Over the years I have attended many trials, city, state and federal at virtually every level.

Most were in pursuit of news gathering, some were as part of corporate leadership and litigation and some civil cases wherein I was involved.

On March 29th, I attended the most unusual court hearing in my life span. It was the Riverwalk case in Augusta before Superior Court Judge Duncan Wheale.

It was so unusual that I hasten to write my reflections while my memory is still fresh.

Typically you would ask, how did it come out? My answer is I'm not sure. We won on some motions, but not our motion for Summary Judgement. The opposition, The City of Augusta, didn't win on their motion for Summary Judgement either and they failed on their motion to strike our presentation and accompanying documentation of evidence supporting it. As I proceed you will see why this is important.

Usually, after a hearing you have some definition of a result. This is still up in the air as the conclusion was Judge Wheale will write his order, then furnish it to both sides for acceptance or rejection, or further discussion or amendment. If there is no agreement, which is likely, he can proceed to write his order as he sees fit.

Until that process is complete, we're not sure where we're headed. It became obvious early in the hearing that an appeal might be likely, particularly in light of part of our pleading regarding the First Amendment. This type appeal normally goes to The Georgia Supreme Court.

The most unusual part of the case centered around Judge Wheale's reluctance to rule on the Georgia statute regarding removal or desecration of monuments or memorials associated with military service. This aspect is center to our case. It represents an important decision not yet acted upon by any court.

This led to an exchange between Judge Wheale and Steve Boynton, counsel for GHC and others, regarding the role of a judge in the interpretation of Georgia statutes passed by the General Assembly and signed to law by the Governor. The outcome was there was still no ruling on the statute or the intent of the legislature.

As a purely personal opinion from one who has no legal bearing, it seems to me on appeal there could be a possibility this case could be remanded to the Superior Court and Judge Wheale to rule on the central issue in the case. This would create a basis for appeal beyond First Amendment considerations, for either side.

Rest assured, with unlimited taxpayer resources, the City of Augusta relishes the opportunity to appeal against a plaintiff such as GHC which admittedly has limited resources.

Without addressing this issue, Judge Wheale in effect ignored what we contend is a violation of the statutes, meaning there will be no change in the position Augusta has taken by the removal of Second National flags and memorial markers from the Riverwalk park.

Judge Wheale made it plain in his comments that he does not consider himself a judicial activist and has no desire to change status quo or make law from the bench regardless of his personal opinions. This brought the exchange with Mr. Boynton stating that personal feelings should not prevent the judge from making a decision based on the merits of the case in relationship to the established law.

There is no question in my mind that Judge Wheale did not wish to rule on the merits of the motion, hoping to pass it off to the appeal process. For that reason it was necessary for our counsel to fight furiously to have the motion by the opposition to strike our pleadings and documentation denied. We prevailed.

We must now wait for Judge Wheale's order and the opportunity to discuss it which he indicated he will provide. Disagreement on the order may cause the judge to make a more definitive ruling and the basis for an appeal by either side which exists anyway.

The more I think about the frustrations and expense of litigation, the more I'm convinced we need to go to our friends in the legislature and get them to amend certain sections of the Georgia code which directs in plain terms the intent of the legislature thereby eliminating any chance of courts skirting around issues or passing the buck to another level.

This is far from over. We'll try to keep you informed as developments occur.

Special thanks from all of us at GHC to Don Donaldson, veteran Savannah attorney and loyal SCV activist who is co-counsel for GHC and those who have joined us in this case. Don has made significant contributions to this case and we all need to let him know our appreciation and respect.

Also participating at the case in Augusta were our Secretary-Treasurer, Lum Petitt and our Director, Woody Highsmith.

This can't be concluded without thanks to all of you who have contributed to the Riverwalk fund. Without you, we couldn't be involved in a first-of-its-kind legal fight in Georgia. Thanks for being on the front lines with us. It looks like we have more to do. We're proud to be associated with you.