Dr. Oleske Informs DOMES She is Initiating Litigation

Dr. Deanna Oleske, the interim District 1 Medical Examiner who earlier this year had a tussle with some local funeral home directors, has now officially notified the District One Medical Examiner Support (DOMES) board that she is suing said funeral home directors.  She indicates litigation is commencing due to some letters written to the county earlier this year (by multiple local funeral home directors) describing allegations of barbaric treatment of corpses.  These letters  subsequently made their way into the press, and these letters  ultimately led to some better communication(s) between the ME's office and the funeral homes.

Dr. Oleske strenuously denied the allegations in the letters at the time, as did her operations director Dan Schebler.

 Although it seems everyone knew this litigation had commenced, apparently the folks that serve on the DOMES board may not have been aware--or made aware officially.

 They're aware now.

 Although the Escambia BCC is not being sued so far as I have been told, we are getting bombarded with public records requests from the Medical Examiner's lawyers.  The press and the ME and her staff have tried to argue that the letters were somehow connected to Escambia County's rejection of the Doctor's "We must have a new facility outside of Escambia County" arguments.  I believe we can get functionality in the current spaces with about a $2-$3 Million investment rather than a $20-$30 Million investment in new facility outside of Escambia County.  The one issue (alleged mistreatment of corpses) has nothing to do with the other (new facility) so far as I am concerned. 

 So, we will see where this all ends up.  Meanwhile, I have been told by a credible source that the Medical Examiner, Dr. Oleske, has put her "name in the hat" and applied to be the district 2 Medical Examiner in Tallahassee.  We will see what happens if she gets tapped for that position.  My understanding is the D2 ME's office is in a Quonset Hut type of PEB--think Gomer Pyle's Bunk Room Facilities--not a modern, large, state of the art facility the likes of which is being sought for Santa Rosa County by Oleske.  Also, a source familiar with operations of the D2 office reports that over there in that Circuit--the ME (who I am told is retiring) does not have in-house investigators but rather outsources that function to the local sheriff's office; staffing levels there are smaller than here.

 Lots of change coming if Oleske happens to be offered that job.

More to come.  See her letter from yesterday, below.

 

 

 

Why Conflate Two Separate Issues?

Sometimes no matter how much spaghetti is thrown at a wall---none of it sticks.

The recent article by Jim Little of the PNJ had an appropriate headline and summary of a recent scandal at the county:  Someone stole information from the county's servers illegally, this issue is being investigated by the FBI, and currently Jonathan Owens, my former political opponent who I dispatched in the 2020 primary and who worked as former lighting-rod commissioner Doug Underhill's secretary--- has publicly proclaimed he has this stolen property.  Doubling down, I'm told he(Owens) went on the radio and was giddy about explaining how he read all the personal, private, privileged and confidential information that was contained within this stolen data file.  Going further, he even admitted to disseminating this stolen property.  

Now, he does not say how he came to possess it other than providing a flimsy, unbelievable story that this file magically appeared on his desk.  Abracadabra!  But really, who would buy that explanation?  It is unbelievable, and that's the polite way I will put that.

So yes, the story got that aspect of the issue right.

But then came a huge part of the story that was about an unrelated issue:  the now settled cases of alleged, purported misconduct at the county's EMS division from four years ago.  

No doubt, there were some problems with record keeping and organization and multiple persons were alleged to have been a part of some falsification of certifications and mismanagement of call logs.

But here is the fact:  Six personnel from the county all but had their careers destroyed with these allegations from a former medical director who herself is now gone.  Of these six, only one was adjudicated guilty.  The other five settled their cases and WERE NOT CONVICTED.  The county paid a $5,000.00 fine, we got new medical directors, we got new leadership, and our EMS department moved forward.  Case closed.  Ever since that witch hunt by a former medical director--which it was--we have been cleaning up the mess, paying huge settlements and legal bills for the abyssimal way these former employees, now exonerated, were treated by the county.  No due process, allegations that were untrue, and careers ruined.  

But all that is in the rear view.

So why conflate this current case of theft and mishandling of protected information with the ancient history of that case?  

Now, this same former medical director did file a Federal Qui Tam claim post-employment with a couple of lawyers who specialize in this.  But that is a separate case from the falsification of records case.  

But MOST IMPORTANTLY:  The personal, private, priviledged and confidential text messages these lawyers so desperately want to keep, the ones allegedly provided to them outside of the normal discovery process, the ones that were stolen, the ones that cannot be verified as accurate, and the ones that are being investigated by law enforcement for the way they were inappropriately obtained---have no bearing on that Qui Tam case.  None whatsoever.  I am a part of the legislative in this county--I have no day in-day out operational oversight of any department--let alone EMS billing.  I'm not a fact witness to any of these overbilling allegations, and any discussion of the former Medical Director contained within these stolen text messages from my personal phone would be irrelevant hearsay and not a part of any case--let alone this particular one.  This is all setting aside the fact that these files were not provided as a bonafide records request, they were obtained unlawfully and there is no way to discern whether or not lines have been added into this particular file nor whether or not other lines have been deleted or manipulated.  Bottom Line:  There is no way to authenticate what Jonathan has given to these lawyers in this Qui Tam case.  So why are the lawyers burning up the taxi meter, running up costs, on chasing this issue down a rabbitt hole?

So now comes the news journal-- conflating a serious, major theft with a closed case and a current case for which the stolen files have no bearing?

I know why the plaintiff's lawyers are doing this---they are running up the check hoping for some settlement of this case to cover these exhorbitant fees, throwing spaghetti at the wall, making tons of discovery requests, then modulating them and moving them around.  They are grasping at straws and hoping to find something to help their case.  So they are doing what these sorts of lawyers, working on contingency, do.  Doing what lawyers do--It's why they are so dang popular and beloved 😀.  

But why is the PNJ carrying these lawyers' water--instead of separating the real from the faux as they should?

Unexpected Money is Always Good

Nobody knew this was coming.

I just opened a letter that was sent late last month to my office.  Snail mailed.  Apparently, we were entitled to funds that the Attorney General's office sought and recaptured resulting from litigation regarding an auto parts price-fixing scheme nationwide.

I'm interested to know more about it and what the total pot of cash came to, and whom it was that ran the scheme.  Specifically, I'd like to not buy from them in the future if we know who did it.  Regardless, I'm glad we are getting a cut.

I've now confirmed with staff that we have the cash in our account.  $33,473.92.

Unexpected Money is Always Good!

Inside the Sausage Grinder: Part II

Documents linked within this blog post pertaining to a recent legal settlement with a former employee illustrate how contentious some personnel issues can become when board policy is not followed with fidelity--and the expensive outcomes.

"Alison,

 I received three transcripts related to our settlement with Matt Selover late this afternoon from Kimberly Chappel.

 If these are a public record and do not require redaction, I intend to release them on my blog first thing tomorrow morning.

 Please advise if there are any legal or ethical prohibitions on me making these documents public unredacted, in the same form as I have just received them and in the same form the CoC has apparently received them.

 Please advise soonest.

 Thanks,

 Jeff Bergosh

Vice-Chairman and District 1 Commissioner,

Escambia Board of County Commissioners"

FROM Alison Rogers:

"Jeff, pursuant to state statute, I am of the opinion that all of the transcripts are public record and we are obligated to make all of the transcripts available."

Some of what we do in government is not pleasant-including contentious shade meetings to deal with pending litigation.  This is why there is a term related to the work of governing--"making sausage."  Making sausage is not pretty, it is downright nasty;  stuff goes in, and sausage comes out.  Most like sausage but not the process. 

As it pertains to this issue and the transcript I am going to link below from June 3rd of this year--Once the litigation with a government entity is completed, the transcripts of the shade meetings associated with the litigation become a public record.  We recently settled this particular lawsuit, and a number of individuals and media outlets have requested these transcripts already.  So they will be coming out and therefore I am posting them here also.  They are an interesting read and view into what are typically confidential discussions.

Read BCC Shade Session 6-3-2021