 |
| The deposition of Rayme Edler, who would have been called to testify and who was a fact witness, was damaging, very damaging to the County's case. Very Damaging. Read it, below |
Our case with former employee Matt Selover has settled, and therefore much of the discovery documents, depositions, etc., once redacted appropriately, will be released here.
The deposition of Rayme Edler was devastatingly bad for the county. It was a horror show. Although she had two lawyers falling over themselves to object to just about every question asked of her---Attorney J.J. Talbot was pedestrian, balanced, and methodical in the extraction of damaging information from Edler during this deposition. And unlike me, Rayme Edler would have been called to testify in any trial had we not settled. I never would have been called as I was not a fact witness, not an expert, and my opinions were not and are not relevant to the facts of the case. (a fact ignored by the attorney for the insurance company in her memo to the county, and a fact omitted from the PNJ coverage of this settlement) And had it gone to trial--by the insurance company's own estimation--the County could have been on the hook for up to $820,000.00 PLUS Legal fees. (That devastating fact was conveniently left out of the PNJ's hit piece on me published Monday).
With respect to the medical director at the time of this incident, I received the below opinion from Charlie Peppler about releasing her deposition transcript, which I will be linking to this blog post.
From Deputy County Attorney Charlie Peppler:
"Comm’r,
I have reviewed Dr. Edler’s depo transcript and there does not appear to be any exemptions applicable. You may wish to exercise your own discretion about testimony given by Dr. Edler XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX on pages 173 through 177. Perhaps, redacting those pages with an explanation that they involve personal, sensitive matters of a former employee, but, again, that is your call, I couldn’t find an exemption for this testimony. (In my own opinion, I don’t think the trial judge would let this testimony into evidence on the grounds of relevance, but that is not the issue at this point). Other attorneys in our office are reviewing the depos of William Hopkins and Jana Still and they will get with you when they have finished their review. Regards, Charlie
Charles V. Peppler"
Read the deposition of Rayme Edler, with pages 173-177 removed on the advice of Peppler, here.
