Emails show Robert Wilkinson lied to state investigators and the public, claims these messages don’t exist.
OCEAN SPRINGS, MS – Multiple residents filed complaints with the Mississippi Bar, alleging that City Attorney Robert Wilkinson unlawfully represented both the City of Ocean Springs and its private vendor, Securix, at the same time.
The city enlisted Securix in 2021 to combat uninsured motorists through the use of mounted cameras. Wilkinson played both sides of the deal – partnering with the company, while simultaneously advising the city on the program.
In his formal defense letter to the Mississippi Bar, Wilkinson deflects blame onto residents, business partners, the media — and this reporter. At no point does he accept responsibility for his actions.
In one passage, he even chastises the complainants for being too involved in city government, criticizing them for regularly attending Board of Aldermen meetings and offering critique during public comment.
Throughout his defense package, Wilkinson maintains that, due to the conflict of interest, he has completely removed himself from anything to do with Securix in Ocean Springs. In one entry, he wrote:
“At all times I disclosed my representation to Securix and recused myself from providing legal advice to the City.”
That was a lie.
Mayor Kenny Holloway, Aldermen Mike Impey, Rob Blackman, and Rickey Authement submitted letters in support of Wilkinson, telling state investigators that he had recused himself.
They lied, too – as did former Police Chief Mark Dunston.
Mississippi law is clear: when a City Attorney recuses himself due to a conflict of interest, he is prohibited from participating in any discussions, formal or informal, related to the matter. This includes communications with elected officials, city staff, or outside parties. Proper recusal requires the attorney to refrain from offering advice, influencing decisions, and must leave the room during any meeting — whether a Board of Aldermen session, staff meeting, or other city function — where the topic is discussed.
These internal emails — spanning from 2022 through 2023 — show Wilkinson doing the exact opposite of recusing himself. He coordinated with court officials, advised the judge, negotiated ticket processing, coached the vendor through legal strategy, and even used his son to lobby the mayor regarding payment collections.
He did not step away. He ran point.
And to be clear: Wilkinson will not respond to questions from GC Wire prior to publication. So, the record speaks in his place — and it speaks volumes.
This is not interpretation. These are his own words, sent from his own email accounts, while actively managing both sides of a program that financially benefited him and his allies.
If Wilkinson truly recused himself, the following emails would not exist. But they do.
The Emails
The following emails are just a sample from hundreds that show his active role in both advising the city and Securix simultaneously. Some seem mundane, while others expose a level of behind-the-scenes control that makes his claim of recusal impossible for anyone to believe.
Wilkinson is actively managing court coordination.
In this email, Wilkinson is confirming court hearing dates with City Municipal Judge Calvin Taylor and referencing a future planning meeting with both the judge and Police Chief. That’s not neutral oversight — that’s hands-on involvement in the implementation of a legal process.
“I am sure that you, the Chief and I will meet prior to this to discuss your plans for addressing these uninsured motorists…” This shows Wilkinson anticipating involvement in judicial strategy — despite claiming to the Mississippi Bar that he had fully recused.
Wilkinson relays judicial criticism of Securix’s platform to company officials — as their advisor.
In this email, Wilkinson writes to Securix officials immediately after a conversation with Judge Taylor that states he — and others within the police department — believe the Securix ticketing website “looks like a scam,” noting numerous public complaints.
Wilkinson is not just passing on information — he is relaying the private concerns of a judge to a private vendor and instructing them to “change this ASAP.” It is a role incompatible with recusal and shows a deeper level of influence over the program than disclosed.
Wilkinson nudges the judge to steer defendants away from court and into a profit-generating diversion program.
In this email that is directly to Judge Taylor, Wilkinson outlines a legal strategy to push defendants into the Securix Diversion Program rather than exercising their right to a court hearing. Securix does not get paid if the ticket recipient chooses to have his day in court.
Wilkinson then confirms that someone from his own law firm will be present in court, as will Securix representatives — a clear conflict of interest. This email does not merely show he failed to recuse; it shows he was directing judicial conduct to benefit a private client while presenting himself as an officer of the court.
Wilkinson offers to leverage his position with the police chief to silence a citizen complaint.
This email shows Wilkinson responding to a Securix executive’s frustration over a resident complaint. His response: “To hell with her. Do you want me to call the Chief?” The woman had contacted police and was reportedly upset about how her ticket was handled. Wilkinson offers to intervene directly with the Chief of Police to shut the complaint down.
This behavior reveals how Wilkinson used his influence within City Hall to protect Securix and retaliate against concerned citizens. His short response says loads. It reflects a disturbing willingness to use the city’s police resources as a private enforcement arm for a vendor, and it further obliterates his claim of recusal.
Wilkinson acknowledges he is “the face of Securix” and fears public fallout.
In this lengthy email chain, Wilkinson reports a conversation he had with Police Chief Mark Dunston about a Securix employee named Grace who harassed a resident who demanded she have her ticket adjudicated in the courtroom. The judge dismissed the ticket. The email details the embarrassment caused to the city — and Wilkinson — and documents an alderman’s concern about Securix acting as an investigative body.
A key admission here is Wilkinson’s own words, saying the Board and mayor see him as “the face of Securix.” This is not something a recused city attorney says. He then warns Securix that “If the City of Ocean Springs terminates its contract, it will be virtually impossible to get another City in Mississippi.” More proof that Wilkinson had a vested interest in the Ocean Springs program as the model city for expansion, directly contradicting his sworn statements to the Bar that he removed himself from the process.
Wilkinson praises a company email designed to protect against legal exposure.
Responding to an internal disciplinary message sent by a Securix executive to employee Grace Kelly, Wilkinson writes: “This letter is perfect… you covered our rears.” The context is a legal liability incident resulting from Grace’s behavior in court. Wilkinson is actively coaching the vendor on how to shield itself from legal consequences — and by using “our,” he includes himself in that liability.
This is not the behavior of someone who has recused. It is the behavior of someone managing the legal fallout of a program he has helped design, implement, and sustain.
Wilkinson insists the police chief sign off on a collections letter — to ensure political cover.
In this email, Securix discusses using a collections agency to extract money from ticket recipients who haven’t paid. Wilkinson replies, “I want it to be absolutely clear Chief Dunston approves. That is crucial that he approves this letter.”
This shows Wilkinson continuing to operate as the legal strategist for both the city and Securix, managing not only communications but the political fallout if collections are challenged. He knows the optics are dangerous — and seeks to preempt blowback by wrapping the collections process in the Chief’s official endorsement letter.
As the program collapses, Wilkinson deploys his son to lobby the mayor.
This email reveals Wilkinson’s son Alex — who served as Operations Director for Securix — was dispatched to meet with the mayor as Ocean Springs was moving to end the program. Wilkinson writes: “Alex is meeting with the Mayor tomorrow… I believe there is a solution to the collection issue.”
This email confirms Wilkinson was still managing strategy and political relationships even as the city tried to unwind its involvement. His son’s presence in high-level meetings shows a coordinated attempt to preserve the financial benefits of the program, even as public opposition mounted and legal scrutiny intensified.
The Letters
The following letters were submitted to the Mississippi Bar by Mayor Kenny Holloway, Police Chief Mark Dunston, and Aldermen Mike Impey, Rob Blackman, and Rickey Authement. Each letter defends Robert Wilkinson’s conduct, claiming he properly recused himself and provided no legal advice to the City of Ocean Springs regarding the Securix program.
Two of the letters — from Impey and Authement — are nearly word-for-word identical, and several others follow the same structure, phrasing, and defense points. There is substantial evidence that all five letters were written or heavily guided by the same individual, likely as part of a coordinated effort to influence the outcome of the Bar investigation.
These letters stand in direct contradiction to hundreds of internal emails showing Wilkinson’s continued legal involvement and strategic direction of the program.
In his letter to the Mississippi Bar, Mayor Kenny Holloway acknowledges that Wilkinson had a conflict but says he continued to rely on him at public meetings to respond to questions from residents. That admission is a direct contradiction of the law. Under Mississippi ethics rules, a city attorney who has recused himself is not only prohibited from advising city officials — he is required to leave the room entirely when the matter is discussed.
Wilkinson wasn’t just in the room. He was speaking on behalf of the city about the very program he claimed to have stepped away from — with the mayor’s approval.
Alderman Rickey Authement’s Letter
Authement states that Wilkinson disclosed his conflict and did not provide legal advice to the city on the Securix program. He claims Wilkinson’s presence at meetings was limited to responding to public questions at the mayor’s request. However, this statement directly contradicts Authement’s own prior remarks.
In early 2024, Authement publicly stated that he was unaware of Wilkinson’s financial ties to Securix until he read about them in media reports. Shortly after, he made a formal motion to replace Wilkinson’s firm as City Attorney, citing those undisclosed ties as the reason.
Weeks later, after losing his re-election bid, Authement reversed his position and signed this letter defending Wilkinson. The letter is nearly identical in language and structure to the one submitted by Alderman Mike Impey, indicating the likelihood of coordinated drafting.
Impey asserts that Wilkinson disclosed his conflict of interest and recused himself from all legal discussions regarding Securix. He states that outside counsel was brought in for all legal matters concerning the contract with Securix, which we know is false. This letter is nearly identical in wording and structure to the one submitted by Alderman Authement.
Alderman Rob Blackman’s Letter
Blackman offers a short statement claiming Wilkinson recused himself and did not provide legal guidance on the Securix program. He cites board minutes as evidence but does not address the extensive email record showing Wilkinson’s direct involvement in implementation and strategy or Board meetings where he witnessed Wilkinson addressing residents about Securix.
Former Police Chief Mark Dunston’s Letter
Former Police Chief Dunston claims that he alone made all decisions about the Securix program and that Wilkinson neither offered nor provided legal advice. This is directly contradicted by Dunston’s own emails. He was copied on several emails where Wilkinson directed court policy and legal response, making his denial unreliable. Also, in a January 2025 email Dunston admitted that after Ocean Springs adopted the program, he was placed on the Securix payroll while simultaneously serving as police chief.
What the Record Shows
The emails published above paint a clear and indisputable picture: Robert Wilkinson did not recuse himself. He lied to state investigators and he lied to the public.
Despite telling the Mississippi Bar that he stepped away from all matters involving Securix in Ocean Springs, he continued to direct, advise, coordinate, and influence nearly every aspect of the program — both on the city’s side and the vendor’s.
The letters submitted by the mayor, the police chief, and multiple aldermen don’t just echo Wilkinson’s false narrative — they help construct it. In some cases, they contradict public statements made by those same officials just months earlier. In others, they mirror one another so closely that the coordination is unmistakable.
This was not a misunderstanding. It was not a miscommunication. It was a calculated effort to conceal misconduct and protect those in power from accountability. When public officials lie to state investigators to protect each other, the public deserves the truth.
