Cuyahoga County Elections Board member Sally Florkiewicz has become the third member of the board to remove herself, following a swift kick in the ass by Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. Last week Brunner ordered the four-member board to resign their positions, or she’d fire them. It’s apparently a technique she borrowed from reality, where, unlike in the twisted world of Cuyahoga County, really sucking at your job doesn’t get you a promotion.
The two Democrats on the board, Ed Coaxum and Loree Soggs, stepped out of the way last week, leaving the Republicans, Florkiewicz and Chairman Bob Bennett, standing alone in front of the firing squad. In a written statement to the press, Florkiewicz says she will resign her post in order to “serve the community in other ways.”
She didn’t elaborate on what those ways would be, but it’s possible she may donate her brain to science so they can study the effects of doing nothing continuously for years on end. — Jared Klaus
This article appears in Mar 28 – Apr 3, 2007.
ANTHONY THORNTON, CHERYL SCULLARK, MARGARET WALSH
TO READ ALL PRESS RELEASE GO TO http://WWW.MYSPACE.COM/134801324
Cleveland Municipal Court Ass. Prosecutor Aric Kinast (whom litigated this case) stated; “we think Margaret Walsh is an excellent attorney and that this is– these allegations are ridiculous, but we are certainly not stipulating.” Let Margaret Walsh represent Cheryl Scullark, Anthony Thornton, Cleveland Municipal Courts Prosecutors Marlene Ridenour, Tiffany Young, Arik Kinast, Victor Perez, Anthony Jordan and herself and not present any evidence.
Legal Aid Society Lawyer Margaret Walsh is inefficient and negligent. She was appointed my lawyer in Cleveland Municipal Court for a Criminal Damaging Case tried on or about July 14, 2005. This case involved Anthony Thornton, Cuyahoga County’s Economic Development Manager and his girlfriend Cheryl Scullark. Walsh did not care if I had been read my rights. If she did my rights that are constitutionally mandatory would not have been violated by her. I was not Miranda (read into the four volume transcripts). This case went before the Eighth Appellate Court and was affirmed, although (in my attorney’s brief) as an error in trial, he clearly made a prima facie case about Walsh’s inefficiency.
I was unable to communicate with Walsh. On, Wednesday, June 8, 2005, my only consultation with her, I sat down to discuss my case and she told me that I was silly before I could explain the whole case to her. She prejudged me before I could even provide evidence to her.
On Friday, July 8, 2005, I left a message with Walsh. I did not get a response from her until Monday, July 11, 2005, at 11:06 a.m. She left a message with my answering service in which she said, “… there’s nothing to talk about, we’re set for trial. I don’t have any news because the prosecutor and I rarely talk about cases until the day of, so I will see you in court on July 14th, this Thursday, 9 o’clock or 10, 9 o’clock or 10 o’clock, whenever it was set for bench trial. Come at 9 o’clock and we’ll have a bench trial, bye.”
As a result, I left her a message on Monday, July 11, 2005, and another message on Tuesday, July 12, 2005. She left a message on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 at 4:17 p.m. stating, “Hi, Ms. Townsend, I got your message and I called you back the other day. I was off on Friday. You called me last week, I called you back. I’m calling you now. I know you said call after 5. What is so imperative? Leave me a message, 698-3222, 698-3222. We’re still scheduled for trial. You still have to come to court. Come to court. You’re scheduled for trial, that’s not changing. Leave me a message. What’s so imperative? Bye.”
Walsh failed to communicate with me regarding a bench or jury trial. Subsequently, I was not given the opportunity to select a bench or jury trial. She took it upon herself to decide that I was having a bench trial. I didn’t sign a waiver form be it yellow or white. She violated my rights by waiving without my knowledge or consent. I did not want a bench trial. I did not know that we were having a bench trial until I received the message from my attorney on Monday, July, 14, 2005, as stated above. At any time before trial, my counsel did not state or gave me an opportunity to review any of the city’s evidence.
Not having my best interest in mind, she refused and failed to disclose any of my evidence to discredit the witnesses.
After trial, Walsh told me that I would have a lot of fines to pay, do not call the complainant’s home and change my phone number. I then asked her was she going to be with me at sentencing, she said no and then walked away. I retained other representation.
There was a new trial motion filed on my behalf, outlining Walsh’s conduct. The Court suggested that we call her as a witness to dispute the allegations. The burden was on the City. They refused to call her either since I taped her messages and attached them as an exhibit to the motion. She did not volunteer a rebuttal, defense or explanation. She just sat there. My retained attorney made a prima facie case.
The city has opened the door for me to continuously be stalked and harassed by their witnesses. Walsh put the wedge in.
LET THE RECORDS SHOW…
Let the records show, Court of Appeals of Ohio 8th Appellate District Judges, Kenneth A. Rocco, Mary J. Kilbane, and James J. Sweeney all unanimously agree that my United States Constitutional Rights and Civil Rights will not be upheld in Cuyahoga County, Ohio based upon an opinion and decision mandated and journalized on December 15, 2006.
Let the records show, Anthony Thornton, Cuyahoga County’s Economic Development Manager and his girlfriend Cheryl Scullark, went to the City of Cleveland, Ohio and had Criminal Damaging Charges filed against me. Criminal Damaging is a charge in which something has to be damaged.
Let the records show, the Judges never mentioned in their opinion that my rights were not read to me, although it was clearly pointed out by my attorney in my brief that “the trial transcript of her initial appearance on May 11, 2005 does not reflect that she was advised that in order to get a jury trial, then she had to file a written demand in writing. She simply appeared and entered a not guilty plea and was told to go to the Public Defender’s Office.â€
Let the records show, no where in any of the four volume transcripts were my rights read to me. Based upon their findings, they were able to identify that there was no jury demand filed. When reviewing the file, the court does not have a record of my rights being waived in writing. The Judges questioned the City about this during oral argument. The City answered no, she didn’t sign a waiver form and there is none in the file. If my rights were not violated, it would not have been up to a trier of fact to determine credibility; it would have been up to a jury.
Let the records show, trial counsel never ensured my decision. Whether I show evidence or not, it’s my Constitutional right to exercise if I want a bench or jury trial, not my counsel. It was clear, and they could read into the record, that my rights were not read to me at any time nor I was not arrested on this charge. I was not Miranda and my Constitutional rights and were violated.
Let the records show, para 23, the Appellate Judges state, “An Appellate court’s function when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if, believed, would convince the average mind of the determine in a light most favorable to the City, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.â€
Let the records show, it was pointed out in my brief that the City failed to present sufficient evidence to support a conviction for criminal damaging,
Let the records show, “In light most favorable to the City†states that no matter what the evidence supports, the vested interest is in the City. Unsubstantial, incompetent, uncredible, false, weak, contrary, perjury, conspiring evidence supported the court’s verdict.
Let the light shine.