FULL VIDEO OF STATE OF OHIO V. FORCHIONE "PROBABLE CAUSE" HEARING

UPDATE:  (2:55 PM)

The SCPR has learned that Judge Michael McNulty has found "no" probable cause that Judge Francis G. Forchone committed a "theft-in-office" in his handing of the $5,000 Sandy Hook School Support matter growing out of the Scott D. Studer case.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog for background).

See the judge's order at the end of this update.

A complaining affidavit was filed with the Canton Municipal Court on February 28, 2013 by one Louis W. Demis now of Columbus, Ohio but formerly of Navarre (Stark County) Ohio.

Local media failed to inform the Stark County public about the filing of the affidavit when it was filed even though there is indication that they had access to the filing early on.

The SCPR published a blog on the matter forthwith on first learning about the existence of the filed affidavit.

Of course, both outlets (The Repository and WHBC) were all over the story once the probable cause hearing was announced.

Demis' attorney, Craig T. Conley, told yours truly that depending on his analysis of the articulated basis of Judge McNulty's decision, he may look into whether or not there is an appeal to be made.

The Report will have an analysis of the proceeding and the judge's decision in a blog planned for tomorrow.

ORIGINAL BLOG

 VIDEOS

Hearing:  State of Ohio v. Forchione

Press Conference

First Up:  Craig T. Conley

Followed By:  (same video)

Craig Morgan

The Stark County Political Report presents the entire video of the probable cause hearing of Stark County Common Pleas Judge Francis H. Forchione,

For background see the below lined blogs.

• April 22, 2013 blog, and
• April 15, 2013 blog

Press conference video:  Conley followed by Morgan.

STARK GOP & REPUBLICAN ATTORNEY & CIVIC ACTIVIST CRAIG CONLEY TRYING TO GOAD DEMS INTO FILING A ORC 3.07 & 3.08 ACTION TO REMOVE REINSTATED CO. TREAS. ZEIGLER. WOULD THAT BE A SMART THING FOR THE DEMS TO DO?

Stark County Republican Party Chairman Jeff Matthews says if anyone files an action under Ohio Revised Code Sections 3.07 and 3.08, it should be the Stark County Democratic Party.

Dems Party Chairman Gonzalez's response:  (a paraphrase)  "Our only obligation was to ask Zeigler to resign" (which Gonzalez et al has done, perhaps, repeatedly).  It would have been a godsend for Stark's organized Democrats and the Party's elected officials had Zeigler done so.

But Zeigler has repeatedly said that he did not do anything wrong in the management of his office which implicitly is to say (in the opinion of the SCPR) that he had adequate and reasonable safeguards in place to prevent his former chief deputy - Vince Frustaci - from making off with county money to the tune of what some say is $2.96 million (Frustaci has admitted to taking $2.46 million)

Moreover, county and federal prosecutors have exonerated him of any involvement in the theft itself.

At face value one might say that since Zeigler adamantly maintains that he minded the county treasury properly, that is the full explanation of why he has not heeded calls for his resignation.

But is it?

Some think that Zeigler (being wholly blameless in his eyes) is outraged that the Stark Dems "threw him under the bus" and that his insistence of reassuming office in light of the June 23rd Ohio Supreme Court decision reinstating him is sort of a revenge on the Stark Dems.

The problem for Zeigler and the Stark County organized Democrats is that the Stark County voting public seems to think that Zeigler did not have adequate and reasonable safeguards in place.  Moreover, The Report believes that the public perceives that Zeigler (before the Frustaci story broke) was a key member of the Dems' "good ole boy network" and therefore his stubborness in not resigning rubs off on most of the remaining Stark County Democratic Party officeholders.

Zeigler clearly cannot get re-elected if he chooses to run again in 2012 and his former connections to many of the remaining Democratic officeholders could be a key factor in their losing.

One has to wonder whether or not Zeigler would get a measure of satisfaction in their losing.

Back now to the focal point of this blog:  Gonzalez's rejection of the Stark GOP's (and Republican Craig Conley's) entreaty for the Stark Dems to initiate a constitutional challenge to Zeigler remaining in office.

Here is a copy of a letter sent by Conley to Gonzalez on Friday:

So, the question remains:  should the Dems take up the Republican challenge?

Con:  As pointed out by Conley a larger number of valid Stark County voters signatures would be needed (about 20,000).  While very doable given the Stark County electorate's negative take on Zeigler's handling of his office, it still would divert Party resources from the 2011 and 2012 elections, and make the Republicans' task to win whatever offices/issues are at stake much easier to achieve.

Pro:  It is likely that unless or until the Stark County voting public has cleaned its own house, they will not be of a mind to elect Democrats to anything.  Going the 3.07/3.08 route would be proof positive that the Stark Democrats (win or lose) are doing everything they can to deal with its Zeigler problems.  Win or lose, having made the effort should go along away towards Stark Countians being open to electing Democrats countywide.

Gonzalez in rejecting the Stark GOP/Conley prod is preserving Party resources.

But to what end if the Stark County public feels that Party has not done all it can to put Zeigler behind it?

STARK CO. PROSECUTOR FERRERO CASTIGATES ATTORNEY CRAIG T. CONLEY ON CONLEY'S PRO BONO WORK TO RECOVER MISSING STARK TREASURY MONEY FROM TREASURER ZEIGLER. WILL HE FOLLOW IT UP WITH A DISCIPLINARY COMPLAINT? WILL CONLEY FILE ON FERRERO?

First of all, a disclaimer:  Yours truly is writing as an opinion journalist and not as an attorney.

The disclaimer is for the benefit of Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero who in January, 2010 filed a disciplinary complaint against yours truly on the basis of work done by the Stark County Political Report (as an opinion journalist) critiquing his office's handling of the Marlboro Police Chief Ron Devies' and son Kyle's case which ended in a dismissal at the conclusion of the State's (Ferrero's office as prosecutor) case.

The complaint was dismissed out-of-hand by the Ohio Supreme Court's Disciplinary Counsel.

As for the Devies case dismissal; they are very rare indeed.  The defense, superbly represented by Jeff Jakimedes (Kyle Devies) and Richard Reinbold (Ron Devies), did not have to put on any part of their case.
The Report was not surprised in the least at the result and predicted something along the lines what materialized all along.  Stark County Common Pleas Judge Lee Sinclair in dismissing the case advanced the cause of justice.

Second, it is now time to consider the Ferrero's "in the newspaper" upbraiding of public interest attorney (pro bono - for the public good)  Craig T. Conley who represents Bethlehem Township resident Tom Marcelli (standing in for the Stark County taxpayers) for costing taxpayers money in his filing of a lawsuit against Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler claiming, in its essence, that Zeigler is "strictly" liable (meaning that Conley does not have to prove negligence on Zeigler's part) for losses of nearly $3 million during Zeigler's time in office.

Upbraiding?

Yes, that's the SCPR take on this quote of Ferrero in today's Repository, to wit: (as reported by Shane Hoover, Zeigler lawsuit agreement falls apart," to wit:

The prosecutor bristled at Conley's putting pressure on commissioners to pursue the case now, saying that Conley already has done enough in costing the county for Zeigler's defense in the pending case.

Well, apparently Attorney Conley is not taking Ferrero's word for it as to his (Conley's) actions "costing the county for Zeigler's defense in pending the case."

Conley has provided the SCPR with a copy of a public records request he has made on the Stark County prosecutor's office for records which document Ferrero's claim to The Repository (see the actual request below).

The SCPR is not surprised at all by Ferrero's "brist[ling]" as reported in The Repository.   The Report has gotten a number of accounts from law enforcement and Stark County political figures to the effect that Ferrero has a difficult time dealing with the words or actions of others which he finds disagreeable.

One was when he reportedly had an outburst at a political gathering when a discussion about former Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr's asking long time Stark County Board of Elections member Billy Sherer to step aside from the board in favor of Attorney Sam Ferruccio.

Other outbursts by Ferrero are said to have happened at the Stark County Police Chiefs Association (SCPCA) when discussions were underway about whether or not the SCPCA would support the retention of the "imposed" 0.50 of one percent sales tax as done by Commissioners Bosley, Harmon and Vignos in December, 2008.

The Report has gotten feedback that Ferrero has been less than complimentary (to be euphemistic about it ) about the opinion analysis done by yours truly on various Ferrero activities in and about Stark County. 

Now this outburst on Conley.

Conley has been critical of Ferrero's delay in getting moving against Zeigler because he is concerned that taxpayers will lose their priority on any Zeigler-held assets if there is a judgment against Zeigler.

It seems to the SCPR that John Ferrero thinks only he can criticize.  But nobody had better criticize him.

The Stark County Political Report views Craig Conley as an honorable, courageous man who does more "pro bono" work than most, if not all, Stark County attorneys. 

Now that Conley appears to be in a Ronald Reagan-esque "trust, but verify" modality, what will be Ferrero's action?

Will there be more outbursts?

In a little over two years, John Ferrero will have to run for re-election. The SCPR urges members of the Stark County bar to start mulling over who will oppose him for re-election.  Last time, thanks to Stark County Republican Party chair Jeff Matthews; Ferrero ran unopposed.

A very good curative for the likes of John Ferrero is for them to experience a good stiff dose of political competition.

Will Jeff Matthews blow it again?

Here in the full Conley records request.