Important Facts Ignored in Latest PNJ Hit Piece that Attempts to Portray Me in a False Light with Actual Malice

I suppose I should not be surprised when a former employee of Gannett's PNJ called me yesterday and the conversation quickly went to the two recent PNJ articles that do not reflect reality and actually attempt to portray me in a false light deliberately.  Not the first time PNJ has done this to me, probably won't be the last.  Ironic that these antics always occur during campaign season......

"I'm sorry this happened and they did this to you, she stated.  When I was there, they had a strict policy of never printing anonymous documents they did not first independently verify"  said this former employee.  I guess they are justifying this publication by saying the "anonymous source" that provided them the stolen texts had a document that they verified with Jonathan Owens' copy.  Wait, though:  What if that copy was manipulated, and that  copy was provided to the PNJ's source  which matched up with Jonathan's--- but both of which are stolen and neither of which have actually been verified as accurate?  

Looks like journalistic integrity and standards have been lowered in the organization in light of poor economic performance, decrased relevancy (and subscriber numbers) and vanishing ad revnue coupled with higher costs.  Plus, it's easier to sell newspapers if the headlines are salacious, scandalous, and sensational.   Facts, who cares, right?

So in this morning's hard copy edition, they have once again published what is an outright falsehood, and did not bother to ask my side.  True, I said I would not comment on the ongoing federal investigation into how my data was stolen--- but I most certainly would have commented on this garbage quote.

"Using keyword searches related to public business, the News Journal reviewed the texts and reported that Bergosh referenced Edler more than 100 times in texts that seemingly should have been released as a matter of public record under Florida Sunshine Law, but were not." 

I have never once in 17 years as an elected offical failed to produce a public record, ever.  Not once, and I did not in this instance, either.  I'm not the disgraced former commissioner with more ethics violations, recommendations for removal from office, Federal and State lawsuits and continuing problems even after he left office than any other commissioner in the history of this county.  No, unlike that guy-- Doug Underhill----- and his acolyte, minion, secretary--- Jonathan Owens--------I follow the law to the letter even though I say things and do things the PNJ don't like.

So the fact is this.  I never received a request for public records related to these texts that I failed to produce, and I have never failed to produce any of my personal text messages regarding the Edler case. The county received voluminous requests for other emails and correspondence, and data requests, which the lawyers are working to fulfill via the discovery process.  Importantly:  The lawyers did not request these text messages under a PRR, nor did anyone else.  Had a request been made of me, I would have fulfilled it as I have always done and have a track record of doing.  But instead, my entire text file was stolen.  Mention of this was made by the lawyers for Edler via email on March 27th.  Attorneys for Edler sat on these purported text messages of mine for two months and did not provide them to the attorneys for the county until nearly two months later, on May 24th.  I was not notified until June that there was potentially a breach of my data, but I was concerned because I was never requested to provide my text messages relevant to this case because I was told the other side already had "all of them."

So instead of getting the facts from the source, PNJ runs with an article that intimates I failed to produce a record, which is a lie.  It is untrue. It is libel.

The truth of the matter is, this discovery process continues, and now we are working on a fair way to redact the files from my phone that were stolen in an attempt to protect attorney-client privileged communications, exempt records, and personally identifiable information that is contained within that stolen text file while simultaneously working to maintain our obligation to produce responsive records.  And no final decision has been made on what will be released because it is tied up in the courts.

First email notification March 27th, 2023

Escambia County finally  receives purported Bergosh text file, June 1

--Other notable falsehoods:  The "quote" the PNJ references about "no public data on private cell phones" is not the position of the county's attorneys, and that was noted by the magistrate judge herself during the hearing in a back and forth with county attorneys.  Why leave that quote in there when it is clearly not the position of the county's attorneys and that was acknowledged in court because it is an inaccurate, non-factual assertion?