The case that was closed in 23 minutes.
In any community, transparency and truthfulness are critical for maintaining trust and fostering a sense of security among residents. Recently, our community was shaken by an alleged act of vandalism against Cody Yawn, a well-known figure in Camp Branch Acres. Cody’s dramatic social media posts painted a vivid picture of victimhood, with claims of targeted harassment, video evidence, and a strong intention to press charges against the perpetrator. However, a closer examination of the facts, particularly the official police report, raises significant concerns about the accuracy and truthfulness of Cody’s statements.
Discrepancies in Cody’s Claims
- The Missing Video Evidence
- Cody’s Claim: On social media, Cody repeatedly stated that he had video footage of the incident and would share it if the perpetrator didn’t come forward by a specific deadline. This was a critical element of his public narrative, designed to convince the community of the seriousness of the situation.
- Reality: According to the police report, Cody admitted that no such video existed. The camera was not even pointed at his car on the day of the alleged incident. This stark contradiction between his public statements and the reality documented by law enforcement is deeply troubling.
- Timeline Inconsistencies
- Cody’s Claim: Cody suggested that the vandalism occurred while he was attending a POA meeting, implying that the incident was targeted and directly related to his community involvement.
- Reality: The police report indicates that the timeline was far more ambiguous, with the incident possibly occurring anytime between 9 AM and 1:30 PM. This lack of correlation undermines Cody’s narrative of a targeted attack. Law enforcment was not contacted until after 6PM, and was contacted by the vehicle’s owner (not Cody)
- Confusion Over Tire Damage
- Cody’s Claim: Initially, Cody described the tire damage as a “slash.” Later, he changed his story, claiming the tire was punctured by a needle and even shared a graphic of a hypodermic needle to emphasize the point.
- Reality: The officer who inspected the tire reported a small puncture at the tread and noted that it could easily have been caused by running over something, rather than an intentional act of vandalism. This raises serious questions about the credibility of Cody’s dramatic description of the damage.
- Intent to File Charges
- Cody’s Claim: On social media, Cody asserted that he intended to press charges if the perpetrator did not come forward, projecting a sense of determination and seriousness. At one point, he even declared that “action has been taken,” leading his followers to believe that he had already involved law enforcement.
- Reality: The police report reveals that Cody only contacted the Sheriff’s office after receiving significant pushback from members of the Facebook group, who questioned the validity of his claims. In truth, no charges were filed, and Cody merely requested that the incident be logged for informational purposes. This delay and the misleading statement about taking action further undermine his credibility.
- Ownership of the BMW
- Cody’s Claim: Cody has stated that the BMW is his “baby” and much better than his previous POS vehicle.
- Reality: The police report clarifies that the BMW is actually owned by someone else, a person named K Barnes – this is Kelly (his mom). Barnes is a pevious last name for her – of which she has many. This discrepancy further calls into question the reliability of Cody’s statements.
- Misrepresentation of Law Enforcement Comments
- Cody’s Claim: Cody claimed that the sheriff suggested the act had “all the signs of someone looking to seek approval” and that the perpetrator was likely someone new to the area.
- Reality: There is no evidence in the police report that such a conversation ever took place. This appears to be a fabrication, designed to add weight to Cody’s narrative and manipulate public perception.
- Original Complaint and Suspicious Activity
- Cody’s Claim: The initial call to the police was classified as a complaint of “criminal mischief,” a serious charge that implied intentional vandalism.
- Reality: After a brief investigation (23 minutes), the officer quickly closed the case and reclassified the incident as “suspicious activity.” Given the discrepancies in Cody’s story and the lack of supporting evidence, one might wonder if the truly suspicious activity in this case was Cody Yawn’s own behavior. Was the suspicious activity really the result of Cody’s overblown narrative rather than an actual crime?
Conclusion: Can Cody Yawn’s Word Be Trusted?
In light of these discrepancies, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Cody Yawn’s account of the “Tennis Ball Terrorist” incident is riddled with inconsistencies, exaggerations, and outright falsehoods. The dramatic narrative he crafted on social media does not hold up under scrutiny, particularly when compared with the official police report.
Cody’s decision to embellish or fabricate details of the incident suggests a troubling pattern of dishonesty. While he sought to portray himself as a victim, the reality appears to be that he has misled his neighbors and undermined the trust that is so essential to our community.
Moreover, Cody’s premature claim that “action has been taken,” when in fact he had not yet contacted the Sheriff’s office, highlights his willingness to deceive and manipulate for attention. It was only after facing substantial skepticism from the community that he finally reached out to law enforcement, further casting doubt on his motives. It is ironic that “like a man” he hid behind someone else to call and do his dirty work for him.
And what about the reclassification of the incident from “criminal mischief” to “suspicious activity”? Was the real suspicious activity the officer observed related to the dubious nature of Cody’s claims? This reclassification raises additional concerns about the credibility of the entire incident.
As we move forward, it is imperative that we base our actions and judgments on verified facts rather than dramatic but unsubstantiated claims. The integrity of our community depends on it.
For those who value truth and transparency, this incident serves as a reminder to critically evaluate the information presented to us, especially when it comes from individuals who have shown a propensity to distort the truth.
Let us remain vigilant and committed to upholding the values that truly strengthen our community: honesty, integrity, and accountability.
It’s a real shame the officer was used as a prop in this drama – wonder what the investigating officer will think of this? This was a waste of law enforcement time and resources.
This picture of the officer leaning against the car – it’s taken from an angle up to down. It is also taken with the officer not at all concerned about being photographed. The image is grainy – like the picture was taken from a security camera. High angle looking down, relaxed subject, grainy resolution – it appears Cody’s cameras were working just fine. However, who would want to post a picture of themselves vandalizing a car?
Poor Theresa, thinking she was being clever with that selective capitalization, but only getting 2 out of 3 of the dots correct – CMH
REQUEST FOR SCREENSHOTS
Cody, as always, was the master of the delete and edit button on Facebook. However, with him pointing fingers at so many and having so many arguments with various individuals, I’m sure somebody has the “full” transcript of his tales of woe. Please send any additional documentation that you feel needs to be added to this story to publicinfo@campbranchacres.org We will be posting a follow-up to this story to fully document his dishonesty. However, in the meantime – most of us can remember the crazy things said during this time. Rest assured – any screenshots or documentation we receive will be sanitized to remove personal information about the contributor.
We received this additional documentation from a concerned citizen, where Cody claimed that he couldn’t share video due to an “ongoing investigation”:
MRS. FOIA
Please note, we redacted personal information. Some of those involved may be unaware of their collusion in this incident. We also removed some personal information about Cody, because it wasn’t necessary to show the proof here, and we don’t post unnecessary public information for harrassment – a practice known as doxing – which Cody has participated in.
THANK YOU
A special thank you to Felicia Michael at the Trinity County Sheriff’s Office, who processes public information requests. After receiving this report from a concerned citizen, we contacted Felicia for a copy to verify the accuracy.
Public information requests for the Trinty County Sheriff’s Office can be initiated by emailing tcso@co.trinity.tx.us
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.