Panama City, Bay County, Florida
Thursday, January 10, 2015
By: Kevin Earl Wood, Email: allunited@bellsouth.net
Bay Community News has previously reported on Bay County, Florida, Clerk of Court Bill Kinsaul’s falsification of public records, particularly court dockets that involved Pretrial Intervention/Diversion (PTI) agreements between a first time offender and the State Attorney. The previous story detailed how Mr. Kinsaul was falsifying dockets under his control and provided evidence to support the claim of falsification.
Bay Community News has also reported later that included additional evidence against Clerk Kinsaul.
In that story it was shown that while Clerk Kinsaul now has this new fraudulent, malicious and arguably libelous systemic policy against first time offenders who successfully complete a PTI agreement with the State Attorney, the story also provided evidence that the prior longstanding Clerk of Court Harold Bazzel did not have such a malicious, and arguably retaliatory, policy against first time offenders.
Now there is additional evidence against Clerk Kinsaul that Bay Community News has received from the Office of the State Courts Administrator in Florida proving that Clerk Kinsaul has falsified the docket in several cases. A beginning list in which these falsifications and other erroneous, fraudulent and malicious entries as a pattern and practice would include:
Jeanette Hopkins 14005021MMMA
Thomas Palmer 14005019MMMA
Abhishek Patel 14006536MMMA
Carl Butler 13007388MMMA
Petru Chitic 13006536MMMO
Darrin Whitt 13006158MMMO
Darius Newton 13007178MMMA
Tatum Cleveland 14002015MMMA
Zachary Pascavella 14000782CTMA
Isaac Hand 13006861MMMA
Bay Community News has interviewed, and received documentation from, staff at the Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA) in Tallahassee, Florida.
The documentation provided by, and statements of, staff at OSCA proves that Mr. Kinsaul directly, and through his attorney, Tim Warner, have not been honest with the press and the public.
This reporter has been briefed by OSCA on the Summary Reporting System (SRS) AND has been advised that the SRS has absolutely no connection to, or control over, what Clerk Kinsaul places on his own docket in Bay County.
SRS is merely a system by which Clerks of Court provide statistical data where, “The primary purpose of the SRS is the certification of need for additional
judgeships.” It does not mandate what a Clerk of Court puts on their local dockets, or removes from their dockets, or corrects on a docket.
On October 6, 2014, Bay Community News received this letter from Mr. Kinsaul’s attorney Tim Warner:
Based upon my conversation with Dana Sowell at the Clerk’s Office, she has stated that Mr. Burch’s case has been handled, by the Clerk, in accordance with instruction received from OSCA.
This is absolutely not true.
According to OSCA, they only provided information to Ms. Sowell about the SRS system, not Mr. Kinsaul’s docket entries. It is OSCA’s position that they have no control over Mr. Kinsaul’s docket entries because Mr. Kinsaul is an independently elected public constitutional officer over whom nobody has control of what he puts on his docket, or removes from the docket when erroneous, fraudulent, or otherwise false or libelous information is entered as in the above listed cases.
Nonetheless, the information provided to Mr. Kinsaul, and Bay Community News, by OSCA does not at all support Mr. Kinsaul’s position that a criminal case in a PTI situation is “DISPOSED” of by a PTI. A case can only be “DISPOSED” of in a successful PTI by the state dropping and abandoning the case.
Again, the SRS has nothing to do with what Mr. Kinsaul, at his discretion, places on his “docket.”
However, let’s look at SRS as relates to PTI’s in County Court, i.e. minor misdemeanor cases.
OSCA publishes guidance on the process of documenting the successful completion of PTI in a county criminal case:
With or Without lnformation Filed
Court Decision Date Set
Court Action ‘H’
Report Disposition’Before Trial,
Other to SRS
|
Successful
PTI
|
Yes
(Dismissor No File)
ProsecutorAction Set to ‘L’ or
‘O’ (‘dropped or abandoned‘ or
‘nolle prosequi‘).
Prosecutor Final Decision Date
Set
As shown as above, OSCA has advised Bay Community News that when a PTI is successfully completed, the SRS system, as well as the clerk’s docket, should reflect “dropped or abandoned” or “nolle prosequi” reflecting the State dropping the charges, closing the case. PTI does not “close” a case.
In conclusion, Mr. Kinsaul should correct the “DISPOSITION” field of the above listed cases to “DROPPED/ABANDONED” or “NOLLE PROSEQUI” according to OSCA.
The following flow chart was provided by OSCA that documents the above:
