Consol. Sch. Dist., 439 U.S. 410, 415-16, 99 S.Ct. 693, 58 L.Ed.2d 619 (1979). “The private nature of the statement does not ... vitiate the status of the statement as addressing a matter of public concern.” Rankin, 483 U.S. at 387 n. 11, 107 S.Ct. 2891. As the Rankin Court noted, “[A] purely private statement on a matter of public concern will rarely, if ever, justify discharge of a public employee.” Rankin, 483 U.S. at 388 n. 13, 107 S.Ct. 2891. Likewise, the Supreme Court of Alabama, in Roberts v. Joiner; 590 So.2d 195, held that statements made by two police officers to a mayor concerning certain town council members was a matter of public concern, even though the statements were not made public or directed toward the public. 590 So.2d 195. See also Todd v. Kelley, 783 So.2d 31 (<HOLDING>). ’ More important than the number of people to
holding chief of police an executive officer because a member of the executive branch and an officer recognizing a public employees first amendment right to address matters of legitimate public concern holding that statements made only to supervisor and chief by police officer were matters of public concern holding police officer is a public official holding that issues of prison security public safety and official corruption are matters of public concern