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.

(On) "Houston, We Have a Problem...."

Some folks have come up with the brilliant idea to move a massive homeless camp out of the city and now into the county, in District 1.  Oh, and they haven't talked with the nearby residents, the planning and zoning department, county administration, or anyone else at the county.  They just went straight to the press with the plan.  😏 

 

As I discussed in part II of Dumb Ideas that will likely be DOA (Dead on Arrival) the issue of establishing a homeless encampment very near existing neighborhoods was the topic.

That post got instantaneously crushed with hits, and the phone calls came subsequently.

I have now heard from and had the opportunity to speak with one individual in particular with intimate knowledge of the topic and the locations the homeless task force had been scouting.

And first off--full disclaimer:  I support the work of the homeless task force, I support doing whatever we can to assist folks who are down on their luck and not homeless by choice.  But it has to be planned, transparent, and most of all----in an appropriate location that will not negatively impact existing neighbors.  (preferrably way out in the woods away from other existing neighbors)

According to this trusted source with whom I spoke Saturday, the announcement came prematurely.  "We all knew they were looking at multiple sites--but they should not have given the specific site locations so prematurely.  Congratulations--now they have doomed this site!" said this individual, who continued "Look, that (Houston Avenue, County District 1) site is a good location;  It is large and has some nearby ammenities that these folks need--but I disagree with them putting this out so early.  It's like, they have asked for my opinions, I give them, and then they do not listen and do the exact opposite!"  this individual stated.

So, in doing additional research on the site that will apparently be the frontrunner for these downtown interests for the homeless camp they want out of the city--it appears there could be some problems. 

 Zoning, while it apparently meets the initial zoning--it may not meet the size requirement nor the locational criteria.  More to come on that.

But the truly insidious action would be if this group---or any group---just simply starts moving folks to this parcel of land without proper permits, licenses, and approvals.  And with the self-imposed, city proclamation of having these individuals cleared out from under the I-110 bridge by 11-24-21-------This appears to leave only 23 days for any group desiring to use this parcel as a homeless camp to get ALL necessary state and local health and operational permits to do a camp at this location.

Staff has not been approached and know NOTHING about this.

The County Administrator has not been approached and tells me he knows NOTHING about this.

Of course--nobody has called the commissioner of that district nor has anyone bothered to talk to the actual constituents who live in that neighborhood.  But those constituents were blindsided with this plan in the press, and have subsequently voiced their collective displeasure with this idea via multiple angry calls to my office.

23 days is simply not doable if these folks intend to ram this through and do it with appropriate