Tuesday, June 30, 2026

Joplin teen charged with 3 counts of negligent homicide


The Ottawa County, Oklahoma District Attorney's office has charged a 19-year-old Joplin man with three counts of negligent homicide in connection with an October 17, 2024 crash in which three passengers in the car he was allegedly driving were killed.

According to the probable cause affidavit, when the Oklahoma State Highway Patrol investigated the accident,, Jonathan S. Spencer told a trooper that the other survivor of the crash was the one who was driving.







Subsequent investigation, including a search of videos taken on the phone on one of the three deceased passengers indicated Spencer was the driver.

A bench warrant was issued for Spencer's arrest today.

(From the probable cause affidavit)

On the early morning of October 17, 2024, JONATHAN SPENCER was driving a blue in color 2010 Pontiac Vibe. In the car with SPENCER was front seat passenger KADEN HARRISON, and back seat passengers CHANCE MILTON, BRENT TAYLOR and ISAAC DUNN. SPENCER was driving eastbound on State Hwy 10 when the car left the road to the right for an unknown reason and then overcorrected and lost control and departed the road to the left and overturned multiple times before coming to rest on its top. 

During the collision all three backseat passengers were ejected from the vehicle.

Trooper WILL LANGELY was the first trooper to respond to the scene and was able to talk to SPENCER before he was taken to the hospital. SPENCER told LANGLEY that he was the front seat passenger and HARRISON had been driving the car. 

SPENCER stated that after the crash he noticed that the three backseat passengers had been ejected and he and HARRISON were the only occupants still in the car. SPENCER said he then got himself out of the car and then helped get HARRISON out of the car and that they both had been wearing seatbelts.

Trooper JOE GREEN was notified by NERCC about the collision and responded to the scene. Once on scene GREEN took photographs of the scene and the vehicle. GREEN then went to Mercy Hospital in Joplin to make contact with SPENCER, but he had already been treated and released. 

GREEN then went to Freeman Hospital in Joplin to make contact with HARRISON. HARRISON was incapacitated due to his injuries and unable to speak to GREEN. GREEN was able to speak to HARRISON'S mother and get information needed. 

HARRISON underwent multiple surgeries over the next several weeks and during that time his mother reached out to GREEN and told him that they had hired an attorney and would not be speaking with GREEN anymore. 

During that time GREEN was never able to interview HARRISON.








GREEN was given consent by the registered owner of the car to download the Airbag Control Module (ACM) to gather any precrash data that might be stored on it. GREEN harvested the module on October 17, 2024, and then on November 5, 2024, GREEN imaged the module at Troop B headquarters, and it showed that 5 seconds before the crash the car was traveling at 78 mph and 1 second before the crash it was traveling at 78 mph in a 55 mph zone.

Later in the investigation GREEN was given access to a cell phone that had belonged to back seat passenger, MILTON. On this phone there were several videos recorded the day of the crash, and they all show SPENCER driving and HARRISON in the passenger seat.

GREEN was eventually able to interview SPENCER and HARRISON. GREEN interviewed SPENCER at his father's residence in Joplin, MO and SPENCER did deny driving the car at all the night of the crash. 

When GREEN told SPENCER that he knew that he had lied to him, SPENCER'S father said the interview was over and told GREEN to get out of his house. 

GREEN interviewed HARRISON at Troop L headquarters in Vinita, OK with his parents there and his attorney. HARRISON cooperated and answered all questions.

Petitioners want to dissolve Stotts City


(From Stotts City Mayor Tracy Knight)

Mayor Tracy Knight is encouraging residents to carefully research and fully understand the implications of a petition that has begun circulating within the community seeking the dissolution of the City of Stotts City.

“Every resident has the right to participate in the democratic process,” Mayor Knight said. “However, I also believe every citizen deserves to understand what this decision could mean for the future of our community before signing a petition or casting a vote.”








Under Missouri law, a circulating petition alone does not dissolve a municipality. If the petition receives the number of signatures required by law and satisfies all applicable legal requirements, the matter may proceed through the statutory process and could ultimately be submitted to the voters. If approved through that process, Stotts City would cease to exist as an incorporated municipality, and its local municipal government would be dissolved in accordance with Missouri law.

Mayor Knight emphasized that the issue extends beyond politics.

“This is about preserving a community that has proudly existed since 1896. Like many residents, I recognize the frustration created by the recent audit findings and the governance challenges our city has experienced. Those concerns deserve accountability, transparency, and meaningful reform. My belief is that we should work together to restore our city—not lose it.”

With the Fourth of July approaching, Mayor Knight called on residents to reflect on the values that have sustained both the nation and small communities for generations.

“Independence Day reminds us that strong communities are built by people who refuse to give up during difficult times. Stotts City has overcome challenges throughout its nearly 130-year history because its people cared enough to work together.”








Mayor Knight concluded by encouraging residents to seek information from multiple sources, review Missouri law, and make informed decisions based on facts.

“Most importantly, let us remember that we are neighbors before we are divided by opinions. We all care deeply about the future of Stotts City. Regardless of differing viewpoints, I hope our community will continue to treat one another with respect, compassion, and a shared commitment to what is best for our town.”

Mayor Knight reaffirmed her commitment to improving transparency, strengthening accountability, and working alongside residents to preserve Stotts City’s future.


Former Cherokee County deputy sentenced for child pornography, enticing a minor


(From the U. S. Attorney for Kansas)

Former Cherokee County, Kansas Deputy Garrett Gayoso was sentenced to 222 months in prison during a hearing today in U. S. District Court in Wichita.

Gayoso, who pleaded guilty to production of child pornography March 30.

The Cherokee County Sheriff's Office placed Gayoso, 25, on administrative leave in April 2025 after the Fall River, Massachusetts Police Department said it was investigating the deputy for what was described as "an inappropriate relationship" between Gayoso and a juvenile female."








Gayoso later resigned. Massachusetts authorities charged him in May 2025. A grand jury from the U. S. District Court in Kansas indicted him December 17.

The allegations against Gayoso were detailed in the U. S. Attorney's detention motion.

Defendant is a former law enforcement officer who abused his position of trust to groom a teenager online and get her to produce child pornography for his sexual pleasure. During the course of the months-long grooming, defendant was promoted to the role of Detective in February 2025, where he was supposed to be investigating the very types of crimes he was committing in secret.

Defendant is a danger and a flight risk and should be detained.

The case came to light when the victim’s mother searched Minor Victim 1’s laptop and cell phone and found sexually explicit messages and pictures between Minor Victim 1 – a 16-year-old high school student - and Defendant.

Minor Victim 1’s mother also discovered that Defendant had traveled to Massachusetts (where Minor Victim 1 resides) and had sex with Minor Victim 1. Minor Victim 1 confirmed that this all occurred.

Massachusetts law enforcement contacted the KBI to investigate further. Various search warrants were obtained, and Defendant was Mirandized and interviewed. During the interview, Defendant admitted that he met Minor Victim 1 online and moved the chats to snap but claimed they did not text much (but had over 24,000 text messages on his phone). 

Defendant admitted to having sex with Minor Victim 1. Defendant admitted that nude photographs were exchanged and that he sometimes requested the nude photographs. Defendant denied knowledge of Minor Victim 1’s age, but his denial is contradicted by the facts.

For example, Minor Victim 1 states that although they met on a website meant for 18-year-olds, that Defendant asked her almost immediately how old she was, and she responded truthfully that she was 16.

Additionally, a review of the text messages show that it is clear Defendant knew her age. Defendant talks about throwing a prom for the victim, discusses the 7-8 year age gap of Minor Victim 1’s parents and how it matches their age gap. 








Additionally, at one point Minor Victim 1 sends her Massachusetts id card that clearly shows her date of birth on it. Defendant comments on the id. Although proving that Defendant knew Minor Victim 1’s age is not an element of production of child pornography, it is relevant to show that he absolutely knew she was a minor in high school.

Defendant’s cell phone was seized and searched pursuant to a warrant. Defendant’s common social media handle was some variant of “Bootygoblin.” Agents found well over 24,000 text messages between August 17, 2024 and January 8, 2025.

Minor Victim 1 stated they were communicating through April 2025 (when her mother discovered the messages) and also reports that they communicated on other forums, such as Snapchat. Even with this incomplete picture, agents uncovered 119 images from Minor Victim 1 to Defendant, many of her entire nude body and many focused on her vagina.

There are also videos of Minor Victim 1 engaged in a sex act.

Defendant regularly discusses masturbating to these images. The chats are filled with sexually explicit comments, including when Defendant calls Minor Victim 1 “daddy’s little whore” and “daddy’s little slut” and “my cum slut” and “my whore” and “my obedient little whore.”

Defendant moved quickly in his grooming techniques with Minor Victim 1. Within his first 10 messages to the victim, he asks for a picture to see what she looks like. He starts talking about wanting to be in bed with her and rubbing her thigh within the first two hours of conversation.

After some of Defendant’s subtle suggestions, Minor Victim 1 states “I’m not sending you nudes we literally just met.” Nevertheless, Defendant continued to lavish Minor Victim 1 with praise and grooming and despite starting the conversation on the evening of August 17, already tells Minor Victim 1 he loves her around 1am on August 20.

The next day, on August 21, 2024, Defendant states “show me all of your body. That way nothing is secret or hidden from me.” The victim then sends a full body picture showing her breasts and vagina. It is evident this is new production because Minor Victim 1 states she needs to shave and Defendant responds he isn’t bothered by it before Minor Victim 1 says she will need some time to take a decent picture.

The text messages continue to when Defendant travels to Massachusetts to have sex with Minor Victim 1. After that encounter, the following exchange takes place:

MV1: Yes, I'm a little upset about something though

Defendant: What's that

MV1: I didn't like the whole not putting the condom on right away thing. I'm going to be paranoid as hell now

Defendant: I'm sorry baby

MV1: I don't want to take risks like that

Defendant: I'm sorry

MV1: It's okay just ask me before doing stuff like that next time

Defendant: You're right. I should've asked

Defendant then proceed to buy Plan B for Minor Victim 1.

The rest of the messages continue with the grooming and requests for child sex abuse material. At one point, Defendant asks Minor Victim 1 if she is still horny and suggests that she “take care of it” but then says “Don’t forget to show me.”

When Minor Victim 1 responds that she will, Defendant responds “Good girl.” They also discuss Defendant watching Minor Victim 1 engage in a sex act on a video call. In other words, the Defendant used Minor Victim 1 to engage in sexually explicit conduct in live chats that law enforcement does not have a record of.








The U. S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas issued the following press released today:

A Kansas man was sentenced to 222 months in prison for enticing a minor to create and send him child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

According to court documents, Garrett Gayoso, 25, of Baxter Springs pleaded guilty to one count production of child pornography.

Gayoso met the 16- year-old minor online. Evidence shows the victim was quickly forthcoming with Gayoso about her age. Gayoso groomed and convinced the victim to engage in sexually explicit activity, produce visual depictions of the conduct, and then send him the images via text messages. Between August 2024 and April 2025, Gayoso exchanged text messages with the minor that contained over 100 CSAM images.

“The defendant in this case was a law enforcement officer at the time this crime occurred. It’s deeply troubling that someone who took an oath to protect and serve the public would turn out to be someone from whom our society needs protection,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan A. Kriegshauser. “Child predators are master manipulators. Children should be taught that any time someone directs them to keep secrets from trusted adults that is not someone with whom they should be communicating.”

The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) investigated the case.


Victim identified in June 25 pedestrian fatality on Range Line


(From the Joplin Police Department)

Following the initial investigation, the Joplin Police Department’s Major Crash Team determined that an adult male, identified as Jolly Matthews III, of Hattiesburg, Miss., was attempting to cross Range Line Road near 32nd Street on foot when he was struck by a northbound dune-buggy style vehicle. 

Matthews was pronounced deceased at the scene. Next-of-kin has been notified. The vehicle that struck Matthews is registered and street legal.








As the Joplin Police Department’s Major Crash Team continues to investigate this incident, it has been determined that Matthews was struck by multiple vehicles while crossing the street.

The Joplin Police Department is asking anyone with information regarding this incident to contact Sergeant Jared Delzell at 417-623-3131, ext. 1633, as this is still an open and active investigation.

The Joplin Police Department wants to remind all citizens and visitors that crossing major roadways can be dangerous. To mitigate the dangers of crossing busy roadways, pedestrians should cross the road at marked intersections or crosswalks.

Earlier news release

On June 25th, 2026, around 8:57 p.m., Joplin Police, Fire, M.E.T.S. and Newton County Ambulance were dispatched to the area of 32nd Street and Range Line Road in reference to an injury crash involving a pedestrian. 

Upon the responder's arrival, it was discovered that the crash involved one vehicle and one pedestrian. The pedestrian was pronounced deceased on scene. 








The Joplin Police Department’s Major Crash Team responded. Southbound traffic on Range Line Road was shut down for an extended period of time to investigate the crash. 

Due to inclement weather, the time had to be extended.

During the initial investigation it was determined that an adult pedestrian entered traffic to cross Range Line from east to west when the collision occurred. Next-of-kin notification has not been made at this time. The deceased was taken by the Newton County Coroner’s Office.

This incident is still an active and ongoing investigation.

DESE preparing A-F grade cards for each Missouri school district


(From the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) has submitted a proposed A-F framework for grading Missouri’s public schools and districts to the governor’s office. The submission of the A-F School Grading Framework responds to Executive Order (EO) 26-01, signed Jan 13, 2026, by Governor Kehoe, which directs DESE to create yearly A-F grade cards that reflect student outcomes.

Under the framework, DESE will produce annual grade cards for districts, schools, and charter schools. The new grade card system is an addition to Missouri’s existing accountability tools, not a replacement.








“The goal for the A–F school grading framework is to provide families and communities with a simple, comparable, and rigorous picture of school performance,” said DESE Interim Commissioner of Education Dr. Stacey Preis.

A-F Grade Card Framework

In accordance with the Executive Order, K-8 school grades will include student academic achievement, value-added growth, and growth toward proficiency in English Language Arts (ELA), literacy, mathematics, and science.

For high schools, grades will include student academic achievement and value-added growth in ELA, mathematics, and science, as well as Success Ready Graduate measures and four-year graduation rate.

The new A–F School Grading Framework offers a clear, accessible, and simplified snapshot of school performance. View DESE’s A-F framework proposal online.








“We appreciate DESE's work to develop this proposal and look forward to reviewing it as we continue to put students first and strengthen education across our state,” said Governor Kehoe. “Parents deserve clear, easy-to-understand information about how schools are performing so they can make the best decisions for their children. The A-F framework is about bringing greater transparency and accountability to Missouri's education system by giving greater weight to student outcomes rather than the administrative process.”

DESE plans to present the proposal to the State Board of Education in August.

The plan remains subject to change based on any revisions requested during the review process, per the executive order.

Kehoe takes action on budget bills


(From Gov. Mike Kehoe)

Today, Governor Mike Kehoe signed the Fiscal Year 2027 (FY27) state operating and capital improvement budget bills totaling $50.7 billion, delivering a responsible, balanced budget that invests in Missouri’s priorities while preparing for the years ahead and protecting taxpayer dollars.

“I appreciate the members of the General Assembly for their partnership in passing a budget that reflects our shared commitment to fiscal discipline and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars,” said Governor Kehoe. “After several years of historic growth in spending, this budget funds smart and necessary investments, while also taking an important step toward right-sizing government to ensure Missouri remains positioned for long-term success.” 








The Missouri FY27 state operating budget is approximately $49.8 billion after vetoes, including $15.7 billion in general revenue.

The budget includes critical investments in Governor Kehoe’s key priority areas, including:

Public Safety – $2 billion to support safer communities and law enforcement across Missouri, including funding for Missouri Blue Shield grants, Operation Relentless Pursuit, law enforcement academy scholarships, and more. Public safety budget highlights.

Economic Development – $338 million to drive business growth and innovation in the state. These budget items include funding for the Missouri Technology Corporation, a statewide apprenticeship program, Missouri One Start, and a public-private-employee shared funding child care model. Economic development highlights.

Agriculture – $59.4 million to support Missouri farmers, producers, and rural communities through investments in infrastructure and programs, including low-volume roads, Missouri FFA, and more. Agriculture budget highlights.

Education – $9.8 billion to strengthen Missouri’s education system, including the K-12 education foundation formula and transportation, Empowerment Scholarship Account Program, career and technical centers, and higher education. Education budget highlights.

Healthcare – $24.8 billion to support individuals with physical, developmental, and behavioral health needs. These budget items include funding for self-directed supports, outpatient competency restoration, and Medicaid reform. Healthcare budget highlights.

While the General Assembly's budget largely stayed within the bounds of the Governor's recommendation, it did so by using $179.1 million of one-time cash to pay for ongoing costs.








Additionally, despite efforts to curtail government spending, the state faces a projected shortfall of more than $500 million in FY28.

“State government doesn’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem, and continuing to spend faster than we grow our economy is not a sustainable path forward,” Governor Kehoe said. “Our work doesn’t end with balancing this year’s budget. By maintaining fiscal discipline and continuing to grow Missouri’s economy, we are building the foundation for an even more strong and resilient Missouri.”

To fulfill his constitutional obligation of signing a balanced budget, Governor Kehoe issued 65 vetoes, totaling over $30 million in general revenue. View the complete list of budget vetoes.

He also issued 78 expenditure restrictions, totaling $441.3 million, including $337.2 million in general revenue. View the complete list of expenditure restrictions.

The Governor’s budget vetoes and expenditure restrictions were largely limited to new projects, improper funding sources for new appropriations, or an over appropriation of various funds.

Monday, June 29, 2026

Joplin mental health counselor arrested on Oklahoma fugitive warrant

 The Joplin Police Department arrested Philip Klonowski, 36, Joplin, on a Wagoner County, Oklahoma felony fugitive warrant.

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.







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.









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

A Washburn man allegedly choked a Monett woman and stomped her kitten to death Friday, according to a probable cause statement filed today in Barry County Circuit Court.

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."

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 Joplin man was killed in a two-vehicle accident 2 p.m. Sunday on Elder Road five miles west of 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

Four businesses failed Joplin Health Department inspections this week, according to information posted on the department website. 

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

“In the morning, O Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait in expectation.”

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.”

(For more of Nancy Hughes' writing, check out her blog, Encouragement From the War Room.)