Federal courts conflict on GOP effort to revive gerrymandered Missouri congressional map

By Rudi Keller 

Missouri Independent

A federal judge in St. Louis on Tuesday ordered Missouri to use the gerrymandered congressional map drawn during a 2025 special session, giving a direction to Secretary of State Denny Hoskins and other election officials that conflicts with an order issued last week by the Missouri Supreme Court.

Chief U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark issued a temporary restraining order, effective for 14 days, blocking Hoskins from using any congressional map other than the one drawn during the 2025 special session. The order came just moments after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh rejected Missouri Republican officials’ last-chance appeal to salvage the congressional district map favoring the GOP.

Had Clark not acted, Kavanaugh’s denial would have left the state court order in place and Missouri on course to use the 2022 map for the November election.

The dueling orders created immediate confusion, with Attorney General Catherine Hanaway issuing a news release saying the state would comply with Clark’s order. Attorneys for People Not Politicians, the political action committee that forced a referendum on the 2025 map, said the conflicting orders could leave election officials unsure which one they must follow.

The local election authorities have a valid order from the Missouri Supreme Court telling them to use one map, said Chuck Hatfield, attorney for People Not Politicians. They also, he said, have a valid order from Clark telling them not use any map except the one the Missouri court said they should not use.

“I think they’re they’re probably not sure what map they should use, and they need to talk to their lawyers about that,” Hatfield said.

Abha Khanna, the Seattle attorney who was People Not Politicians’ lead lawyer at the U.S. Supreme Court, said Clark’s order “is something that we will deal with to figure out on appeal.”

A referendum on the 2025 redistricting plan will be on the Nov. 3 ballot as Proposition A.

The 2025 map was drawn with the goal of making seven of Missouri’s eight congressional districts favorable to Republicans, principally by reshaping the Kansas City-based 5th District held by Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. The map used in 2022 and 2024 produced a delegation of six Republicans and two Democrats.

Clark issued his decision in a lawsuit filed Friday by U.S. Rep. Bob Onder, state Sen. Rick Brattin and two voters.

Onder is the Republican nominee in the 3rd District, seeking a second term in a district drawn more to his favor in the 2025 redistricting plan. Brattin is the Republican nominee in the 5th District, where the district was designed to generate a GOP victory that ousts veteran Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City.

“Plaintiffs face irreparable harm absent a (a temporary restraining order) because many Missouri voters would have to cast their general-election votes for candidates whom they had no role in nominating,” wrote Clark, who was appointed to the bench in 2019 by President Donald Trump. “Candidates who had no choice but to campaign and raise money in the (2025) districts that Missouri’s highest election authority presented to them, have spent their funds and campaign efforts in districts that would no longer exist.”

Clark also ruled that the public interest dictates that the map used in the primary be the map used for the general election.

“Disenfranchising voters across the state and denying them their constitutional right to have their primary votes counted significantly harm the public interest,” he wrote.

The center of both Clark’s ruling and the appeal to Kavanaugh is the Missouri Supreme Court decision that enjoined Hoskins from using the gerrymandered congressional map drawn. 

Kavanaugh did not elaborate on his decision. 

In turning down the emergency application for a stay, Kavanaugh created no precedent on the issues raised by the state. But the decision does show that he did not find enough convincing argument that the state would likely prevail in a hearing by the full court or that the state would suffer “several irreparable harms” as claimed in the application.

People Not Politicians on Sunday had urged Kavanaugh to reject the state’s application and uphold both parts of the ruling from the state Supreme Court.

In the opening paragraphs of the filing, attorneys for People Not Politicians write that the only reason the case was at the nation’s highest court is the decisions to delay made by Hoskins during the signature verification process.

Hoskins “waited as long as possible to manufacture the present dispute” and held the congressional primary using the 2025 map, they wrote, “in the hopes of running out the clock on the judiciary’s tolerance for a last-minute reversion to the 2022 districts.”

Now, they wrote, Hoskins wants “this court to deliver him the political victory to which he was never entitled under the Missouri Constitution. This court cannot and should not reward the secretary’s scheme to outsmart Missouri voters, Missouri law, and the Missouri Supreme Court by granting applicants the extraordinary relief they seek.”

A key point made by Missouri Solicitor General Lou Capozzi in the state’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was that the mechanism for changing between districts is too time consuming and difficult to complete before ballots must be delivered starting Sept. 19.

County clerks, however, told the Missouri Supreme Court that switching voters to the map used in 2022 and 2024 is a relatively simple process. And the Jackson County Board of Elections told the Kansas City Star it would be ready to hold the election in the 2022 boundaries. 

The redistricting story began in the summer of 2025, when Onder, of Lake St. Louis, got the ear of President Donald Trump to tell him that Missouri, like Texas, could provide additional GOP seats to bolster the party’s thin majority in Congress.

Since Missouri lost a seat after the 2010 census, it has sent six Republicans and two Democrats to the U.S. House each election.

Onder won his seat in 2022, the year he and other members of the state Senate’s conservative caucus were outmaneuvered as they tried to force a congressional map that would tilt the 5th District, based in Kansas City, to the GOP.

And, despite initial misgivings, Republicans got in line behind Trump. Gov. Mike Kehoe called a special session inflamed with partisanship, including a state Senate rule change that effectively silenced Democrats, that forced through what the GOP majority wouldn’t do in 2022.

The legal and political backlash that followed has not yet spent its full force. It began when People Not Politicians began circulating the referendum petition and intensified as it became clear there would be more than enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Legally, the battle has upended the consensus on the effect that filing a referendum petition has on legislation as well as delivered strong new precedent upholding the governor’s power to select subjects for a special session and the General Assembly’s power to redistrict at any time.

Politically, the climax will be written in November, when voters decide on both the referendum and the congressional candidates selected in the primary.

The flurry of filings over the weekend shows the intense national interest in the outcome of the Missouri case.

Republican attorneys general from Florida, Texas and 18 other states filed in support of Missouri, arguing it is not legal to change voting districts between the primary and the general election. 

Meanwhile, in Texas, that state’s Supreme Court is deciding whether local voting districts can be changed after the primary to dilute voting strength of minorities.

The American Center for Law and Justice also sent a brief to the court urging it to rule for Hoskins.

On the other side, the Campaign Legal Center, the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation joined forces to file a brief supporting People Not Politicians, as did the two Missouri voters who tried to get the 2025 map suspended while signatures were being checked.

• 6:30 pmThis story was updated at 6:30 p.m. to include the federal court ruling in St. Louis.

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.

Jason Smith: Canada is choosing politics over people

(From Eighth District Congressman Jason Smith)

Farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers across Southeast and South Central Missouri have spent years on the losing end of a trade relationship that was stacked against us. For far too long, Canada has gotten the benefit of the doubt while our producers and businesses paid the price. 

And our farmers, in particular, have paid the price, as Canada has worked to protect its own domestic industries at our expense. That’s why I’m so supportive of President Trump working to level the playing field and return fairness to our trading relationships.

It’s worth noting how we got here. At the beginning of his administration, President Trump announced his intention to use all trade tools at his disposal, including tariffs, to achieve fair treatment for American businesses abroad. Most of our allies recognized that there were some trade imbalances, and set out to renegotiate. Only two countries retaliated against the U.S. with tariffs: Communist China and Canada.

One action that Canada took hit close to home for Missourians. Nearly every Canadian province blocked American beer, wine, and spirits from store shelves while leaving the door open to everyone else. One white oak barrel producer in Southeast Missouri, which produces whiskey and wine barrels, had to for the first time shut down one of their lines of production because of how dramatically this impacted American producers. Missouri’s dairy farmers are dealing with a similar problem with Canada’s dairy quota system, which favors European imports over ours and squeezes American producers. In response, on July 20, President Trump signed three proclamations imposing 50 percent tariffs on Canadian goods in response to Canadian discrimination against American vehicles, alcohol, and dairy.

In an attempt to find a path forward, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and U.S. negotiators attempted to find a solution that would achieve the fair access for American business. They engaged in good faith, but Canada chose to blow up the deal for purely political reasons. How do we know it was political? Ontario Premier Doug Ford said the quiet part out loud, stating, “If I was allowed to, I’d be down there door-knocking [for Democrats].” The Canadians are engaging in shameful political behavior to try to manipulate the outcome of our elections. The American people won’t be fooled, however.

President Trump’s results speak for themselves. Time and time again, President Trump’s trade policies have led to better deals for both ends of the table. Cambodia eliminated tariffs on all American farm products, and in exchange saw its own tariff rate drop from 49 percent to 19 percent. Japan struck a deal that lowered its tariff rate on nearly all of its exports after committing to purchase $8 billion in American agriculture goods. And when we sat down with Taiwan officials, both sides walked away with dramatically lower tariff rates on exports. These aren’t one-sided arrangements. They’re deals that everyone benefits from because both sides negotiated sincerely. Canada also has the opportunity for a new mutually beneficial agreement if its leaders stopped playing politics.


President Trump has been clear: America will be treated fairly in trade, and we won’t let any country take advantage of us any longer. I’ll keep fighting for a fair trade deal. I am hopeful Canada will return to the negotiating table and take a fair deal that recognizes the need of the United States to achieve more fair and balanced trade relationships. Until then, I will keep standing with the farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers across Southeast and South Central Missouri who’ve waited long enough for a fair shake.

Missouri education departments partner with Google to provide free AI training

(From the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development)

The Missouri Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development (MDHEWD) and the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) are pleased to announce a new partnership with Google to help empower educators, students, and job seekers across the state with critical job ready and AI skills, all at no cost. 

  

Missouri is home to nearly 100,000 active educators and 1.1 million students across all levels of education. These tools will further streamline educator workloads and create customized classroom materials that allow for a concentrated focus on supporting students, while giving learners access to innovative, active, and constructive learning experiences.

“This partnership reflects Missouri’s commitment to using AI in ways that directly benefit the people we serve,” said Governor Mike Kehoe. “As AI rapidly reshapes our economy, we’re preparing Missouri’s workforce with the skills needed to stay competitive. By prioritizing safe, ethical, and transparent use of technology, we’re making state services more accessible and ensuring Missourians are ready for the high-growth, high-wage jobs of an AI-driven future.”

Missouri is partnering with Google through its Grow with Google initiative, providing residents with free access to Google Career Certificates and Google AI courses. Training courses are flexible and offered online, designed to help Missourians strengthen their skills and gain job-ready AI skills that help them better prepare for high-earning careers. Individuals can secure their free license by registering online.

“These courses strengthen our commitment to helping job seekers gain the practical skills and confidence needed to step into high-quality careers,” said Dr. Bennett Boggs, Commissioner of the Missouri Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development. “By expanding access to cutting edge AI training and education to job seekers, students, and instructors, we’re preparing Missourians for the workforce of the future and ensuring individuals at every stage of their career journey remain competitive.”

In addition, MDHEWD and DESE will provide educators, students, and staff with access to Google for Education AI tools, including Gemini for Education and Gemini Notebook and the Google AI Educator Series which provides standards-aligned training at no-cost to help educators understand and use these tools effectively.

"We’re proud to partner with Missouri to give educators, students, and professionals across the state no-cost access to secure, cutting-edge AI tools, training, and certifications,” said Chris Phillips, Vice President and General Manager, Education, Google. “By delivering these resources directly through K-12 schools, colleges, universities, and local Missouri Job Centers, we are helping residents statewide build practical AI fluency so they can thrive at school and in their careers today and prepare for the opportunities of tomorrow."

“School districts and charter schools continue to have full discretion over the adoption of these tools, and for those that implement them, this work strengthens personalized learning and helps students interact with AI safely, ethically, and responsibly,” said Dr. Stacey Preis, Interim Commissioner of Education. “DESE is committed to ensuring the best conditions for student success and upholding a vision in which every Missouri student graduates with a great education.”

DESE has four key areas of support that will guide the state’s rollout of these tools: Support for Educators: 

Tools will help educators generate lesson plans, develop grading rubrics, and summarize classroom discussions, reducing administrative tasks and strengthening instruction.

Customized Learning: Tools will provide practice exercises and materials tailored to each student’s learning pace and needs, enhancing teacher instruction. 

Research and Brainstorming: Students can use technology as a supplemental resource while learning to verify the accuracy and reliability of AI provided information. 

Digital Citizenship: A dedicated AI literacy curriculum will ensure students understand how to use these tools effectively and ethically.

Rigorous standards for data security and privacy are built into the foundation of Google’s education tools. Clear guidelines and expectations are available for educators to help students use resources appropriately. By pairing the technology with digital citizenship instruction, educators can reinforce ethical use and help students develop the skills needed to engage with AI responsibly.

Missouri AG trashes state Supreme Court ruling in federal filing

By Rudi Keller 

Missouri Independent

Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s chief litigator on Sunday accused the state Supreme Court of adopting “a legal fiction” when it ruled that putting the state’s new congressional map to a referendum means Missouri must use its previous district lines in November.

In a federal court filing, Solicitor General Lou Capozzi asked U.S. Chief Judge Stephen Clark of the Eastern District of Missouri, an appointee of President Donald Trump, to block the state Supreme Court order. Capozzi wrote that his client, Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, agreed with the two GOP congressional candidates who filed the lawsuit that the map favoring Republicans drawn in 2025 should be the one used in November.

In the unanimous opinion last week, Missouri Supreme Court Judge Ginger Gooch wrote that People Not Politicians had submitted a legally sufficient petition referendum and the Missouri Constitution required that the legislation creating the new map can have no effect in law until a vote of the people. 

Hanaway appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday afternoon. Justice Brett Kavanaugh set a noon Monday deadline for other parties to weigh in on the application for an emergency stay. 

In the U.S. Supreme Court response, Chuck Hatfield, attorney for People Not Politicians, wrote that the court did not have jurisdiction to take the case and that Hoskins failed to preserve any federal claims in the way he decided Aug. 4 that the referendum should not be on the ballot. Finally, Hatfield wrote, the attorneys for the state sought the wrong legal remedy.

“Ultimately, if what applicants seek is this court’s blessing to implement (the 2025 map) in contravention of Missouri law, they must secure an order affirmatively establishing the secretary’s authority to use it,” Hatfield wrote. “That requires an injunction, not a stay.”

The ACLU and the Campaign Legal Center filed amicus briefs in support of People Not Politicians. The American Center for Law and Justice filed a brief supporting Hoskins.

In St. Louis, U.S. Rep. Bob Onder, state Sen. Rick Brattin, and two voters filed their lawsuit in the Eastern District court on Friday, with People Not Politicians seeking to intervene to have the case dismissed.

Like Kavanaugh, Clark set a noon Monday deadline for any other intervenors to file and for arguments on whether he had any jurisdiction. Both could issue decisions as early as Monday afternoon. 

Tuesday is the deadline for changing the Nov. 3 ballot. One state law prohibits local election authorities from adding or removing candidates or issues after that date and another extends that prohibition to the courts.

In his Sunday filing on behalf of Hoskins in the Eastern District, Capozzi acknowledges that he cannot dispute last week’s decision on state law grounds.

“The Missouri Supreme Court’s decision rested solely on state law,” Capozzi wrote. “Indeed, the court suggested Secretary Hoskins was barred from even considering federal law in his certification decision.”

The referendum petition was filed Dec. 9. The bill that included the gerrymandered map intended to flip the 5th District — where Brattin is the GOP nominee — was constitutionally set to take effect on Dec. 11.

The provision on a referendum in Missouri’s Constitution, whether lawmakers put legislation on the ballot or it is done by petition, is that it does not take effect until approved by voters. Because the primary was conducted before the ruling that the petition was sufficient, Capozzi wrote, “the Missouri Supreme Court adopted a legal fiction that the (2025) map used in the primary election must be deemed retroactively invalid.”

In the motion to dismiss, attorney Chuck Hatfield argued on behalf of People Not Politicians that the federal district court should not second-guess the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision.

The court does not have jurisdiction, Hatfield wrote. He also questioned whether there was a true dispute between Onder, Brattin and the voters and Hoskins. 

Marc Ellinger, the attorney representing Onder and Brattin, argued side-by-side with Capozzi in the case decided by the Missouri Supreme Court. Now his clients have filed suit against Hoskins, who has told the court he agrees with their demands. 

“The hallmarks of collusion are unmistakable,” Hatfield wrote in the motion to dismiss the case.

The lawsuit is a true dispute, Capozzi wrote, because Hoskins wants to do as Onder and the other plaintiffs demand, but cannot because he would have to break the law to do so.

Ellinger, in his filing, echoed that argument.

“A defendant who lacks the power to grant the requested relief without a court order cannot collude to manufacture one; the very fact that plaintiffs need an injunction from this court, rather than a stipulation from the secretary, is proof the dispute is real,” Ellinger wrote.

In the motion to dismiss, Hatfield used an argument drawn on repeatedly by Ellinger and Capozzi to urge courts to allow the 2025 map to be used in the general election — it is too late to change and doing so would harm the election.

The Supreme Court appeal will decide all the important questions raised by Onder and the other plaintiffs, Hatfield wrote.

“A district-court injunction directing use of the (2025) map while the Supreme Court considers whether to stay the Missouri Supreme Court’s injunction against that map would create chaos for election officials, candidates, and voters,” Hatfield wrote.

He urged Clark to dismiss the case.

“The pending Supreme Court proceeding demonstrates an adequate alternative forum — the constitutionally designated forum — for plaintiffs’ federal claims,” Hatfield wrote.

One unusual aspect of the Eastern District case is that Hanaway is not defending the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court. Usually, when a Missouri state law or precedent is challenged in federal court, the attorney general’s office works to defend it as a correct application of the law.

Instead, through the state’s filings, Capozzi belittles the work of the state’s highest court. 

The decision ignored many of the arguments he made and accepted by the Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green, Capozzi wrote. On several occasions, he wrote, the court did “not mention” his effort to use a tie-in to the federal Constitution to block the referendum,

And the court, to his surprise, applied Missouri law to the case.

“Shockingly, the Missouri Supreme Court reversed and directly issued an injunction prohibiting the secretary — ‘and all those acting in concert with him’ — ‘from implementing, using, or mandating the use of the congressional redistricting in (the 2025 map),’” Capozzi wrote.

Capozzi also criticized the court for refusing to accept his version of facts, adopted by Green but disputed in filings directly to the court.

“Even more bizarrely, the Missouri Supreme Court entirely ignored the circuit court’s finding that changing congressional maps would be ‘impossible’ and force Missouri to violate the federal election calendar,” Capozzi wrote. “Instead, the court explicitly eschewed any consideration of the ‘confusion, expense, and practical difficulties’ that ‘may result’ from its injunction.”

Those issues Hoskins and Hanaway have with the court ruling means the attorney general’s office cannot defend the Missouri Supreme Court decision, Capozzi wrote.

“Defendants take their obligation to defend state laws seriously,” Capozzi wrote. “But under the extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances in this case, defendants believe their oath to comply with the U.S. Constitution prevents them from defending the use of a different congressional map for the general election.”

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.

Barbara McNeely died 49 years ago today

For someone who was later known as the reporter who covered the funerals, it seems strange to realize I was 21 years old when I attended my first funeral.

It was 2 p.m. Saturday, September 10, 1977. I was four months into my first newspaper job as editor of the Newton County News and this funeral should have been the first I covered.

I was so ill-equipped for my job at that point, it never occurred to me to write what should have been one of the most important stories I would ever write. Instead, the words were never written.

The sun was shining brightly on a day when we were saying goodbye to someone who meant so much to the community.

It was in this same building only six days earlier that Barbara McNeely, 20, taught her fourth grade Sunday school class. Three days later, sometime around 8:30 p.m. she was stabbed to death in the east parking lot at Northpark Mall.

Somehow I managed to squeeze into one of the last available seats in the Granby United Methodist Church building. I was wearing the same suit I wore a few years earlier when I had my senior picture taken for the East Newton High School yearbook. I couldn't find a tie, so I went without one.

The temperature outside was somewhere around 90 degrees, something that was unusual for September in those days. I don't remember whether the church had air conditioning, but I vividly remember the air being circulated by seemingly hundreds of cardboard fans.

Almost 49 years later, I don't remember the words that were spoken, I just remember the feeling I had. This couldn't be happening. I'm sure I'm not the only one who had that thought.

***
During the fall of 1977 and early months of 1978, I followed closely the coverage of the arrest and trial of William McMurray II, an Ozark Bible College student who had only lived in Joplin for 16 days when he killed Barbara.

I never revisited that coverage until today. Nearly half a century later I see those stories quite a bit differently than when I originally read them.

At age 21, I wasn't as familiar with how court cases were handled. My first murder trial was a few years off. When I read about McMurray's trial in old Joplin Globe stories today, I'm still shocked that an eight-woman, four-man jury found McMurray not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, but it's easier to see how it happened.

Over the years I've been told the Jasper County Prosecuting Attorney's office was overconfident, but I always assumed that was people trying to rationalize an inexplicable result.

I no longer believe that.

Prosecuting Attorney Tom Elliston presented his case in 34 minutes and called only two witnesses, both from the Joplin Police Department.

Jurors heard about McMurray's confession and how he led police officers to the location of the knife he used for the murder.

The prosecution and the public defenders who were representing McMurray agreed to stipulate to certain facts:

-McMurray's bloody fingerprints were on Barbara's car.

-Strands of McMurray's hair were found in a necklace Barbara was wearing.

-Barbara's blood was on the murder weapon.

By stipulating to those facts, the jury simply heard them stated quickly then brushed past as if they weren't important. It makes a difference when the prosecution stacks one witness after another bringing out separate pieces of evidence to build a case.

The prosecution never presented any testimony about the extent of Barbara's wounds, the brutality with which McMurray killed her.

The defense's case, on the other hand, was extensive, beginning with a social worker who had worked with McMurray in Indiana before he moved to Joplin.

Two psychiatrists testified with the first saying McMurray had his first "major episode" when he killed Barbara and another one while he was being examined at the state hospital in Fulton and that he was seeing his mother's face on various women he saw that night before finally mistaking Barbara for his mother and killing her. He described it as "paranoid delusion."

The second psychiatrist said moving from Indiana to Missouri created "a stressful situation" for McMurray.

The mother was in the courthouse for the trial but after McMurray had a visible reaction when he saw her, she was kept out of the courtroom. She was brought to Missouri by the defense to testify but was never called.

The prosecution never called any witnesses to rebut the psychiatrists' testimony, only saying McMurray was faking.

When the case went to the jury Friday, January 27, 1978, the deliberations lasted past midnight with a message coming back to Judge Charles Teel that the jury was divided 7-5. Teel told them to continue deliberations and 22 minutes later they returned with the not guilty verdict.

As I reread those articles, I realized there was some important information missing from the coverage, something that only appeared in my newspaper, the Newton County News, though I had nothing to do with it.

I was still attending Missouri Southern State College at that time so our coverage was done by one of our columnists, Eulah Hawkins, who noted the effect that McMurray's supporters from Ozark Bible College and more specifically from the religious organization Revival Fires, was having.

A large contingent from the group showed its support for McMurray during the trial, making sure to let people see they were praying for him and also spreading the word that McMurray had seen the light.

Globe stories made mention of the McNeely family sitting behind the prosecution, but never mentioned the demonstrative ways Revival Fires showed support for the accused. The group didn't seem to have any sympathy for the victim and celebrated when the verdict was announced.

The verdict set off a firestorm locally.

As much as people talk about someone getting off with an insanity plea for murder, it rarely happens.
That was just the beginning of the ways the system failed the McNeely family.

***
In the days following, the Joplin Globe was overwhelmed with letters blasting the verdict. It would have been a great opportunity to allow the public to vent, but Globe editors elected to limit the letters to a couple of people who attacked the verdict and one who supported it, saying those adequately represented the public's feelings.

One of those letters came from the McNeely family:

"We wonder what kind of a crime a person would have to commit in Jasper County to be found guilty. 

We weren't prepared for the verdict of not guilty" in the very early hours Saturday morning January 28.

"We can't understand how those 12 people who sat on the jury could listen to all the testimony and come up with that verdict.

"If William McMurray is insane then 50 percent of the people in this country need to be behind bars. Anyone who could recall events which happened up to the time he walked up to Barbara McNeely's car and again when he panicked and ran knew what he was doing when he was stabbing her.

"Jury, did you know how many times Barbara was stabbed. We don't recall this coming out during the trial. She had 23 deep stabs, both wrists slashed and her throat slit. 37 stabs all together.

"Apparently, the jury felt sorry for him. But what about us, her parents? We lost a wonderful daughter. She never harmed anyone, was a good Christian and never gave us any trouble or worry or anyone else who knew her.

"We would personally like to ask each juror. Do you have a daughter and, if so, would you like to lose her that way? We have not had very many nights we could sleep since Barbara's death on September 7, 1977 and I'm sure it will be a long time before we will again.

"Jury, we hope you have trouble sleeping, too. This boy will be out of the hospital in no time at all and he will probably have another "fit of rage."

"Since he fooled everyone this time he'll try it again. At least next time it can't be our daughter but it might be yours.

"Yes, we are very, very bitter. We have a sick society and no justice. All the laws seem to be for the guilty."

***
The McNeelys' letter proved to be far more accurate than the testimony of one of the psychiatrists who said McMurray's prognosis for recovery "isn't very good," and he would be in the state mental hospital for a long time.

It only took five years for the doctors at the hospital to recommend his release. Though it didn't happen at that point, McMurray was released August 8, 1985, less than seven years after the murder and apparently, he had been receiving special privileges prior to that time.

Jasper County authorities and the McNeely family did not learn of McMurray's release until nearly a year and a half later.

By that time, McMurray was already working as an EMT, had received an award from the lieutenant governor and was married with two children- one was his wife's from her former marriage. The other was his child born April 18, 1984, more than a year before he was officially released.

***
In August 2010, I received an e-mail from a Crawfordsville, Indiana reporter telling me William McMurray was writing a book about Barbara's death and about how he had changed his life around since that day in 1977.

I wrote a Turner Report post condemning the book and how McMurray was cashing in on an act that devastated the McNeely family and all those who loved Barbara.

I received a response from McMurray, who said there was nothing he could say that could "justify the taking of a human life," and all of the efforts he made to reach out to the McNeely family and the Joplin community, but his efforts had been "strongly discouraged."

After his brief lip service to the evil act he'd committed, he came to the real purpose of his message.
He spent several paragraphs telling me about the wonderful things he had done since his release, his work as an EMT, his charity activities and how he hoped his book would help others who had to deal with "childhood issues."

I never responded and I'll never read that book.

Let me correct one mistake I made.

I incorrectly wrote that McMurray wrote that he made efforts to contact the McNeely family.

That's not true.

He said he made efforts to contact "the McNealy family."

He couldn't even bother to get the name right.

Barbara McNeely died 49 years ago today

Fairview man bound over for trial on assault, weapons charges

A Fairview man was bound over for trial on multiple felony charges after waiving his preliminary hearing in Newton County Circuit Court.

The arraignment for Tyler Koeda Millokin (DOB 1995) in trial court on charges of first-degree assault, unlawful use of a weapon, armed criminal action and unlawful possession of a firearm will be held 9 a.m. September 28 before Judge Charles Spencer Genisio.

From the probable cause statement:

On April 27, 2026, law enforcement responded to a report of shots fired at or near Fairview, Newton County, Missouri.

Upon arrival, witnesses reported hearing approximately three gunshots coming from the area of that residence. One witness described a black or dark-colored sedan arriving immediately prior to the gunshots and then fleeing the scene.

Law enforcement was later contacted by W1, who reported that Tyler Milliken shot V1 during an altercation at that location.

Officers subsequently located V1 in Webb City, Missouri. V1 reported that he had been shot in the arm.

Deputies made contact with Tyler Milliken at or near 203 South Estes Avenue where he lives. Milliken denied involvement in the incident.

While on scene, deputies observed physical evidence consistent with a shooting, including a spent shell casing located in the front lawn of the residence, as well as broken glass and tire tracks consistent with a vehicle leaving the area abruptly.

Criminal History reveals that Tyler Milliken was previously found guilty of felony possession of a controlled substance in Newton County, Missouri, on June 25, 2018, making it unlawful for him to possess a firearm.

The case was investigated by the Newton County Sheriff's Office.

East Middle School principal named SWMO principal of the year

 

(From Joplin Schools)

We are proud to celebrate East Middle School Principal Jason Cravens as the MoASSP Middle School Principal of the Year for Southwest Missouri!

Mr. Cravens received the award at an all-school assembly, where his staff, students, and family members were in attendance for the surprise announcement. 

Joplin High School principal Randy Oliver along with MoASSP Board President Jeff Brown presented the award.

"I have the best staff, the best family, and the best students," said Mr. Cravens. "This award is for all of them."

With almost 30 years of experience as an educator, Mr. Cravens has been EMS principal for 11 years and has been in Joplin Schools since 1999 - he's an Eagle, through and through. We are so proud that he shares his heart, skill, and teamwork in Eagle Nation, and excited for him to be recognized across the state. 

Congratulations, Mr. Cravens!

Joplin City Council changes dates for meetings, work sessions

(From the City of Joplin)

The Joplin City Council has scheduled new dates for its September meetings and work sessions, with some adjustments in place.

Due to Labor Day falling on Monday, Sept. 7, the first council meeting of the month will be held on Tuesday, Sept. 8. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the City Council Chambers on the 5th floor of City Hall. The Council’s informal meeting will begin at 5:15 p.m.

There will not be a council work session on Sept. 14. Work sessions are typically held the second Monday of each month, but the work sessions for September are focused on the topic of budget, and Council Budget Work Sessions have been scheduled for Sept. 22-23.

Due to the anticipation of a light agenda for the Sept. 21 meeting, that council meeting is being rescheduled so that it can coincide with the first scheduled Council Budget Work Session on Tuesday, Sept. 22. 

The regular Council meeting will begin at 6 p.m., with the budget work session beginning after formal business is concluded. Please note these will both take place on Sept. 22. There will be no informal meeting on September 22.

If needed, the Council Budget Work Session will continue on Sept. 23 beginning at 5:45 p.m.

Burleson introduces bill to prevent federal taxpayer dollars from paying for Flock cameras

(From Seventh District Congressman Eric Burlison)

This week, Congressman Thomas Massie and I introduced legislation to stop federal taxpayer dollars from funding automated license plate readers and biometric surveillance cameras.

The bill would prohibit the use of federal funds to purchase, install, maintain, operate, or upgrade these systems—including related contracts, subscriptions, cloud services, databases, and data-sharing arrangements.

The Fourth Amendment protects Americans against unreasonable searches. New technology doesn’t erase that protection, and federal taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to bankroll surveillance systems that track law-abiding Americans.

The link below features the congressman's interview with Newstalk KZRG in which he talks about the bill.

https://x.com/RepEricBurlison/status/2095894490556813641?s=20
 

MSSU mourns loss of biology professor

(From Missouri Southern State University)

It is with great sadness that we share the passing of Dr. Alla Barry, a beloved professor of biology at Missouri Southern State University. Dr. Barry passed away following a tragic boating accident.

Dr. Barry leaves a lasting impact on the lives of the countless Missouri Southern State University students who she taught, mentored and inspired. 

Her commitment to her students and meaningful contributions to the university will be part of her tremendous legacy. She will be greatly missed by her colleagues, students and all who had the privilege of knowing her.

Counseling services are available to students who may be struggling with this loss. Support is available in Billingsly Student Center, Room 347, or by calling 417-625-9559. During this difficult time, faculty and staff may reach out to Director of Human Resources, Derek Collier, for support and available employee resources.