PROSECUTOR FILES COMPLAINT AGAINST WEST SIDE BOY FOR AGGRAVATED MENACING.

Why can Prosecutors file complaints but citizens are denied that right?

By Doug Deepe, Investigative Reporter

(Posted 9:45 a.m., Monday, July 28, 2003)

Assistant Scioto County Prosecutor James Scott Smith walked into Scioto County County Common Pleas Juvenile Court and filed a criminal complaint against a 15 year old West Side boy for allegedly using the internet to threaten a Portsmouth West High School teacher.

The complaint filed on April 4, 2003 by Assistant Prosecutor Smith states that the student "On or about April 4, 2003, did knowingly cause another to believe that the offender would cause serious physical harm to the person or property of the other person, the other person’s unborn, or a member of the other person’s immediate family…..causing (the victim) to believe that she would be seriously harmed by depicting violent acts against her on an "internet website."

According to the complaint filed by Assistant Prosecutor Scott Smith the actions of the West Side boy is a first degree misdemeanor.

The website in question is no longer in operation so the Sentinel can not verify what was on the website that would make the female teacher at West Portsmouth High to fear for her life. Other students that have seen the website didn’t believe that the student intended "harm" to the teacher. West Portsmouth students claim the student that posted the information and caricatures on the website was upset with the female teacher and was just trying to get back at the teacher by posting negative things about her on the webpage.

The actual complaint has a serious question on it. Why is a "stamped signature" for Judge James W. Kirsch of the complaint? Did Judge Kirsch actually read the complaint and sign the complaint using a rubber stamp? Why would a judge use a rubber stamp to sign a complaint put in front of him for signature?

The student pled not guilty to the charge on April 14, 2003 and the Sentinel is not sure if the case has yet to be resolved.

This case brings us to another question. Why is it that a prosecutor can get access to a local judge to have a "complaint" reviewed but a private citizen can not?

This case proves that there is a "double standard" set forth for prosecutors, law enforcement etc, and then the rest of the citizens.

Judge Howard Harcha III simply dismissed Billie Ashley’s affidavit for complaint in July 2003 without even allowing Ashley to call witnesses into the courtroom to be heard.

These activities should not go unnoticed the next time elections role around for these elected judges and prosecutors. The law should be for ALL THE PEOPLE not just the prosecutors and judges.

D D

SCIOTO COUNTY JUDGE HOWARD HARCHA III DISMISSES WOMANS COMPLAINT AGAINST PORTSMOUTH POLICE OFFICER WITHOUT INVESTIGATION OR SUMMONS TO OFFICER AS REQUIRED BY LAW.

Judge Harcha III dismissed case even though witnesses were ready to testify.

By Doug Deepe, Investigative Reporter

(posted 9:00 a.m., Thursday, July 24, 2003)

Judge Howard Harcha III proved what most citizens in Scioto County have been saying about our local judges is pretty accurate. People say that the Judges ignore the Ohio Revised Code and make up their own laws as they see fit to help their friends, family or co-workers.

On July 15, 2003 Billie Ashley filed an Affidavit for Complaint against Portsmouth Police Officer Todd Bryant claiming that Bryant had committed either "gross sexual imposition" or "sexual imposition" against her on July 4, 2003.

Ashley filed her complaint using Ohio Criminal Rule 4 (A) which states as follows:

RULE 4. Warrant or Summons; Arrest

(A) Issuance.

(1) "Upon complaint.  If it appears from the complaint, or from an affidavit or affidavits filed with the complaint, that there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed, and that the defendant has committed it, a warrant for the arrest of the defendant, or a summons in lieu of a warrant, shall be issued by a judge, magistrate, clerk of court, or officer of the court designated by the judge, to any law enforcement officer authorized by law to execute or serve it.

The finding of probable cause may be based upon hearsay in whole or in part, provided there is a substantial basis for believing the source of the hearsay to be credible and for believing that there is a factual basis for the information furnished.  Before ruling on a request for a warrant, the issuing authority may require the complainant to appear personally and may examine under oath the complainant and any witnesses.  The testimony shall be admissible at a hearing on a motion to suppress, if it was taken down by a court reporter or recording equipment.

The issuing authority shall issue a summons instead of a warrant upon the request of the prosecuting attorney, or when issuance of a summons appears reasonably calculated to ensure the defendant's appearance."

Two retired judges reviewed Ashley’s Affidavit for Complaint and Judge Harcha III’s ruling and both retired Judges say that Judge Harcha III didn’t follow the Ohio Criminal Rules of Procedure. Both retired Judges agreed that, "He (Judge Harcha III) was required by Criminal Rule 4 to bring the affiant in before him and inquire about the affidavit for complaint, or at a minimum, allow her to produce other witnesses to prove her charges. He pitched it with no regard for the criminal rules and that’s sad."

Judge Howard Harcha III at no time allowed Billey Ashley to come before him and testify or provide witnesses to back her story about being sexually assaulted by Portsmouth Police Officer Todd Bryant. Witnesses were available to testify and affidavits have been signed by other witnesses confirming Ashley’s complaint against Bryant.

Judge Harcha III simply reached into what some call "the judges bags of tricks and deceit" and used another criminal rule that had no connection with what was before him (Harcha III) and simply dismissed a crime against a crooked cop.

Witnesses have stated that Judge Harcha III's secretary has been seen having lunch with Portsmouth Police Chief Charles Horner at El Toro Loco. Chief Horner has suits pending in Judge Harcha III's court. Will that case get thrown out too?

On July 18, 2003, just three days after the Affidavit for Complaint was filed by Billie Ashley, Judge Harcha III signs a "JUDGMENT ENTRY" that reads as follows:

Pursuant to Rule 7(A) of the Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure, the within cause is hereby dismissed.

Criminal Rule 7 (A) involves either a bill of information or an indictment and has absolutely nothing to do with an Affidavit for Complaint. Here is criminal rule 7(A)

RULE 7. The Indictment and the Information

(A) "Use of indictment or information.  A felony that may be punished by death or life imprisonment shall be prosecuted by indictment.  All other felonies shall be prosecuted by indictment, except that after a defendant has been advised by the court of the nature of the charge against the defendant and of the defendant's right to indictment, the defendant may waive that right in writing and in open court.

Where an indictment is waived, the offense may be prosecuted by information, unless an indictment is filed within fourteen days after the date of waiver.  If an information or indictment is not filed within fourteen days after the date of waiver, the defendant shall be discharged and the complaint dismissed.  This division shall not prevent subsequent prosecution by information or indictment for the same offense.

A misdemeanor may be prosecuted by indictment or information in the court of common pleas, or by complaint in the juvenile court, as defined in the Rules of Juvenile Procedure, and in courts inferior to the court of common pleas.  An information may be filed without leave of court."

Why is it that local citizens are constantly denied their rights to file criminal complaints against police officers in Portsmouth and Scioto County and that the local Judges protect these men by not following the Ohio Revised Code.

Criminal Rule 4 is clear. When an Affidavit for Complaint is filed, a Judge should review the affidavit, call witnesses (which were available had the Judge brought Ashley before him before he made his ruling) and take testimony under oath, and then decide if there is enough evidence to have Officer Todd Bryant arrested.

Judge Harcha III just showed not only a lack of respect for Billie Ashley’s rights, but Judge Harcha III showed disrespect for the Ohio rules of criminal procedure by this blatant unjust ruling.

It didn’t take long for corruption to rear its ugly head back in Scioto County Common Pleas Court, because this is a corrupt decision. People thought this type of action left after the last election. Guess you were wrong people.

PORTSMOUTH MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK LEROY KEGLEY REFUSES TO ALLOW WOMAN TO FILE SEXUAL ASSAULT AFFIDAVIT AGAINST PORTSMOUTH POLICE OFFICER

Scioto County Common Pleas Court Clerk Mildred Thompson files the affidavit.

By Doug Deepe, Investigative Reporter

(Posted 10:30 a.m., July 16, 2003)

An affidavit for complaint captioned the State of Ohio vs. Todd Bryant, accusing Todd Bryant of felony gross sexual imposition and misdemeanor sexual imposition was filed with Scioto County Common Pleas Court Clerk Mildred Thompson on July 15, 2003.

Billie Ashley claims that on July 4^th, 2003 Detective Todd Bryant "Did have sexual contact with another, not the spouse of the defendant (Bryant), to wit: Billie Ashley, by purposely compelling said Ashley to submit to force or threat of force, in violation of Ohio Revised Code Section 2907.05, entitled "Gross Sexual Imposition."

Ashley further claims "Defendant (Bryant) did have sexual contact with another, not the spouse of the defendant (Bryant), to wit: Billie Ashley, while knowing that the sexual contact was offensive to the other person or was reckless in that regard, and/or while knowing that the other person’s ability to appraise the nature of or control the defendant’s (Bryant’s) conduct was substantially impaired and/or while knowing that the other person submitted because of being unaware of the sexual contact, in violation of Ohio Revised Code Section 2907.06 entitled "Sexual Imposition."

Yesterday morning, Billie Ashley went with her attorney, James Banks of Dublin, Ohio, and attempted to file an affidavit for complaint as permitted by Ohio Revised Code Criminal Rule 4 E with Portsmouth Municipal Court Clerk Leroy Kegley. Clerk Kegley informed Attorney Banks that he (Kegley) could not accept the affidavit for complaint because of "local court rules forbidding him to take the affidavit."

Ohio Revised Code Criminal 4 E says that any citizen can swear out an affidavit for complaint against a person that commits a crime in Ohio and file the notarized affidavit with a Clerk of Court, Judge or Prosecuting Attorney.

When confronted with Ohio Revised Code Criminal Rule 4 E Clerk Kegley continued to refuse to accept the affidavit for complaint against Detective Todd Bryant of the Portsmouth Police Department.

Attorney Banks took the affidavit for complaint to the Scioto County Common Pleas Court Clerk Mildred Thompson and offered the complaint under Ohio Revised Code Criminal Rule 4 E and Clerk Thompson immediately filed the complaint as required by the Ohio Revised Code.

The action of Clerk Kegley and the establishment of local rules of the Portsmouth Municipal Court that conflict with the Ohio Revised Code may lead Attorney James Banks to file legal action against the City of Portsmouth for his client Billie Ashley.

There were numerous witnesses inside and outside the Portsmouth Municipal Clerks Office when Clerk Kegley produced the illegal court rules and told Attorney Banks that he (Kegley) couldn’t take the affidavit of complaint.

It’s not clear what action Attorney Banks will take against either the Clerk of Portsmouth Municipal Court or the City of Portsmouth at this time.

Scioto County Clerk Mildred Thompson assigned a criminal case number to the case, #03CR525, and stated she would send the affidavit for complaint to the Scioto County Prosecutors Office for action.

Local attorneys stated yesterday that they were pleased that Attorney Banks forced the issue above Clerk Kegley because the Portsmouth Municipal Court Rules are illegal and that citizens of Portsmouth and Scioto County have had their rights denied for decades.

When questioned why they (the local attorneys) never pressed the issue of the illegal rules with the local judges, one attorney stated, "They would never assign us a case if we took them on concerning their local rules, it’s something you just don’t do."

Attorney Banks and Scioto County Clerk Mildred Thompson proved that the Ohio Revised Code is the law of Ohio and Scioto County whether the Portsmouth Municipal Court Judges and Clerks want to accept it or not.

DID SCIOTO COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT JUDGE WORK OUT A SECRET DEAL IN CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 03CR000153?

By Doug Deepe, Investigative Reporter

Sunday, June 22, 2003 at 9:25 p.m.

Angie Meddock of 1905 Robinson Avenue, Portsmouth, Ohio appeared in Scioto County Common Pleas Court on March 24, 2003 and pled guilty to three counts of trafficking in drugs, felonies of the 3^rd degree. Meddock was allowed to go free on bond pending her pre-sentence investigation by the Scioto County Probation Department.

On May 7, 2003, Meddock appeared back in Scioto County Common Pleas Court, before Judge Howard Harcha III and Meddock was allowed to withdraw her three felony three guilty pleas. The court docket sheet in case number 03CR000153 states,

"Upon defendant’s (Meddock) motion to withdraw her guilty plea of 3/20/03; after hearing of arguments by counsel, the court finds said motion well taken & allows the defendant (Meddock) to withdraw her plea; this case is hereby dismissed; The defendant will plead to a bill of information in case # 03CR360.

On the same day, May 7, 2003, Judge Howard Harcha III, accepted a bill of information agreed to by the Scioto County Prosecutors Office allowing Meddock to plead guilty to 1 count of possession of drugs, a felony of the 4^th degree, one count of deception to obtain a dangerous drug, a felony of the 5^th degree, and one count of illegal possessing of drug document, a felony of the 5^th degree.

Meddock was allowed to drop her guilty pleas of 3 felonies of the 3^rd degree to 1 felony of the 4^th and 2 felonies of the 5^th degree.

Meddock was again allowed to go back out free while the Scioto County Probation Office did another pre-sentence investigation.

On June 3, 2003, Meddock’s attorney, Chris Gerard, filed a motion with Judge Harcha III, requesting that his client be allowed to enter into a drug treatment program in lieu of being sent to prison.

The court docket sheet does not indicate whether Judge Harcha III granted Meddock’s motion.

Meddock’s initial pleading of guilty, which was accepted by an "unknown Judge", (the Judges name on the docket sheet has been deleted) would have prevented Meddock from being allowed to enter into a drug treatment program; Meddock was facing prison time.

Judge Howard Harcha III was prepared to sentence Meddock in the original case on May 7, 2003 at 9:30 a.m., and had notified Attorney Gerard and Meddock to be in court for her sentencing.

So what could have transpired to get Judge Harcha III to let a woman drop her guilty pleas, after the taxpayers paid for the pre-sentence investigation, and to re-plead her case at much lower crimes? Only Judge Harcha III knows that answer.

The Sentinel is following up information that there may be a Dr. Crawford connection with this "sweetheart deal" and that information is coming together for another article. D D Sunday, June 22, 2003.

The Sentinel was contacted by two inmates recently released from the Scioto County Jail claiming that a work release inmate, David Platt, arrived back at the Scioto County Jail from his work release job for a private contractor at the Elks City Club in an inebriated condition. The released inmates further stated that Platt told them that he was given the alcohol from a bail bondsman in exchange for Platt’s agreement to file a complaint against another bondsperson. Carolyn Lykins, of Carolyn’s Bail Bonds.

The Sentinel contacted Scioto County Sheriff Captain Dave Hall about the allegations. Captain Hall investigated the matter for the Sentinel. Captain Hall stated that David Platt did arrive back to the Scioto County Jail from a work release detail unescorted but the supervisor on duty doesn’t recall smelling alcohol on Platt.

Carolyn Lykin’s stated to the Sentinel that she confronted Captain Dave Hall about Platt returning to the jail drunk. Lykin’s also says she told Captain Hall that she had information that Platt was given alcohol by a male bondsman who got Platt to sign a complaint against Lykin’s that could be used to get Lykin’s bail bonding license revoked or suspended. Captain Hall confirmed that this confrontation with Lykin’s did occur this week at the Scioto County Courthouse.

The Sentinel has made inquiry to the State of Ohio to inquire if a complaint was filed against Lykin’s and we will publish any information we receive as soon as it is available.  (Thursday June 5, 2003)