No True Bill: Exoneration and Vindication Part I

Tuesday of this past week I was fully and completely exonerated of doing anything illegal associated with the news articles and allegations surrounding the stolen and improperly released county files and text messages that had been used as some sort of "evidence" I violated the Florida Sunshine Law.  

I was investigated for months and months over allegations I did things I did not do--- and accusations that I committed crimes I did not commit. 

Of course I knew I was innocent.  I follow the law.

This past Tuesday an 18 member Grand Jury looked over all of this and declined to prosecute due to the fact there was no evidence I committed a crime.  They issued a "No True Bill."  I have requested this public record from the clerk and she and her attorney have refused to send a signed copy of it to me.  Instead, I have obtained the above copy in the interim from the office of the State Attorney.

So how did this happen? 

Back in December several false accusations were made about me very publicly in an orchestrated "hit"  designed to effectively ruin my reputation and destroy me politically.  Reckless, Irresponsible, and reprehensible.   

Making matters worse--these histrionics were perpetuated by a then employee of the county, Steve Stroberger, and his boss, sitting county commissioner Mike Kohler.  

Sure, everyone saw it for what it was.....It was a set up job from the get go, played to maximum effect at what was supposed to be our jovial and festive Christmas meeting, the last meeting of the year somewhere before Santa Clause Spoke and then again after the Grinch gave the BCC cookies and a proclamation.  Stroberger's cringe-worthy antics can be viewed in minute 13:53 of this video. Then his boss, Mike Kohler, piled on with this garbage at minute 12:40 of this video.

These two, the commissioner and the secretary, took their best shot at me, writing letters and emails to the Governor demanding I be removed from office and simultaneously demanding an investigation of me by the State's Attorney over what these two geniuses decided unilaterally was a "Sunshine Law Violation" and a "clear case of Gerrymandering!" (of course they were dead wrong, but I digress...)

This was the conclusion these brainiacs reached after they read a PNJ hatchet job and some stolen county text messages that had been manipulated.

"You should resign!"  Said the commissioner's secretary. (He was hoping I would to make his run for my seat all the easier.  Not going to happen)

The real reason this happened was that Steve Stroberger wants to win my seat so He and his boss together can run the west side of Pensacola--and like Doug Underhill and Jonathan Owens in 2020--they want D2 to run D1.  So they took a kill shot at me with baseless allegations I committed a sunshine violation based on stolen messages that were manipulated.  Truth?  Who cares about that!  They just want to win an election!

Ain't going to happen.

So, within a week of that ugly spectacle of a meeting  right before Christmas-- the Office of the State Attorney committed to looking into the matter and issued a press release stating this.  Multiple news articles covered their announcement.  And they did investigate.  And they subpoenaed my unadulterated copy of my iPhone backup. And they referred the issue to the Grand Jury.

Meanwhile, I cooperated every step of the way and understood that everything on my iphone's backup that had been stolen (60,000 + text messages and more than 1,600 color photographs) was subject to inspection for evidence of any crime.  

I had actually already signed an unconditional writen release allowing for this unfettered search of these files six months earlier (nearly a full year ago now) when Law Enforcement met me and the County Administrator in my office on June 11th of last year.  They were there with the FBI confiscating county servers and files after it was learned that someone at the county stole confidential, privileged and personal identification information from the county's IT office and disseminated it inappropriately and unlawfully, unredacted, to multiple persons over state lines and to multiple lawyers at multiple firms actively involved in litigation against the county.  And yes--you guessed it--some of the data in the stolen files was protected attorney-client privileged information related to that particular litigation.  (That is the reason former D2 Secretary Jonathan Owens is now facing a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge and as much as a $20,000.00 sanction at the Florida Division of Ethics because in their opinion probable cause exists that he violated Florida Statute 112.213(8).)

 Much more interesting and current information on this weird and surreal situation in part II.

Jonathan Owens' Ethics Problem: What is the Process from Here?

The Florida Commission on Ethics met yesterday in Tallahassee, and at that meeting the commission supported, via a unanimous vote, Commission Advocate (prosecutor) Elizabeth Miller's position that probable cause exists that Jonathan Owens violated state Ethics law.

Owens' attorney, in a really obnoxious, aggressive way, attempted to conflate other issues and other matters unrelated to this hearing during his time at the podium to convince the commission members his client Owens did no wrong.  He attempted to vilify me and blame the victim.  He tried to say his client did not get these stolen county files because of his position as an employee when he worked at the county.  This attorney also argued Owens did not get such data in the course of his job duties--which I found to be telling--because in the media in interviews Owens argues, disingenuously, that he received information like these stolen files all the time within his duty as an aide. Nobody believed that claim by Owens, by the way.  Owens' attorney's flaccid, weak, boorish and harried arguments were ultimately unpersuasive to the commission members present.  (Owens and his attorney did not even file their own answer brief to counter the Advocate's assertions......... which seems odd) 

Setting that aside--the only two questions commissioners asked Owens' attorney demonstrated they had read the advocate's very detailed and factual brief---- and the cognitive dissonance they were hearing from Owens' attorney, juxtaposed with the Advocate's narrative,  showed on their faces.  Watch the hearing at minute 6:00 of this video, below:

 

 "Isn't HIPPA implicated here, don't folks have to get permission before releasing medical records" asked one commissioner, to which Advocate Miller acknowledged the existance of concurrent civil proceedings and also the criminal investigation by law enforcement over the theft of the files and Owens' unlawful possession of said files under FL Statute 817.5685.

The other question was really shrewd:  "Did all the other commissioners recieve these files or just your client Owens?" asked another commission member.  To which Owens' attorney gave a nondescript, terse response. "I don't know."  (Truth is, only Owens received these files, no other commissioner did, and NOBODY believes this stolen file from the county servers just magically appeared on his desk or that it was slid under his office door as he has also publicly stated).

After only two questions from the commission members, the vote was called and an immediate motion was made, and two commissioners simultaneously seconded the motion, and the chairman called the vote.

by a unanimous vote, the commissioners rebuked Owens' attorney's arguments and supported the Advocate's position that probable cause exists that Owens violated state ethics laws.  5-0 vote.

Next steps, according to an ethics commission staffer with whom I spoke later that day, is this.

A. Owens and his attorney can negotiate a settlement directly with commission advocate Elizabeth Miller

or

B. They will face a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge that will settle the case, and send the disposition of the case back to the commission where they will implement an appropriate fine and/or punishment.

Maximum penalty for this infraction, if Owens is found guilty, is $20,000.00  (Plus his currently compounding and increasing legal fees)

My prediction is that Owens and his Lawyer go for the settlement, as this appears to be their only cost-effective option given the overwhelming evidence against them in this case.  I mean--how can this lawyer even argue this case???--given all the proud public statements Owens has now given about how he received the files as an employee, read them all, knew they contained private, confidential, privileged information that would never be released unredacted, didn't return the property, didn't consult legal or IT, and instead he "held onto them" when he left the county and worse than that--sent them out, over state lines, unredacted.  He also boldly boasts he still has them.

So, they'll settle---------Or, they can fight it and risk testimony being memorialized on the record in this case damaging their narrative in the civil case---- or worse---- giving prosecutors in the criminal investigation evidence that will be damaging to their defense in that proceeding.

Neither choice is optimal, and this is what happens when people can't win a straight up contest at the ballot box.  Greed, and lust for power, and a longing for a commission seat drove Owens on this.  He and his boss and best friend, disgraced former commissioner Doug Underhill, must have as their calling in life, the unyielding desire to beat me in D1.  They ran Karen Sindel in 2016, ran Owens in 2020, and now they are running a new guy against me this time.  They are going to get the same result.  Win on the issues, not slimy, dirty, disgusting and unseemley gamesmanship.  

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Doug's best buddy Jonathan Owens is in trouble.  

He freely admits he's sent these files to lawyers suing the county, and he also held onto these files for nearly two years since he left employment---hoping he could use them to damage me in my election and help his chances in a rematch against me.   That didn't pan out for Jonathan, though.  Not by a long shot.

It's a giant quicksand pit Owens walked into all on his own.  He's about waist deep in it now.  And sinking.  Good luck, dude.

Once the county gets a ruling on our show cause hearing on the replevin suit from Judge Schlechter--we will begin depositions in that matter.  As we find others who possess the unredacted files unlawfully, we will add them to the complaint, we will perfect/amend the complaint.  Who else has the files?  We'll find out, one by one, and we will depose them.  Not one of them----all of them.

The old bull is walking down the ridge to the pastures below---not running.  walking.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I Got a Call from the Florida Division of Ethics Yesterday.......

....And was asked if I would be attending the Show Cause Hearing in Tallahassee this Friday morning at 7:30 AM Central Standard Time.

I filed an ethics complaint against Jonathan Owens who illegally possesses a copy of stolen county files, the complaint I initiated was investigated, and the Advocate (prosecutor) for the Ethics Commission has filed a brief that details the complaint and her finding that Florida Ethics Law was violated by Owens.

Meanwhile, the county has sued Owens and others for the return of the stolen county files.

The FBI and others are also investigating this for possible criminal violation(s).

And the county is awaiting a judge's ruling in the civil matter which hearing has already happend and  will next (hopefully) allow for multiple depositions to happen to help the county ascertain precisely who unlawfully possesses copies of these stolen files--so we can amend/perfect our claim to add those additional persons to the suit.

Meanwhile-----the Ethics commission will hear from the Advocate and from Owens' attorney at this hearing Friday--after which time the Commission will vote on the matter.

After the vote, if the Commission agrees with the advocate, the matter will either end up with a negotiated settlement between Owens and the Commission--or it will head to the Division of Administrative Hearing for that body to settle the compaint.

I'm told that because Owens' attorney has waived confidentiality--his hearing Friday will be livestreamed on the Ethics Commissions YouTube Page (here).

The agenda is here

The live video will be at this YouTube Channel at 7:30 CST.

Interestingly--Andrew Tallman's opinion show on AM 1620  has been as silent as a church mouse on this matter, as has other media outlets besides Rick's Blog.  I wonder if Tallman will cover this hearing and try to come up with some way to portray Owens as a victim in all of this............Yawn,

Jonathan Owens Declines Opportunity to Speak on his Own Behalf for Legal Fees He's Requested YOU Pay

When offered the opportunity to speak on his own behalf to personally request the county cover his legal bills for his own nefarious, unlawful conduct---- before discussion on this item at a public meeting ended-----Owens sat motionless like a wax statue of a ventriloquist's doll. Why?

Jonathan Owens,  the former county employee who worked for disgraced former county commissioner Doug Underhill and who is in possession of stolen county records----- recently had the gall to formally request a taxpayer funded legal defense for his transgressions and resultant troubles stemming from his unauthorized possession of said files.  

The County Attorney's Office added this request for a taxpayer-funded (i.e. YOU) defense from former employee Owens to our agenda on Tuesday.  And Owens even showed up to the meeting, sitting in the back row of the chambers.

Nevertheless----not one commissioner on the dais Tuesday showed any inclination of even countenancing this outrageous Owens request once it was up for consideration on the agenda.  (four of us were present, D2 commissioner Mike Kohler blew off the meeting and wasn't there) 

When offered the opportunity to speak on his own behalf to personally request the county cover his legal bills before discussion on this item ended-----Owens sat motionless like a wax statue of a ventriloquist's doll.

He had the opportunity to ask, speak, lobby, and request, --and he did nothing.

The thing that is incredible to me coming off of this awkward, cringe-worthy spectacle is the rank loyalty and feilty a handful of citizens and one radio talk show host are demonstrating toward Owens in this matter.

It really is both fascinating and sad.

But facts are facts and they cannot be surpressed no matter how much Kool Aid the Underhill/Owens/Tallman fanboy club chugs.  

FOCUS ON FACTS:

1.  The records at issue were stolen from the county, and the stolen records contain personal identification information (full photos of passports, Pictures of front and back of driver's licenses, bank account numbers and pins, social security numbers, tax forms, medical records, and a host of other data on more than a dozen citizens) that would never be released under any public records request, ever.

2. Jonathan Owens admitted he has all of these records, has read them all, knew much of the information was personal/private, kept all these files upon leaving employment from the county, did not report to relevant county staff he possessed them when he worked at the county, and has subsequently dissemenated these files to others unredacted.  He admitted this all freely and openly on Tallman Mckay's Podcast (which has been scrubbed from 1620's site) as well as in the News Journal.

3. Mere possession of this personal identification information as described above, unauthorized, on this many people is a third degree felony under Florida Law.  That's why the State Attorney and appropriate law enforcement agencies were notified and a criminal investigation was requested by the county on this matter back in June.  One week later--law enforcement investigators met me in my office and were given possession of the entire file--and both the county and I, personally, signed a waiver on that date allowing investigators to freely and without providing to us any immunity or amnesty-----free reign to search all the contents of all the files in question for ANY EVIDENCE of ANY CRIME. (Somebody wake up "letter-writers"  Mike Kohler and Steve Stroberger and let them know this)

4. Jonathan Owens is specifically NOT authorized to possess this type of data, nor was he ever authorized to possess it--- and his handling and/or possession of such data--which includes photos of my family members' passport documents, Photos of my Family's driver's licenses, my social security numbers, and my childrens' social security numbers, and my sons' tax returns----was never a part of his job duties and/or a normal course of his employment in the county.  What he should have done, if his story is true and this stick drive was shoved under his office door, was immediately turn the drive over to legal.  That would have been the appropriate course of action for him to take.  But Owens didn't do that.

5.  County staff that handles public records requests for the BCC have testified, under oath, that prior to the county becoming aware of this data breach and the theft of these records coming to light----no PRR's had been made for my text messages from my personal phone.  (for the geniuses reading this--it's because those who wanted these files were already given them by Owens, unlawfully, and outside of the PRR and/or discovery process--see the relevant testimony from the county's investigation, below)

Lying liars that lie, like Underhill/Owens/Tallman/Edler will say "Bergosh and the county were withholding these texts that were public records"  but the under oath testimony in this matter obliterates their lies:  No requests were made for these files prior to our notification that said files had already been stolen and disseminated unredacted.  

6. Nothing at all related to this matter implicates the whistlebolower statutes--Federal or State--as such status would have to have been determined and agreed to by the court PRIOR to the improper, unlawful

Jonathan Owens Doesn't Rate a Taxpayer Funded Legal Defense

Because mere possession of personal identification information by those who are unauthorized is a crime, and Jonathan Owens freely admits he possesses such information, his request for a taxpayer funded legal defense should be met with a denial.

Tomorrow morning on our agenda of the regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, we will be discussing a request from former employee Jonathan Owens.  

Owens is requesting that county taxpayers fund his legal defense in a civil lawsuit he is facing and also in an ethics complaint he is defending.

Yes, the county does have a policy that provides, in some circumstances, a legal defense for an employee who faces litigation arising from such an employee's normal and routine employment activities.

Jonathan's case does not meet that standard.  

And many believe Jonathan is actually guilty of a crime, a third degree felony, by possessing, unauthorized, the personal identification information on five or more individuals, which is illegal under Florida Law. 

Owens claims he innocently, when he was a county employee, came into possession of a file containing this personal identification information.  Furthermore, he admitted reading this file, keeping it, and disseminating it unredacted to a law firm suing the county.  He admitted his possession of this file in the newspaper and on the radio on Andrew Tallman McKay's program on AM1620 back on August 7th. (transcript here)

This is why law enforcement is investigating this issue--they know it is illegal, too! They (law enforcement and the State Attorney's Office) know this file has pictures, text messages, and other information that should not be possessed by anyone who is not authorized to possess it.  Mere possession under the statute is unlawful.  --and Jonathan is specifically NOT authorized to possess this file, which contains:

a.     Social security numbers for at least 3 individuals.

b.     User names and passwords for e-mail and service accounts.

c.    American Banking Association routing and bank account numbers for multiple accounts.

d.     The address and access codes for the electronic gate and lock on a private residential condominium.

e.     Photographs of the Passports of two persons.

f.      IRS tax returns for two separate persons.

g.     Insurance cards.

h.     Credit and debit card pictures, numbers and PINs.

i.      Pictures of Driver’s Licenses of two separate persons.

j.      W-2 forms for one person.

 

6.         Additionally, the file includes personal and private discussions on the following health matters relating to at least 13 different individual citizens who are not public figures and that are also not in any way connected to Escambia County’s Government:

 

            a.         Colonoscopy.

            b.         Hospitalizations.

            c.         Psychological Diagnoses.

            d.         Miscarriage.

            e.         Cancer.

            f.          Heart attack.

            g.         Parkinson’s Disease.

            h.         Cancer diagnosis and prognosis.

            i.          Suicide.

            j.          COVID Vaccination Status.

            k.         COVID Diagnoses.

Information such as this, above, is not a public record and would not be released under any public records request ever.  If people want public records, they should request them, not steal and distribute them as has happened here.  And because Jonathan has a copy of the stolen files and has admitted this--he must also know this:  mere possession of such information by those who are unauthorized is a crime, and therefore Owens' request for a taxpayer funded legal defense should be met with a denial.

Where is the Replevin Case Going from Here?

Is the media always right?

The judge assigned to the County's Replevin/Conversion civil suit  against Gannett, Jonathan Owens, and Alex Arduini (and potentially others as discovery, interrogiaories, and depositions proceed) has now put forward a case management report, detailing an initial roadmap for how the case proceeds from here.

Interesting that it appears, from this initial case management report, that the case will continue into August of 2025.  I'm told this sort of a document is standard and is subject to change and revisions as the case progresses.  In speaking with multiple attorneys on this matter, I am told that it is a novel area of law--replevin of data-- and there is a lot of research to be done.

The Gannett motion for dismissal was filed as well, in addition to the assignment of an attorney for Jonathan Owens.

It will be interesting to watch how this proceeds and how the parallel investigation into the theft of the files from the county and the associated crime of multiple individuals' possession of personal identification information, which appears to be a Felony as the information possessed unauthorized contains records on more than 5 individuals, intermixes with this civil trial.

A lot of people believe the media can do anything they want, anytime they want, to anybody they want with reckless abandon and disregard for the truth and regardless of damage their actions cause.  After all, who holds them accountable?

Maybe they are right?

I believe that is too much power to give to anyone, even the media.  Others agree.  

Meanwhile that question simmers as this case is simply about retrieving stolen property.  People still have to answer questions though, under oath, so who knows what additional information comes from this civil case and bleeds over into other cases and investigations?  Remember, don't lie under oath in this case, or to investigators in another parallel investigation......

Back to the media's unfettered right to do anything they want----I don't know the answer to that question but I did follow the multiple lawsuits filed by one student against the titans of media for a combined total of nearly a billion dollars for the media's feckless, reckless, inappropriate way they collectively distorted the truth about what happened at a Washington DC rally in 2019.

Interesting that one by one, multiple media companies settled in that case, and of particular note. each settlement in that affair contained terms that were "confidential" .

The media also paid a large settlement when apparently baseless assertions about the accuracy of voting systems from one company were spouted by at least one large cable news network.  They paid a large settlement for the damage they caused in that case, too.

So sometimes the media don't get everything they want.  Sometimes they lose.

And I know this: most in this area have a negative perception of the PNJ and the PNJ know it.  Garbage like this current situation reinforces that sentiment, demonstrated also by PNJ's diminishing subscriber base and their associated revenue losses.

Jonathan Owens wants County Taxpayers to Fund his Legal Defense

Owens sent the County Administrator and the County Attorney the request yesterday.  I'll print it below.

I personally do not feel he is entitled to any taxpayer funded legal representation because what he did is potentially criminal, fell outside the normal course of his job, and he remains in possession of stolen county records that he is not authorized to possess and that are in fact illegal for him to possess under Fl. Stat. 817.5685.  Furthermore, Owens admitted to reading the entire file  (In a radio interview with Andrew Tallman on AM 1620),  he knew it contained private, confidential records, yet he not only never told any county employee he had the file while he was working at the county--he also kept the file upon leaving employment and he also provided it, unredacted, to others---including opposing counsel in an ongoing court case against his former employer---------knowing it contained attorney client privileged conversations about that case in particular.

As Ricky Ricardo from "I love Lucy" might have exclaimed:  "Someone has some 'splainin to do!"

When he "acquired" this file and knew exactly what it was, he should have immediately returned the property the owner and promptly notified the county attorney's office.  He didn't.  He read it, kept it, and gave it to others instead.  He didn't need no stinkin' attorneys then!

But now he wants an attorney??

Nope, I don't believe he'll have three votes for this if it even comes to the board for our action--because he clearly DOES NOT qualify, under our policy, to be able to receive this coverage.  Period. This was not a job related function he was performing, and no, he ain't no whistleblower--there are specific statuatory definitions of what a whistleblower is--and he is not one.  Good luck with that.

Looks here like Jonathan Owens is following in the footsteps of his best friend, soul mate, and former boss,  Disgraced Former Commissioner Doug Underhill.

And like his mentor, partner and former commissioner Underhill----Owens now is also requesting you, the taxpayer to fund a legal defense to his reprehensible, potentially criminal conduct.

I can't make this stuff up!

What D2 resident and former Underhill Secretary Jonathan Owens sent the county yesterday:

Stolen County Files Part I: The Story Doesn't Add Up and the Dates Don't Jibe Either, "Darth" Newman

The "force" is not strong with attorney  "Darth" Newman's  version of the timeline of his receipt of stolen Escambia County files and records....

The problem with lies is that they will always be found out.  A liar who lies and tells lies will invariably lose track of the lies he tells and then the lies he or she told will be discovered.  Then, that person will be discredited, ostracized, ridiculed and even made a pariah. 

Or it could be worse.

Sometimes you lose a relationship when you get caught in a lie---- be it  a business, personal, or other type relationship.

Worse than this--if a lie is told to a federal agent--that's a crime.

And if a lie is told under oath, that's perjury.

If a lie is told to a judge by an "officer of the court "-- well, there are professional ramifications that can be significant and career threatening or career ending: there could be sanctions up to and including a formal bar complaint, a reprimand, a sanction, or disbarment.

So liars ought to be careful about telling lies--lest they get wrapped up in their own webs of dishonesty and have to pay a price for it.

Currently---there are lots of lies flying around Escambia County as it pertains to stolen Escambia County files that contain lots of county records, medical records, personal identification information, attorney-client protected conversations, and a host of other records that are not public records and would never be released under any circumstances--let alone unredacted--- under any valid public records request ever.  Yes, there may be a number of bonafide public records within the larger file of stolen records as well, any one or all of which would have been provided upon request because these files were saved from deletion via action taken by the county---but the majority of the file would not have been a public record.  

Nobody ever asked, though, and no public records requests were made of the information in these files.  until the whole thing was stolen.

And, again, the vast majority of what was stolen and disseminated inappropriately and unredacted by Jonathan Owens is NOT public record.

Webbed into all of these lies, potential crimes,  and other problems are the issues of the separate, frivolous Federal Quitam and harrassment case brought by lawyers for former Medical Director Rayme Edler. 

That case is baseless, meritless, and frivolous and will be defeated in court--that's my opinion.   

And that separate federal lawsuit against the county, along with the previously settled cases of 5 former EMS employees (ALL but 1 of whom were NOT prosecuted) has apparently provided Gannett and the Pensacola News Journal with just enough cover for them to use (conflate) the stolen, unverified county text message files they now possess unlawfully---somehow----- with the 2019 EMS challenges and the former Medical Director's currently stalled case.  

That's their pretext.

The thing is this, though.  The files at issue, from my phone, were stolen from the county, and after being stolen--these files have been manipulated.  

And this issue, this case, and this Escambia County lawsuit to recover these files are separate and distinct and have NOTHING to do with previously settled EMS cases or with Dr. Edler's current, frivolous and meritless lawsuit(s) against the county which will be defeated in court.  

I have it on very good authority, from a source that knows, that manipulation to these stolen files has already happened, and there will be much more to come on this in the next 6-12 months as discovery, depositions, the currently confidential but soon-to-be released FBI investigation report, potential prosecutions, ethics violation investigations, and other evidence and information is brought forward, gathered and presented to the court to bolster the county's replevin lawsuit.  

By contrast to the files the PNJ have---which have been manipulated---my original jump drive  (provided to me and in my posession since imaged and copied by the county IT staff in February of 2022 and provided to investigators recently and upon their request) is an exact duplicate of what was on the county's harddrive after my phone was imaged.  That has now been confirmed, again, by a source intimately familiar.  

The file that Dr. Edler's attorney's have, by contrast, is NOT an exact copy, it has been manipulated, the hash signitures do not match.  This, again, is the same file the PNJ has.  

So as we do discovery for our replevin case, and we take depositions, we will find out how this happened as we ask a lot of questions about this.  Lots.  And we'll be asking questions of lots of people including the PNJ reporters and editors that have this manipulated copy of stolen files and ran with it in multiple stories they have manufactured and  published as gospel truth anyway--never bothering to do what legitimate, honorable and reputable journalists do----- verify the authenticity of the data from the source-----the county or me----before publishing inaccuracies.

As bad as all of that is, (And it is REALLY BAD) worse is the fact that the timeline(s) of the "when" Dr. Edler's attorneys first received this manipulated, unredacted copy of my files to attempt to use in their separate, frivolous lawsuit(s) against the county does not add up with what Jonathan Owens----their lynchpin star witness himself-------- is saying. 

The Story Doesn't Add Up and the Dates Don't Jibe, Either, "DARTH"

Lawyer Darth Newman from Pennsylvania has submitted an affidavit in Federal Court to Magistrate Hope Cannon in Rayme Edler's case that he (Newman) is working.  In it, he states that he had no idea the stolen county text message data file was coming to him, did not request it (of Owens), and that it was emailed to him unsolicited, unannounced on March 15, 2023.  "Darth"  goes on to state he is the only one of Edler's co-counsels that have "substantially" (whatever that means) viewed it and that he notified the defense counsel "shortly after coming into possession of the file."  Read his sworn statement, here.  (Notably--the notification from Darth Newman to the County Attorney did not come until nearly two weeks later, on March 27th, and this notification was nonchalantly offered up multiple paragraphs into (buried) and within the body of a voluminous email full of legal mumbo-jumbo and minutae on a variety of ongoing, monotonous discovery gripes--AND obviously and conspicuoulsy NOT highlighted.  Nevertheless--the notification should have been immediate, via a call to the county or a stand alone email as this was an important development.  And county staff moved WAY too slow catching on and I was not told until nearly 3 Months later which was massively disappointing.  But that is a separate issue which I have discussed at length with the county attorney privately.)

Meanwhile--Jonathan Owens has proudly, in cocky fashion like a weird sort of proud rooster, stated on the radio and in the press on August 7th of this year that he kept the file after he left county employment, read the files,  was asked by Edler's lawyers if he had anything else that could help their case for Edler and against the county----------- AFTER he was interviewed by them and AFTER he provided an affidavit for their case against the county.  Problem is--their interview and Owens' affidavit is dated April 3rd, 2023.  Three weeks after Darth Newman said Owens sent him the file unsolicited on March 15th 2023.  Read Owens' sworn affidavit, here

None of these tools have a time machine, so this is obviously a lie.

Someone is lying, obviously, and these timelines don't mesh.  Owens even states in the transcript of his radio interview from August 7th of this year---on page 11 of the county's lawsuit filed against him and two others, here----that he provided Edler's attorneys a copy of the stolen files "Last year."  

Wait-----That would have been 2022--way before "Darth" says he received the unsolicited email on March 15th of 2023.  Did "Darth" get the file in 2022 as Jonathan stated, or is Jonathan lying?  Or is "Darth" Newman Lying?  Or did co-counsels actually have it and read it in 2022 as Jonathan clearly stated and did/does Rayme Edler actually possess this stolen file, too?  If co-counsels to "Darth" had it "Last Year" like Owens proudly stated--this makes the entire affidavit submitted by "Darth" Newman inaccurate at best--a series of lies at worst.  So, who is lying? 

These stories do not jibe, people are lying, and timelines are changing, evolving, and revolving.

Lying liars are lying all over the place on this timeline, in affidavits, on the radio, and in the press using manipulated, stolen data to bolster their lies.  

Did they even lie to the Federal Magistrate, Hope Cannon, with this "timeline?"

Wow---too many questions.  

But make no mistake: between the FBI investigation report (which will be made public once the federal prosecutors and/or state prosecutors are done with it and have made decisions on prosecution(s)) and what the county will find and learn as we move forward with our replevin case and enter discovery and begin multiple depositions of multiple persons, we will get to the bottom of it all.  All of it.

And folks will be under oath and they will answer the questions or invoke their 5th Amendment protection from self-incrimination, because that's how depositions work, folks have to answer the questions, objections can be noted but the questions will be answered lest the Judge in the case have to get involved---and that's not good when that happens.  So understandably--- we'll be meticulous in our questions of multiple individuals we will depose as we seek to get back the property, every copy of it, that was stolen from the county and now possessed still to this day, unlawfully and unredacted, by multiple individuals and entities.

I have it on good authority and have been told by multiple persons with firsthand knowledge that clerk of the court Pam Childers unlawfully possesses a copy of this stolen, maniplutlated file.  She will not answer direct requests of her made by the county attorney as to whether or not she has a copy-- so we

Board Votes 4-1 to seek a Civil Action against Jonathan Owens - and Others who Unlawfully Possess Stolen County Files

The Board of County Commissioners took a strong stance tonight on protecting county records.

By a 4-1 vote -- (with Commissioner Kohler voting No)-- the Escambia Board of County Commissioners voted to authorize and direct the County Attorney to seek an appropriate legal proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction, against those who have unlawfully held and disseminated privileged, confidential, private and exempt records.

We discussed the issue in depth at the morning review session, starting at 1:11 of this video

Former employee Jonathan Owens has admitted publicly that he has these records, he possesses them, he has read them and he has admitted giving this information to other parties un-redacted.

He, Jonathan Owens, bragged about reading it all and keeping it once he left county employment.

At the morning session---even though it was evident I had three votes to support seeking an action in court------the County Attorney requested that the item be brought back to tonight's regular meeting for a motion, second, and vote.

So we did, and the vote was 4-1.

You can watch the discussion and ultimate vote at 2:06 of this video.

Next up, a court filing by the county against Jonathan Owens.  

Maybe he'll go to the PNJ or on Andrew Tallman's Radio Show and talk about that?  😀