The Gatekeepers

● Tips are now live — tips@peoplevsbiloxi.com

My dear litigation warfare diary, the day is December 3rd, 2025. It is a Wednesday. It is cold as f***. And so we gather—a meeting of the minds, hot cocoa in hand, sense of justice in the minds, fingertips eager to type, documenting our continued struggle against the dino-kangaroos and their loyal Abiders.

Outside, the Gulf Coast shivers through an unseasonable chill. Inside, we plan.

Speaking of documentation—on November 18, 2025, an inspection occurred at the property. Inspectors Robert and Felicia were present. They found zero violations. Zachary Cruthirds, defense counsel, was supposed to send the report. The undersigned has been waiting ever since.

As we take a sip of cocoa and look through the window at my cool deck—still unfinished, still held hostage by manufactured violations and perjured affidavits—our resolve is renewed. We wipe a bit of hot cocoa off our cheeks and instead of removing it completely, we pause. We form it into a battle symbol. War paint for the litigation warrior.

Then we clean it off because it got sticky. But the battle mindset remains.

Yesterday, as documented in federal court, we filed our defense—an Opposition to the Motion for Protective Order. Let us recap what they seek protection from, dear readers.

Public records requests.

That's it. That's the emergency. The existential threat that required Currie Johnson & Myers to rush to federal court within hours of receiving a records request. They want a federal judge to protect them from... the topic of this very article. Requests for billing invoices. Questions about how much taxpayer money flows to our beloved (and corrupt) City Attorney, Peter C. Abide—the tallest 5-foot-tall man in Biloxi.

But we digress. Today's entry concerns the gatekeepers who make such concealment possible.

Today's entry concerns two names that appear on countless documents but rarely in headlines. Two public servants who process the paperwork that makes the machine run. Two gatekeepers who could have said no at any point—and never did.

Catherine McMahan. Stacy Thacker.

They look innocent. They are not.

Let us begin.

He Who Follows, Shares the Fault?

There is an ancient philosophical question that haunts the halls of accountability: does the subordinate who follows orders share the guilt of the superior who gives them?

The answer depends on three elements: intent, willingness, and knowledge.

Consider the soldier ordered to fire. Consider the bureaucrat told to stamp denied. Consider the clerk instructed to shred documents. Are they merely instruments of their superiors' will, or are they independent moral agents capable of choice?

The undersigned would argue that in most cases, the answer is complicated. A clerk who unknowingly processes a fraudulent document bears no moral culpability. A secretary who transmits an email without understanding its contents is not a conspirator. The law has long recognized that mere presence at a crime scene does not make one a criminal.

Catherine McMahan and Stacy Thacker are not innocent bureaucrats caught in forces beyond their comprehension. They are knowing participants in a systematic scheme to obstruct public records access, generate illegal revenue for outside contractors, and facilitate constitutional violations against Biloxi citizens. The documentary record proves it.

Meet the Gatekeepers

Stacy Thacker: The Absent Custodian

She takes her title way too seriously. Nothing leaves her "custody."

Smaug from The Hobbit—the dragon who hoarded gold beneath the Lonely Mountain for centuries—would be jealous. He would lose Employee of the Month to Stacy Thacker. At least Smaug eventually let Bilbo see the treasure. Stacy won't even let you see a permit application.

And while we are not talking about Stacy's Mom...

Every records request she routes to the City Attorney generates revenue. Every denial she transmits creates legal work. Every delay she facilitates extends the billing cycle. She's not just a custodian. She's a profit center with a hit single.

Here is how the scheme works.

Stacy lets Abide take over her statutory duties. Instead of the City Clerk reviewing records requests—which would cost the City nothing beyond her existing salary—every request gets routed to Currie Johnson & Myers. Abide and his associates "review" the requests at $150 per hour. They draft denial letters. They prepare cost estimates. They consult on exemptions. They bill, and bill, and bill.

Every time Stacy routes a request to Abide instead of handling it herself, she generates billable hours for his firm. Every time she transmits an Abide-drafted denial under her signature, she launders his obstruction through her official authority. Every time she fails to assert her statutory independence, the meter keeps running.

But here is where the story gets truly delicious.

The undersigned's pressure worked. The undersigned's public records requests, ethics complaints, and federal lawsuits exposed the scheme. Abide got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

So what did he do? He tried to change the law.

On February 18, 2025, Abide introduced Agenda Item 4A—proposed amendments to Chapter 2, Article IX of the City Code governing public records. The amendments specifically targeted each violation the undersigned had exposed:

• Where the undersigned challenged Abide's unauthorized control over records, the amendment inserted "the City's Legal Counsel" as official gatekeeper with indefinite deadline extensions.
• Where the undersigned contested discriminatory fees, the amendment changed mandatory "shall" to discretionary "may."
• Where the undersigned exposed unlawful attorney billing for custodian functions, the amendment replaced the statutory $5.00 per hour with "hourly rate of the lowest level employee or contractor competent to respond."

A brief aside on that last one: "competent" is a dangerous word for Peter Abide to put in writing. Given the documented performance of his office—fabricated engineering findings, perjured affidavits, motions filed for people who aren't clients, cost estimates pre-dated by six weeks—one might question whether anyone at Currie Johnson & Myers meets the "competent to respond" threshold.

He was trying to legalize his violations after getting caught. Retroactive immunity through legislative laundering.

The City Council rejected Item 4A by a 4-2 vote on February 25, 2025.

Councilman Tisdale asked the question that killed the bill: "If we are in compliance with state statute now, why is there a need to change?"

The answer, of course, is that they were not in compliance. Abide knew it. The undersigned proved it. And the City Council—to their credit on this single occasion—refused to make his crimes legal.

But despite the rejection, Abide continues the same practices. His December 5, 2024 cost estimate demanded $1,300 for records about Mark Seymour—Abide's undisclosed business partner—representing a 26,000% increase over statutory rates.

Read that again. Thirteen hundred dollars. For an estimate. To tell you how much more money you would need to pay to actually see the documents.

This is not public records administration. This is extortion with a fee schedule.

The Bird Dog Connection

Why $1,300 just for an estimate? Perhaps there were too many records to review?

Or perhaps... Bird Dog LLC.

Peter Abide and Mark Seymour jointly own Bird Dog LLC. Together, they hold millions of dollars in real estate. Meanwhile, Abide—as City Attorney—approves city contracts that flow to Seymour's engineering firm. No conflict of interest disclosure. No recusal. Just contracts approved and real estate acquired.

But wait—it gets better.

For over ten years, Bird Dog LLC's publicly disclosed registered agents have been employees of Seymour Engineering. Not Abide's employees. Not independent agents. Seymour Engineering staff, handling the paperwork for Abide's real estate investment company.

Note: Every annual filing between 2011 and 2023 lists Seymour Engineering employees as registered agents for Bird Dog LLC—Peter Abide's real estate company.

Interesting timing. After years of holding this property through Bird Dog LLC, Peter Abide has decided to sell. The listing price? $3.7 million dollars.

Why did Abide close Bird Dog LLC and list this property for sale just as these "little details" about his business relationship with Mark Seymour became public? Only Peter Abide can answer that question.

But he's a meanie and won't talk to us.

If you're interested in the property, feel free to reach out to the listing. Just know that your potential seller is a defendant in three federal civil rights lawsuits and the subject of ongoing RICO allegations. Buyer beware.

They are not even pretending anymore.

Our beloved Peter, on top of his Dixie Mafia wannabe gangster credentials, apparently has "engineering" aspirations as well. He may not hold a PE license, but he certainly engineers plenty of things—schemes, conflicts, obstructions, and the occasional Motion for Protective Order when someone asks to see his billing records.

The $1,300 estimate was never about cost recovery. It was a wall. A barrier designed to prevent anyone from discovering that the City Attorney is steering public contracts to his secret business partner while operating out of a building they own together.

And Stacy Thacker enables every bit of it.

Catherine "Katie" McMahan: The Active Fabricator

Catherine McMahan serves as Deputy City Clerk and Public Records Officer. If Thacker is the absent custodian who abdicated her duties, McMahan is the active implementer who executes the obstruction scheme.

The documentary record contains a smoking gun that transforms McMahan from passive participant to active conspirator.

On January 27, 2025, McMahan created a cost estimate for a public records request.

On March 12, 2025—forty-four days later—the undersigned submitted the request that the estimate supposedly responded to.

Read that again. McMahan created a cost estimate for a request that had not yet been made. She pre-dated the document to January 27, then provided it in response to a March 12 request.

This is not a clerical error. This is not miscommunication. This is document fabrication. This is evidence of a premeditated scheme to obstruct public records access with predetermined denial mechanisms manufactured in advance.

The Franchise Agreement Lie

But the franchise agreement episode reveals something even more damning.

When CenterPoint Energy operated in Biloxi without paying permit fees and without following ordinance requirements, the Building Department needed a justification. McMahan provided one: she claimed in writing that a franchise agreement existed between the City and CenterPoint that exempted them from these requirements.

When the undersigned requested production of this franchise agreement, McMahan had to admit the truth: no such agreement exists. She retracted her position in writing.

This is not following orders. This is fabricating justifications for enterprise members. A prosecutor would call this an act in furtherance of a criminal enterprise. The undersigned, being more liberal in terminology, might simply call her an "Abider"—a groupie in the Peter Abide fan club.

CenterPoint actually paid the default 2% franchise fee. The franchise agreement lie was never about avoiding that payment. It was about something more valuable: avoiding ordinance compliance and permit fees.

CenterPoint never paid permit fees to the City of Biloxi. CenterPoint never applied for an exception from permit fees. The estimated unpaid fees exceed $100,000. McMahan's fictional franchise agreement provided the justification for this non-payment.

One hundred thousand dollars in fees that CenterPoint apparently thought they got away with. Protected by a lie from the Deputy City Clerk.

The Utility Company Conflict

But why would McMahan—or anyone at the City—protect a utility company's non-compliance? The answer lies in understanding who profits from utility company relationships.

Peter Abide is a partner at Currie Johnson & Myers, P.A.—the law firm that holds the City Attorney contract. Abide's business partner Mark Seymour owns Seymour Engineering—the firm that receives city contracts approved by Peter Abide. Seymour is also Abide's partner in Bird Dog LLC.

When a utility company like CenterPoint violates City ordinances, fails to pay permit fees, and creates safety hazards through cross-bore incidents, the "City Attorney" has a structural incentive to protect utility companies rather than enforce the law against them.

The fox is not merely guarding the henhouse. The fox sits on the board of directors of the chicken processing plant, bills the henhouse $560,000 per year for "security services," and employs clerks like McMahan to fabricate paperwork explaining why chickens keep disappearing.

The Nuremberg Defense Doesn't Apply

The famous Nuremberg trials established a principle that the modern world has largely accepted: following orders is not a defense when the orders are manifestly illegal.

McMahan and Thacker might argue they were merely following Peter Abide's instructions. These defenses fail for three reasons.

• Knowledge: Thacker received written warnings about the illegality of delegating custodial duties to outside contractors. She was put on notice. She continued anyway.
• Willfulness: McMahan did not accidentally pre-date a cost estimate. Document fabrication requires affirmative action. You do not mistakenly create a document dated six weeks before the event it supposedly responds to.
• Ongoing Pattern: This is not a single isolated incident. This is a systematic pattern affecting multiple citizens over an extended period.

When you knowingly participate in illegal conduct over an extended period, creating false documents and transmitting denials you know lack legal basis, you are not an innocent subordinate. You are a co-conspirator.

The Revenue Generation Scheme

Why would Thacker and McMahan participate in this scheme? The answer lies in understanding how the scheme benefits everyone except the citizens requesting records.

When Thacker was the statutory custodian processing records requests, the cost to the City was minimal. A clerk's salary. Normal operating expenses. The work was part of her job duties.

When Abide controls records determinations, every decision becomes billable. His law firm charges approximately $150 per hour. Every records request that requires "legal review" generates revenue. Every denial letter drafted by an attorney generates fees. Every cost estimate that requires attorney input becomes a billable event.

The City pays Abide's legal fees with tax money. This cost is not transferred to citizens requesting records—it is absorbed by taxpayers while citizens pay inflated access fees on top.

McMahan and Thacker facilitate this revenue generation. Every denial they transmit generates more legal fees. Every inflated cost estimate they issue generates more consultation charges. Every request they fail to answer within statutory timeframes requires more attorney involvement to manage the fallout.

They may not receive direct payments from the scheme. But they enable it. They are necessary participants without whom the scheme could not function.

The Records That Disappeared

The obstruction scheme extends beyond denial. It includes active concealment.

McMahan and Thacker sanitized and withheld criminal records related to the July 25, 2025 arraignment in the undersigned's case. Arrest records, booking documents, detention records—files that are known to exist—were not provided.

They transmitted document productions that were incomplete. Service requests that initially contained incriminating admissions were later produced in sanitized versions with the admissions removed.

They participated in concealing records about CenterPoint Energy franchise violations, attorney billings exceeding $562,000 annually, and the "Shrimp Boil" payments from CenterPoint to city employees.

When you sanitize documents before producing them, you are not following orders. You are destroying evidence. When you withhold records you know exist, you are not making a clerical error. You are obstructing justice.

The December 1st Request and December 2nd Warning

On December 1, 2025, the undersigned submitted a public records request seeking all billing invoices and payment records for Currie Johnson Griffin & Myers, P.A.

Within hours, Currie Johnson filed a Motion for Protective Order in federal court seeking to prohibit the undersigned from communicating with City Council and making public records requests.

The timing speaks for itself.

On December 2, 2025, the undersigned sent a follow-up email placing McMahan and Thacker on formal notice of their personal liability exposure. The email was sent to:

The notice stated plainly:

The notice gave them seven working days under Mississippi Code § 25-61-5. The clock is running.

When a citizen documents constitutional violations, places public servants on notice of personal liability, and copies the entire elected government of a city, silence is not neutrality. Silence is complicity.

The Trap

The undersigned has a little confession to make, my dear diary.

When there is a suspicion of conspiracy, the undersigned sets traps. Sends photographs to the culprits when he visits the FBI building in New Orleans. Sends emails like the December 2nd warning, copying every council member, every official, every person who might claim ignorance later.

The true goal is similar to playing poker and calling all-in.

You see, these communications serve a dual purpose. On the surface, they provide formal notice of legal obligations and personal liability. But underneath, they force everyone at the table to show their hand.

When fifteen people receive documented evidence of constitutional violations, conflicts of interest, and potential criminal conduct—and not one of them responds—what does that silence tell you?

If you are part of the conspiracy—or if you have decided that protecting the enterprise is more important than protecting the citizens—you do exactly what every single recipient of the December 2nd email did.

Nothing.

The undersigned did not expect responses. The undersigned expected exactly what happened: collective silence revealing collective complicity. Every council member who stays silent has answered the question. Every official who fails to act has shown their hand.

The trap is not the email. The trap is the choice the email forces. And they have all chosen.

Sunlight Is the Best Disinfectant

But now we have a new layer of pressure, my dear readers.

You.

Maybe because of your visit to this page, things will change. At least on the surface. Maybe we will receive the public records we requested. Maybe McMahan will suddenly discover her statutory obligations. Maybe Thacker will remember she is the custodian, not Peter Abide. Maybe a council member will find their voice.

Because you get to see it now. Because the undersigned is documenting everything. Because this article exists in the permanent record of the internet, searchable, shareable, impossible to memory-hole.

McMahan and Thacker have operated in darkness. Their pre-dated cost estimates, their sanitized document productions, their franchise agreement lies—all of this happened in the shadows of bureaucratic obscurity where no one was watching.

Now you are watching.

Every reader who shares this article adds sunlight. Every citizen who asks questions at a council meeting adds sunlight. Every journalist who investigates adds sunlight. Every voter who remembers in the next election adds sunlight.

But here is the truth, my fellow justice seeker: you are already helping.

By reading this page, you have added the weight of your eyes to a scale that tips decisively against them. Every view is counted. Every moment of attention is pressure. Every reader who reaches this sentence has joined a growing audience that McMahan, Thacker, and their enablers cannot ignore.

Corruption requires anonymity. It requires that no one is watching. It requires the comfortable assumption that misconduct will disappear into filing cabinets and bureaucratic memory holes.

You have taken that comfort away.

They Look Innocent

Catherine McMahan and Stacy Thacker do not look like criminals. They process paperwork. They answer phones. They work in an office building on Lameuse Street. They probably have families and mortgages and concerns about retirement.

The same could be said of every bureaucrat who ever facilitated institutional corruption.

The Nazis who processed transport orders looked like clerks. The Enron accountants who hid losses looked like professionals. The Wells Fargo employees who opened fake accounts looked like bankers.

Corruption does not require cartoonish villainy. It requires ordinary people making small compromises, day after day, until they find themselves complicit in schemes they might once have found unthinkable.

McMahan and Thacker made their choices. They received warnings and ignored them. They created fabricated documents. They transmitted denials they knew were improper. They participated in a scheme that enriched private attorneys at the expense of public access.

They are not innocent bystanders caught in circumstances beyond their control. They are knowing participants in a corrupt enterprise.

The philosophical question is answered. He who follows shares the fault—when he knows the conduct is wrong, when he has the power to refuse, and when he continues participating anyway.

McMahan and Thacker meet every element of that test.

They are, by any reasonable definition, criminals.

What Comes Next

Catherine McMahan and Stacy Thacker are not yet named defendants in the federal civil rights litigation. They have been given a chance. The December 2nd notice provided them an opportunity to fulfill their statutory duties, to choose law over loyalty, to step out of the shadow of Peter Abide's obstruction scheme.

Seven working days under Mississippi Code § 25-61-5. The clock is running.

The documentary evidence exists. The pre-dated cost estimate. The inflated quotes. The sanitized documents. The ignored warnings. The franchise agreement that never existed. Whether that evidence becomes the basis for amended complaints adding McMahan and Thacker as defendants depends entirely on what they do next.

But beyond any legal proceedings, there is a question of public accountability. These are public servants, paid by taxpayers, holding positions of public trust. The undersigned has documented their conduct. The citizens of Biloxi can now see what their clerks have been doing with their records requests.

The choice is theirs. The record will reflect it.

All statements on this page are supported by documentary evidence filed in Cases 1:25-cv-00178-LG-RPM, 1:25-cv-00233-LG-RPM, and 1:25-cv-00254-LG-RPM, United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Court filings are accessible through the PACER system.

Transparency & Right to Rebuttal

Unlike Mr. Creel—who files criminal charges without warning, conducts inspections without consent, and issues stop work orders without stating reasons—we believe in due process.

Before publication, communications were sent to the following parties on December 1-2, 2025 inviting them to rebut any fact contained in this article:

• Stacy Thacker — City Clerk, Records Custodian
• Catherine McMahan — Deputy City Clerk, Public Records Officer
• Zachary Cruthirds — Currie Johnson & Myers, P.A.
• Joseph H. Ross — Currie Johnson & Myers, P.A.
• Michael Whitehead — Page Mannino Peresich & McDermott, PLLC
• Jerry Creel — Building Official / Director of Community Development / Code Enforcement Director / Permit Official / Zoning Administrator
• Richard Weaver — City Official
• Mayor Andrew "FoFo" Gilich
• Wayne Gray — Ward 1 Councilman
• Anthony Marshall — Ward 2 Councilman
• Mike Nail — Ward 3 Councilman
• Jamie Creel — Ward 4 Councilman
• Paul Tisdale — Ward 5 Councilman
• Kenny Glavan — Ward 6 Councilman
• David Shoemaker — Ward 7 Councilman

My dear citizens of Biloxi: your elected officials received documented evidence of constitutional violations, conflicts of interest, and potential criminal conduct.

To be fair, this was yesterday. The undersigned believes in due process, even for those who deny it to others. Perhaps a council member is drafting a response right now. Perhaps the Mayor's office is preparing questions. Perhaps someone among the fifteen recipients is gathering the courage to do the right thing.

The undersigned will update this article if any response is received. The offer of equal prominence for any rebuttal remains open.

But the undersigned has sent many emails to these officials over many months. The pattern is established. The silence is familiar. If December 2nd breaks that pattern, this article will celebrate the change.

Until then, the clock runs. Seven working days under Mississippi Code § 25-61-5. The statutory deadline does not care about the holiday season.

Any party named in this article is invited to submit a signed, sworn statement identifying any specific inaccuracy and providing documentary evidence of the correct information. Any response received will be published in full, unedited, with the same prominence as the original article.

The undersigned welcomes a defamation lawsuit even more—discovery in such a proceeding would be illuminating for all parties.

As of publication, we have received no response.

The offer remains open. Silence is also a response. The record will reflect it.