Jamie Gentry LaPrad apparently thinks the law applies to everyone but her.
A domestic violence protective order was issued in June 2014 against LaPrad, an assistant district attorney in Davidson County, at the request of a fellow prosecutor, according to the Lexington Dispatch. Davidson County’s local newspaper reported that “Alan B. Martin, also an assistant district attorney for Davidson County who lives in Mecklenburg County, petitioned for the domestic violence order against LaPrad.”
Before going any further, we begin by noting the Jamie Gentry LaPrad saga has all the trappings of a “West Virginia Invades North Carolina” byline: As we’re about to see, the Old North State’s doling out so-called justice through LaPrad is perhaps as squalid as it gets.
To be sure, even a cursory read of Alan Martin’s court filings (most of which are included in the link at the bottom of this post) will likely leave you both disgusted and disturbed by the top law enforcement officials in Davidson County—and in particular, by Miss Jamie Genry LaPrad.
The revelations in those filings, however, also lead us to caution that this post only covers parts of them. That said, we strongly encourage an independent review of Martin’s filings (link below) for added insights into the “mentally unstable woman” who—despite this arguably apt characterization—had the power to single-handedly shape the lives and futures of alleged suspects in North Carolina.
Notably, an attorney who has practiced in Davidson County for nearly fifty years told us the only way to get justice in a case prosecuted by LaPrad was to get counsel who neither knew nor had any connection to her.
With that in mind, we now return to the restraining order LaPrad’s co-worker secured against her, after calling off the romance between them.
Petition for protective order against LaPrad
Alan Martin’s petition says that LaPrad, in one month’s time, sent him over 169 uncalled-for emails and 493 uncalled-for text messages. The petition includes what appears to be screen shots of several of the texts that LaPrad allegedly sent, some of which featured what we’ll (*cough* euphemistically) call “selfies” (and have redacted from the linked filings).
Others involved LaPrad asking Martin about “toys” she had at his house:
Hey baby, what was that you wanted me to do to you again?
Something with the “toys” that I still have at your house?
Or maybe with the big candycane [sic] that you enjoy using on me so much?
And still others, which appear to have been sent while LaPrad was at work–i.e., on North Carolina taxpayers’ dime–suggest a jilted LaPrad may have asked police to “be on the lookout” for Martin and his (new) girlfriend drinking and driving:
Are you coming to work today?
Oh your [sic] on the phone with your girlfriend. Well if you are planning your dates for Thursday or this week, I would think twice about that. Especially about being seen with her and drinking and driving. There may be a few bolos out.
And if you think that’s intense, that’s not even half of it.
LaPrad’s physical threats
According to court filings, LaPrad
[T]hreatened to cut [Martin’s] balls off, made repetitive comments to [Martin] that she would not honor his requests to cease contact, sent emails and text messages that [Martin] believed demonstrated an intent to terrorize [Martin], and put him in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. [LaPrad] continued to pursue pattern of behavior intending to terrorize [Martin].
The filings further allege that Martin had reason to believe that LaPrad intended to harm him, and that LaPrad communicated the following physical threats to Martin either in person, by email, or by text message:
- “And if I do see you around Davidson or anywhere for that matter with another woman or if you even sit beside another woman at lunch, dinner, whatever it may be, I will cut your balls off, especially after all the times you cheated on me.”
- “I’m just trying to figure out which girl you left with tonight because when I find out who you are cheating on me with, see previous text.” (referencing above text message in which LaPrad threatened to “cut [Martin’s] balls off”)
- “When something happens to you, the girl you’re seeing, or her family, you will be the cause of it.”
Emotional and psychological torment
There is more. The court documents also say Martin “fe[lt] harassed not only by the sheer volume of communication he [had] receive[d from LaPrad], but by the content of the messages,” explaining that he had been “emotionally and psychologically tormented” by the following threats communicated by LaPrad:
- “And after everything you have done to me and after how horribly you’ve treated me and continue to treat me, I wouldn’t test me …. You will be miserable and that’s what you deserve for the way you treated me.”
- “I think that’s fair, to treat you the way you are treating me. And if at any point in time, you want the hell to stop, you can talk to me.”
- “I know you plan your dates at work, but how sweet to love on her before work. I’ll just have to hack your phone records like you did my email account to find out who she is …. “
- “I’m closing next week. Full approval finalized today! I’m sorry this does not make you happy. I’m not moving for you, I’m moving for me. If you change your attitude, change the way you treat me, and plan a time to chat with me, everything will be fine. If you chose [sic] not to do the above, then it won’t work out. See above texts. I’m sorry, it really is in your hands.” (referring to LaPrad’s moving into a condominium located 200 yards from Martin’s residence)
- “If you … indeed truly want things to get better, then you’ll stop making me miserable and you’ll sit down and talk to me at some point this week. If you want things to get worse, then you won’t. The choice really is up to you but this is the absolute last chance, and if you don’t talk, trust me, you’ll regret it.”
- “[I]f I do see you around Davidson or anywhere for that matter with another woman or if you even sit beside another woman at lunch, dinner, whatever it may be or even talking to another woman, it will not be pleasant. In a month, you will be begging for a truce, but in a month, it will be too late. Think about this now.”
“Why stop there?” Jamie LaPrad thought to herself, perhaps. According to Martin’s complaint, LaPrad also communicated several statements which indicated she was stalking him. The complaint states: “The fact that [Martin] is being followed by a mentally unstable woman leaves [him] fearful for the safety of himself, his family, and any other people with whom he associates.”
The complaint then lists these statements that LaPrad communicated to Martin:
- “Oh and you’re on the phone with your little slut now so you can adequately warn her.”
- “If you want to bring some other woman into it and her children then that’s up to you but I’ll make you and her and possibly her children just as miserable as you’ve made me.”
- “Oh your [sic] on the phone with your girlfriend. Well if you are planning your dates for Thursday or this week, I would think twice about that. … And if you think that’s intense, that’s not even half of it.”
- “So your new gf is from South Carolina. Thanks for the info[.]” (LaPrad was at Martin’s residence, and Martin had a visitor whose vehicle was parked in his driveway with South Carolina registration plates)
Threats to Martin’s children
The complaint also alleges that LaPrad threatened to harass Martin’s young children (it lists two children, both under ten-years-old) in a message that stated:
And since you’ve done everything in your power to turn the kinds [sic] against me, I’ll make sure law enforcement shows up at your house re the hacking into my email when you have the kids so they will know the real truth about their daddy. The daddy they would rather not be with.
Pornographic images of LaPrad
To top things off, according to the complaint, LaPrad further harassed Martin “by sending him multiple text messages and emails containing pornographic images of herself.”
All the while, Jamie Gentry LaPrad was representing the State of North Carolina in criminal proceedings.
Copies of the filings are below.
Martin v. LaPrad