County Circuit Court.
Brittany Kay Taylor, 31, was charged with second-degree domestic assault with bond set at $1,000 cash or surety.
According to the probable cause statement, Taylor's boyfriend reported the incident to the Lamar Police Department. The skin on the man's left cheek was "broken in a circle larger than a quarter in size. There was fresh blood on {his} face and clothes."
The boyfriend said the argument occurred after he accused Taylor of cheating on him.
She said, "F--k you," then "grabbed him by the face and bit him and said, 'I'm leaving,' "the probable cause statement said.
Taylor told the police she and her boyfriend were arguing and they both went to the floor.
"I observed that Ms. Taylor did not have any marks on her." Taylor gave the officer permission to check her side and back.
"Ms. Taylor had no marks."
After being told her boyfriend claimed she bit him on the face, Taylor "admitted she bit him when she grabbed him," according to the probable cause statement.
"I asked Ms. Taylor if {her boyfriend} hit her or hurt her during this altercation. She stated no; he hit the wall and other items. Ms. Taylor's story changed a few times as we spoke."
Washburn man charged after allegedly choking ex-wife, stomping kitten to death
An arrest warrant was issued for James Matthew Richmond (DOB 1984) with no bond, who has been charged with second-degree domestic assault and animal abuse, both felonies.
From the probable cause statement:
On 06/26/2026 at approximately 19:48 hours, a domestic disturbance ensued between V1 and James Richmond.During the disturbance. James knowingly and unlawfully grabbed V1 by what V1 described as her "Windpipe" which she referred to as her throat. While James sternly grabbed V1's throat, V1 believed that she "could have went out at any time", referring to V1 losing consciousness because she couldn’t breathe.
V1 stated she was in fear for her life and that James was going to kill her if she did not get away. V1 was able to get free and left the residence to her neighbors to call 911.
While the domestic disturbance was occurring, James proceeded to kick a kennel that contained a black kitten, across the room multiple times and then stomped on the kennel after V1 heard James's yell "I'll kill the kittens," which ultimately caused the black kitten to become deceased.
V1 and James have been previously married with a history of domestic violence in the past. V1
also stated if James came back "He'd kill her."
V1 and James have been previously married with a history of domestic violence in the past. V1
also stated if James came back "He'd kill her."
The case was investigated by the Barry County Sheriff's Office.
160th District Rep candidate calls for pause in data center construction
(From 160th District State Representative Candidate Jonathan Russell)State Representative candidate Jonathan Russell is calling for a temporary break on new large scale data center projects while Missouri studies their long-term impacts and develops thoughtful policies to guide future development.
"I support the free market and welcome private investment in Missouri," Russell said. "But government should not be giving special privileges or corporate handouts to one industry over another. Before moving forward with more of these projects, we should understand how they will affect our electric grid, water resources, infrastructure, and local communities."
Russell said the General Assembly should use this time to establish a clear, transparent process that gives local homeowners, landowners, and community members a meaningful voice before major projects move forward.
"People deserve to know what is being proposed in their communities and have the opportunity to be heard," Russell said. "Good policy requires transparency, public input, and careful planning."
Russell emphasized that he is not opposed to data centers but believes Missouri should first establish policies that protect taxpayers, property owners, and critical infrastructure while creating a level playing field for all businesses.
"We can encourage innovation without picking winners and losers," Russell said. "Taking a short break now will allow us to develop responsible policies that protect Missouri families, respect local communities, and provide certainty for businesses looking to invest in our state."
Joplin teen killed in collision near Diamond
A 2009 CBR1000RR driven by Gavin McKinney, 19, Joplin, crossed the center of the roadway and collided with a 2010 Ram 1500 driven by a 63-year-old Diamond man, according to the Highway Patrol report.
Dr. Leah Joyner pronounced McKinney dead at 3.30 p.m.
The fatality was the 61st this year for Highway Patrol Troop D.
(Note: The identification of the victim came from the coroner's office and not from the Highway Patrol, which no longer releases names.
Sunday, June 28, 2026
Webb City lawyer sued for malpractice
A Webb City lawyer made "false representations" to the court and to his client in a child custody case over a period of several years, according to a malpractice lawsuit filed Thursday in Jasper County Circuit Court.
The lawsuit was filed by Susan Dillard with Attorney Bradley R. Barton and his firm Pennick Barton LLC are listed as defendants. Dillard is represented by Laurence D. Mass, St. Louis and Nicholas C. Lunnen, Springfield.
According to the petition, Dillard and her husband, Webb City doctor Wayland H. Dillard divorced in 2007 with Dr. Dillard receiving custody of three children.
For the next eight years, she was allowed to see her children, but Dr. Dillard cut off her access in 2015.
For the past eight years, Barton has represented Dillard as she attempted to be allowed to visit her children. Even after Dr. Dillard died in 2020, she was kept from the children, with guardianship being held by their stepmother, the petition said.
After Barton filed a motion for modification of the custody agreement to allow access to Dillard, the lawyer for Dr. Dillard and his wife, filed motions to terminate Dillard's parental rights and allow the stepmother to adopt the children.
On November 21, 2018, the court issued an order denying Dillard visitation on an interim basis. pending trial.
After a judge heard evidence on January 14-16, 2019, ordered the parental rights of Susan Dillard to be terminated and allowed the stepmother to adopt one of the children. The adoption of another was denied, bur the stepmother was granted legal guardianship, according to the petition.From the petition:
Barton stated to the Circuit Court that Plaintiff agreed to the guardianship. Plaintiff never agreed to guardianship of {a child} by Father and Stepmother.
Plaintiff continually contested the Guardianship of {the child} On July 15, 2020, the trial court
found in favor of Plaintiff and granted her motion for therapeutic visitation. Attorney Barton was instructed by the Circuit Court to draft and submit an order for therapeutic visitation.
On or about July 29, 2020, Father died from cancer leaving Sherry Dillard the lone guardian of {the child}.
Plaintiff asked Barton what she could do after Father’s death. Barton stated, “Nothing. She [Stepmother] gets guardianship because was co-guardian with [Father].
Plaintiff was never informed by Barton that she could have opposed guardianship after Father’s
death.
Between July 15, 2020 and April 2022, Barton made no filings in the guardianship case on Plaintiff’s behalf.
Barton claimed that he couldn’t come to an agreement with the Guardian ad Litem and opposing counsel as to the substance of the therapeutic visitation order; and that he couldn’t contact the opposing counsel to obtain an order signed approved as to form. Therefore, Barton never filed the order for therapeutic visitation between July 15, 2020 and April 2022.
On April 25, 2022, almost two years from the time the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for therapeutic visitation, Barton filed a proposed order for therapeutic visitation, which could have been filed within a few days of the probate court’s July 15, 2020 order.
The Circuit Court ultimately set aside the order for therapeutic visitation due to the passage of time.
Barton by his own written admission stated, “I should have sought relief from the court much sooner that I did.”
Between 2020 and 2024, Barton repeatedly told Plaintiff and her brothers that the Court has “refused to sign the order” and that Barton has no idea why; that he “just needs to get in front of the judge” to have him sign the order, that “the judge is lazy”; that “the other two attorneys do not agree with you on who was chosen to oversee the visitation and therefore refused to agree to the visitation plan."
Barton repeatedly told Plaintiff that he “placed the visitation plan in the judge’s box for him to sign;' and also told Plaintiff “I am putting in a motion to terminate [stepmother’s] guardianship, they dragged this on long enough, you deserve your daughter, you’ve done nothing wrong."
None of these statements were true.
Plaintiff repeatedly emailed Barton about the July 15, 2020 order, scheduled many phone calls with him to discuss that order, some of which included her brothers who live in the State of Pennsylvania, and also had in person meetings with Barton regarding the same.
Between 2022 and 2024, Plaintiff’s efforts to obtain therapeutic visitation were set back by continuances and the like, finally culminating in an evidentiary hearing set for October 25, 2024 on Plaintiff’s motion for therapeutic visitation, over four (4) years from the time the Court originally granted Plaintiff’s motion for therapeutic visitation with
32. In May 2024 Barton told Plaintiff he would file a motion to terminate the Stepmother’s guardianship of {the child} but he never did.
Dillard is asking for damages in excess of $25,000, costs and expenses and is demanding a jury trial.
Saturday, June 27, 2026
Four businesses fail Joplin Health Department inspections
Creek Crew BBQ and Catering, Food Mart, 3308 E. 32nd Street; and Kentucky Fried Chicken, 2601 W. 7th Street failed their inspections while 4th Street Bowl, 1419 W. 4th Street, failed its re-inspection after failing last week.
Twelve businesses passed inspection.
Creek Crew BBQ and Catering
Creek Crew BBQ and Catering received a priority violation for having food items in the warmers and holding box being hot held below 135 degrees and a core violation for having a leak in the pipes below the three-compartment sink.
Food Mart
Food Mart received a priority violation for having fried chicken in the hot holding display case being held hot held below 135 degrees and six core violations.
The core violations can be found at this link.
Kentucky Fried Chicken
Kentucky Fried Chicken received one priority violation for employees "dumping heavy amounts of grease on the rock bed near the dumpster area and on the ground behind the outdoor storage shed," and another one for having an employee drink being stored directly above the breading station in the kitchen.
KFC was cited for seven core violations, which can be found at this link.
4th Street Bowl
4th Street Bowl received a priority violation for having sliced cheese, sausage and pepperoni being cold held above 41 degrees and a core violation for having a broken floor tile in the women's restroom,.
***
The following establishments passed their inspections:
EZ Cuisine LLC/ Real Deal Fresh Italian, 2313 W. 7th Street
Chick-fil-A, 3509 S. Range Line Road
Golden Corral Buffet and Grill, 2415 S. Range Line Road
Island Genez Market, 2914 E. 32nd Street (re-inspection)
Dairy Queen Grill and Chill, 2015 E. 32nd Street
Chili's Grill and Bar, 1430 S. Range Line Road
Casey's General Store, 1904 E. 20th Street
Tiger's Taqueria, 1515 W. 10th Street
Sonic Drive-In, 1030 E. 7th Street
Worden's Meat, 1442 E. 32nd Street
Subway, 1814 W. 32nd Street
Sonic Drive-In, 720 S. Maiden Lane
Missouri parent groups organize against Amendment 5
By Annelise Hanshaw
Sarah Laub tried everything to get her son with learning disabilities a better education.
She drove him to a private school an hour and a half away from their home in rural Missouri before being directed to the local public school. When he continued to struggle, she tried homeschooling.
The local school district in Stockton, a town with a population under 2,000, just couldn’t provide everything her son needed, despite teachers’ best efforts.
“They really did not have the funds to provide him with everything he needed, and he really, really struggled,” Laub told The Independent.
As her son approached high school, she researched schools near Kansas City and decided to move her family to Blue Springs, a growing suburb with 20 schools awarded a National Blue Ribbon by the U.S. Department of Education. There, her son learned to enjoy his education and immerse himself in activities like theater.
“Seeing the difference that funding made and the difference in resources that a rural school versus a suburban school had was so infuriating,” Laub said. “All kids deserve to have access to those resources.”
For years, she fought for her son to get what he needed, but now she’s bringing her anger to a larger fight — one she believes has vast implications for public schools statewide.
Laub is part of a coalition called Parents for Missouri Public Schools that is organizing families against a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow state lawmakers to raise sales and use taxes in order to repeal the state’s income tax. Fueled by parents worried about the future of their kids’ schools, the organization is one of many groups labeling Amendment 5 an affront to public education.
Millions already pouring into Missouri ballot fights over taxes and majority rule
The fight over Amendment 5 has largely been framed as a tax debate, with those in favor of the proposal pitching it as a way to drive more business to Missouri. But for public school advocates, the central question is what happens to classrooms if the state phases out a tax that supplies a major share of general revenue and replaces it with sales taxes under the purview of the state legislature.
“Amendment 5 could dramatically harm the bottom line of public education funding in a time in which public schools cannot take another hit,” Molly Fleming, a professional organizer behind Parents for Missouri Public Schools, told The Independent.
State funding of public schools came up $138 million short this fiscal year due to the state budget’s overreliance on lottery and gaming taxes, reducing the amount of per-pupil funding by a couple hundred dollars. The discrepancy has a disproportionate effect on schools who rely more heavily on state support, which tend to be Missouri’s rural districts.
The budget lawmakers passed this spring, which has yet to be signed by Gov. Mike Kehoe, keeps funding flat, coming $190 million under what the state’s formula for determining aid to public schools called for. And officials are predicting lean years ahead as the state reserves dwindle.
“The cut to public-school funding was a very serious thing for me to want to be able to get involved,” Sierra Kilpatrick, a mother of five in North Kansas City and regional organizer with Parents for Missouri Public Schools, told The Independent. “I need to do something, so I don’t feel helpless. I can go out and talk about this.”
Supporters of Amendment 5 argue Missouri should move away from taxing income and toward a system they say would make the state more competitive, attract investment and let residents keep more of what they earn. They have framed the proposal as a way to force lawmakers to modernize the tax code while giving them flexibility to replace lost revenue.
“Other states with no income tax have grown at a pace much faster than Missouri,” Gov. Mike Kehoe said in a recent radio interview. “We’re losing population, they’re gaining population. That isn’t sustainable.”
But opponents say the measure asks voters to trust lawmakers to replace the state’s largest revenue source without guaranteeing that public schools will be protected if the math does not work.
A woman at a pro-Amendment 5 town hall in Grandview earlier this month asked if public schools would face additional cuts, saying she worried lawmakers might not prioritize stable education funding if given more control over taxation.
Republican state Rep. Bishop Davidson of Republic, who sponsored the tax cut amendment, said he thinks public education would benefit from revenues being tied to consumption rather than income.
“States that rely on consumption taxes rather than income tax revenue have more stable budgets and more predictable budgets,” he said.
Davidson’s claim is largely true, with research showing that income tax revenues decline faster in a recession than sales taxes. But policy analysts have varying recommendations to fight volatility, advising states to plan ahead with large reserves or diversify its tax portfolio by not leaning too heavily on one tax system.
Amendment 5 calls for local governments to cut tax rates to keep revenue neutral, since it assumes more goods and services will be subject to both state and local sales tax. It includes a provision barring municipalities from lowering local funding of public schools under these clawbacks, but it does not prescribe any protections at the state level.
The Missouri Budget Project, a left-leaning public policy think tank opposing Amendment 5, estimates that the change could cut school budgets by 18%.
“It really does feel like a tax break for billionaires and millionaires versus safeguarding funding for public schools,” Fleming said. “There are a lot of parents who also are worried about their own bottom line, or worried about increased gas taxes, or whatever it may be.”
Fleming has an extensive background in organizing work, including the formation of a group called Parents for KC Kids which advocated for the passage of Kansas City Public Schools’ bond measure last year. Voters widely approved the $474 million bond, the first capital improvement bond to pass in the city since the 1960s.
Around 90% of those involved in Parents for KC Kids had never campaigned before, Fleming said. The group raised just over $11,000, according to Missouri Ethics Commission filings, contributing to a decisive victory through volunteer efforts and word of mouth.
The families who got involved in the campaign kept their advocacy work going, helping lay the foundation for Parents for Missouri Public Schools.
“When the bond passed, it was like a trigger went off in everyone’s head that, oh my gosh, we can do important things,” said LaNeé Bridewell, a mom in the district. “It is kind of like a bug. We got bit by the bug, and that first one gave us momentum and clarity about our ability to make change.”
Kathryn Evans, a Kansas City mom and nonprofit consultant, was used to helping charitable organizations advocate for themselves but hadn’t yet gotten involved in school matters apart from the parent teacher association. She joined the bond fight to help secure better facilities for neighborhood schools. But after the win, she hasn’t stopped seeing needs.
“Once we won that campaign, I became more aware that there are a lot of threats,” she told The Independent. “We just won a lot of money for our schools so that we can have nicer buildings and facilities, but there are plenty of threats to public education fundamentally.”
Across the state, parents in the Francis Howell School District in St. Charles County took on a similar battle this year.
In April, the county voted on a proposed property tax freeze, which would have stalled local revenue that public schools rely on, with 59% of voters rejecting the measure. The proposal was part of a bill passed by state lawmakers last year that also sought to incentivize sports teams to stay in Missouri.
Jamie Martin, who is president of a group called Francis Howell Forward, partnered with Fleming to educate her neighbors on why frozen property tax rates could harm local schools.
“Because of the property tax fight, I had learned a lot about taxes and how they’re divided up and how they work and how they fund schools,” Martin told The Independent. “So when I saw Amendment Five come on the horizon, I was like, ‘Oh, that is going to have major impacts for public schools,’ and public schools are something I care a lot about.”
Earlier this month, Martin led a training for parents in St. Charles to learn about Amendment 5. Her profession as an education researcher has put her at the front of countless training sessions, but the energy in this room stood out.
“These parents are ready, not just to hear the information and to complain, but these parents are ready to act,” she said.
Over the past few weeks, volunteers with Parents for Missouri Public Schools have held regional meetings in community centers, homes and restaurants. They ask attendees to spread information in a way that fits their schedule, whether it be in social media posts, play dates or more formal campaigning by flyering or making calls.
“The goal is to educate people on this so that they can go out into their communities and educate more people by word of mouth,” Kilpatrick said.
Although summer schedules are busy, Evans said, volunteers are finding ways to work advocacy into their schedules, motivated by the hope of helping their kids’ education.
“We as parents have the highest stakes, but we also have a lot of agency to make a difference in the outcome because of our relationships with each other,” she said. “We are going to be connected as a parent community because we all care about our kids.”
The coalition is also working to influence school boards to pass resolutions warning about potential impacts of Amendment 5. In the past week, school boards in Lee’s Summit and Kansas City have adopted such statements.
Parents for Missouri Public Schools has not taken a partisan stance, instead focusing on the impact to school funding and parents’ personal budgets.
“We are not affiliated in any way with any party,” Evans said. “There is a shared interest in protecting public schools, and that spans all kinds of differences.”
So far, the group has reported one contribution large enough to trigger 48-hour disclosure requirements: a $10,000 contribution from St. Louis-based Missouri Wins Investor Network. Smaller donations will be included in the committee’s July 15 report.
“It is pretty rare that we have an opportunity in Missouri to bring people together across such broad differences to all walk together towards something that we want to protect,” Evans said. “In this case, it is protecting public schools, protecting everyday Missourians.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
SUBSCRIBE
Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com.
Nancy Hughes: In the morning, Lord? But it's too early
Psalm 5:3 (NIV)
When my children were small, I had absolutely no time to myself. From the moment they woke up until they fell asleep at night, I heard “Mom. Mom. Mom. Mom” from three kids ages 5, 3, and almost 1. There is an old saying that having children is like being pecked to death by a chicken. I am convinced that whoever said that had three kids like mine.
I could not even take a soaking bubble bath without three little ones watching me and asking for a sandwich, a puppy, a drink of water, or another brother. I would give up on the bubble bath and pray “Lord give me strength – and patience – and more of both!” as I made sandwiches, got each one a drink, and explained - again - why they were not getting another brother or a puppy. There did not seem to be one minute, much less 30, that I could spend reading my Bible and in prayer.
That is. until one day, when I was whining to the Lord that I just couldn’t fit time with Him into my “busy” schedule, and He suggested to my heart the unthinkable: get up at 5 a.m. every morning for quiet time with Him. What?! Are you kidding me?
At first, my mind and body refused to consider such a radical idea, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized He was right. If I truly wanted to have any time alone with the Lord, it would have to be early in the morning, before anyone was awake.
Can I be honest with you? The first week, I got up with an attitude. “This had better be good,” I would mumble to the Lord. Then I would make a cup of hot tea, grab my Bible, an ink pen, and paper, and curl up in our oversized recliner in the living room. And wait on the Lord. And wait. And wait. Then something happened.
I began to sense that the Lord was waiting on me. I was physically up early each morning to be with Him, but spiritually I was still asleep. So I flipped my Bible open to Psalms, and it fell on chapter 5, verse 3: “In the morning, O Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait in expectation.”
Not only was the Lord waiting to hear my voice, but He wanted to hear what my day was all about! Just as David had done countless times, I, too, should have been starting my day by sharing with God everything going on in my life and then quietly waiting on His answers. I was too busy grouching about getting up early to meet the Creator of the Universe! Shame on me.
Now I truly know that we can’t all get up at 5 a.m. to spend time with the Lord. Different jobs and hours can make that almost impossible. But I would encourage you to begin your day – whether it’s at 11 p.m. or 3 a.m. or 5 a.m. – by talking with the King of Kings. Praise Him for his love and mercy. Share what is on your mind. Lay your requests before Him, and allow Him to speak to your heart. Quietly listen for His nudging. He will never disappoint.
The problems you face before your prayer time may still be there after you talk with the Lord. But you will gain strength and courage to face each one just by knowing He listens and answers – even early in the morning.
Father, forgive me for making excuses for not seeking you before my day begins. May I never forget to begin my day with you. In Jesus’ Name. Amen.
R.A.P. it up . . .
Reflect
What are some of the excuses you have made for not spending time with the Lord before your day begins?
Are any of those excuses more important than a few minutes of prayer?
Apply
For one week, set your alarm and get up 30 minutes early to meet with the Lord. Make a list of activities and possible problems for each day and lay them down at the Cross.
Ask God to speak to your heart. Journal His answers and thank Him for His faithfulness.
Consider setting aside time for the Lord as your #1 priority.
Power
Psalm 5:3 (NIV) “In the morning, O Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait in expectation.”
Mark 1:35 (NIV) “Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed.”
Psalm 63:1 (NIV) “O God, you are my God, earnestly I seek you; my soul thirsts for you, my body longs for you, in a dry and weary land where there is no water.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)