The nice thing about today's article is the Sun had a picture of Denise and Nathan. Usually the papers print a picture of Denise and a shot of King or they print a picture of Nathan and a shot of King. Today there was one of Nate and one of Denise. I know this sounds like a silly comment but it's been difficult and, yes, painful at times seeing Denise and King's pictures taking up the same print on the same page.
As to the article and Bill Cameron all I can say is "friggin' unbelievable".
Sheriff's Office Wants Lees Lawsuit Thrown Out
Published on: Saturday, November 14th, 2009
PUNTA GORDA -- The Charlotte County Sheriff's Office has asked that the civil lawsuit Nathan Lee filed against the agency a month ago in the death of his wife Denise be thrown out of court, according to court documents filed this week.
The CCSO states the case should be dismissed with prejudice and asks for Lee to pay court fees.
In the 13-page motion, the Sheriff's Office claims no responsibility for Denise Amber Lee's death due to a "mishandled" 911 call because her murder was committed by a third party -- Michael King.
The motion states, "Absent a special duty to protect a person from being victimized by a criminal act, a governmental agency's duty to protect a citizen is a general duty owed to the public at large, and any actions taken in fulfilling that responsibility will not be subject to scrutiny by way of a suit for damages."
A court hearing has not been set yet in the case..
Lee maintains that a 911 call taker and dispatchers failed to send any help for his wife on Jan. 17, 2008, after an eyewitness, Jane Kowalski, called to report suspicious activity in the vehicle next to her while she was driving south on U.S. 41 in Charlotte County. Denise, 21, had been kidnapped by King from her North Port home and was blindfolded and bound in the back seat of his Camaro, which was traveling near Kowalski's car.
In a detailed, nine-minute call, Kowalski told a 911 call taker that the person in the Camaro's back seat was screaming and slapping the window. King turned left on Toledo Blade Boulevard, and Kowalski was unable to follow.
Denise's body was found two days later in a wooded area off Toledo Blade.
Lee claims the botched handling of the 911 call in the CCSO dispatch center helped lead to Denise's death. He says employees proved "severe incompetence" in handling the 911 call and "breached their duties" by incorrectly performing numerous operational acts -- including failing to timely air BOLOs about King's Camaro from the North Port Police Department to deputies, failing to communicate the information from Kowalski, failing to timely log her call into the system for 12 minutes after the call was made, and failing to dispatch the information from the call.
"I just think people who live in Charlotte County should be concerned that (the CCSO) are saying they had no duty to protect Denise," Lee said Friday. "It's so unbelievable to say."
Charlotte County Sheriff Bill Cameron was named as the defendant in Lee's 17-page wrongful death lawsuit. Although Cameron was not the sheriff at the time -- John Davenport was -- Lee is required to name him on behalf of the Sheriff's Office for legal purposes, said his attorney, Patrick Boyle of Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.
Boyle said he expected the Sheriff's Office to fight the suit "every step of the way."
"It's common for challenges in most civil cases," Lee agreed.
The civil suit doesn't specify an amount Lee is seeking. State law allows only $200,000 to be awarded in a settlement of such a suit, but a jury can award more.
The CCSO conducted an Internal Affairs investigation following the incident. Two dispatchers were suspended for not following protocol.
The sheriff's motion filed this week states Lee's lawsuit puts a spin on the 911 call, saying that because Kowalski called 911 and alerted law enforcement about the situation, she didn't take any further action to help Denise (because she expected the Sheriff's Office to respond timely) -- "thereby increasing the risk of harm faced by Mrs. Lee."
In the call, Kowalski gave specific street names and explained that King turned onto Toledo Blade. She told the operator she didn't follow him because traffic was too heavy. Kowalski pulled over and asked that someone follow up with her.
The operator indicated in the call that the vehicle was headed toward Interstate 75.
Denise's body was found less than a mile from the Interstate. King was pulled over as he entered I-75 nearly three hours after Kowalski's call.
The CCSO motion also contends that no special relationship existed between the Sheriff's Office and Denise compared to anyone else in the general public -- meaning she wasn't entitled to any special protection.
The CCSO suggests the agency is only liable when a special relationship exists if employees make promises to provide assistance "uniquely responsive to someone, and the person relies upon those assurances to his detriment," according to the motion.
Jurors recommended the death penalty for King in September. A Sarasota judge ultimately will decide his fate in December.
E-mail: eallen@sun-herald.com
By ELAINE ALLEN-EMRICH
Showing posts with label Sheriff Bill Cameron. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sheriff Bill Cameron. Show all posts
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
Today's Herald Tribune
Since we learned about this motion I've been holding off commenting. I am doing my best to restrain myself from saying anything unladylike. It's unbelievable. "Special Relationship"? What's that? I just cannot understand how the sheriff's department, namely Bill Cameron (who was in charge the night Denise died) refuses to accept any responsibility for this debacle. He and the sheriff before him (John Davenport) and their cronies truly do not believe they did anything wrong and are doing anything wrong. It's unconscionable. No apologies. No nothing. They just want to wash their hands of the whole thing. "She would have died anyway" according to John Davenport. They would have swept the entire incident under the rug if Jane Kowalski had not persisted in her phone calls to the North Port Police Department and had we not read the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office Internal Affairs report. sigh.
Here's an article from today's paper by Jason Witz with the Herald Tribune.
Sheriff's Office wants Lee suit thrown out
By JASON WITZ Correspondent
Published: Friday, November 13, 2009 at 1:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, November 12, 2009 at 11:58 p.m.
CHARLOTTE COUNTY - Nathan Lee's wrongful death lawsuit against the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office should be thrown out because the agency gave no specific promises it would protect his wife, a motion released Thursday stated.
In a 13-page motion filed in Charlotte County circuit court, lawyers for the Sheriff's Office argued that 911 workers did not make "assurances to provide assistance uniquely responsive" to a key witness who reported seeing Denise Lee with her captor.
The motion asks a judge to dismiss Nathan Lee's lawsuit seeking damages from the Sheriff's Office in the murder of Denise Lee after her January 2008 kidnapping and rape. A hearing date for the motion has not been set.
The Sheriff's Office contends it would not be liable in Lee's death because no "special relationship" existed with her compared with the general public.
Although the operation of a 911 communication system is part of law enforcement services provided to the public, the agency is liable only when a special relationship is created, the motion states.
The Sheriff's Office contends that such relationship would exist only if, through employees, it makes assurances to provide assistance uniquely responsive to someone, and the person relies upon those assurances to his detriment, according to the motion.
Without that relationship, the attorneys contend, a governmental agency's duty to protect a person cannot be subject to a suit.
Lawyers say there is "no factual basis" to suggest any Sheriff's Office employees made any special promises during its 911 call with Tampa resident Jane Kowalski, who saw Denise Lee in the back of her abductor's car, near the Charlotte-Sarasota County line, pleading for help. Call takers failed to alert deputies, who were patrolling nearby.
Nathan Lee's suit accuses Sheriff Bill Cameron and his employees of being negligent in investigating the abduction of Denise Lee and contributing to her death.
Denise Lee, 21, was later found buried in a shallow grave in North Port, a few miles from where Kowalski had seen her in the car driven by unemployed North Port plumber Michael King, who awaits sentencing for his conviction for murder, kidnap and rape.
Lee is seeking a jury award of more than the statutory limit of $200,000. He said the motion seems contrary to the motto "To serve and protect."
"I'm just extremely frustrated," he said.
The Sheriff's Office is arguing it "had no duty to protect Denise," Nathan Lee added. "I definitely think the citizens of Charlotte County should be concerned about that."
Cameron said the agency would not comment.
Sheriff's Office lawyers say Kowalski was never told to take any action other than observe King's vehicle, court documents show.
But Lee's suit alleges that the Sheriff's Office's handling of Kowalski's call prevented her "from taking other action to help Denise Lee, thereby increasing the risk of harm faced by Lee."
Link:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20091113/ARTICLE/911131037
Here's an article from today's paper by Jason Witz with the Herald Tribune.
Sheriff's Office wants Lee suit thrown out
By JASON WITZ Correspondent
Published: Friday, November 13, 2009 at 1:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, November 12, 2009 at 11:58 p.m.
CHARLOTTE COUNTY - Nathan Lee's wrongful death lawsuit against the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office should be thrown out because the agency gave no specific promises it would protect his wife, a motion released Thursday stated.
In a 13-page motion filed in Charlotte County circuit court, lawyers for the Sheriff's Office argued that 911 workers did not make "assurances to provide assistance uniquely responsive" to a key witness who reported seeing Denise Lee with her captor.
The motion asks a judge to dismiss Nathan Lee's lawsuit seeking damages from the Sheriff's Office in the murder of Denise Lee after her January 2008 kidnapping and rape. A hearing date for the motion has not been set.
The Sheriff's Office contends it would not be liable in Lee's death because no "special relationship" existed with her compared with the general public.
Although the operation of a 911 communication system is part of law enforcement services provided to the public, the agency is liable only when a special relationship is created, the motion states.
The Sheriff's Office contends that such relationship would exist only if, through employees, it makes assurances to provide assistance uniquely responsive to someone, and the person relies upon those assurances to his detriment, according to the motion.
Without that relationship, the attorneys contend, a governmental agency's duty to protect a person cannot be subject to a suit.
Lawyers say there is "no factual basis" to suggest any Sheriff's Office employees made any special promises during its 911 call with Tampa resident Jane Kowalski, who saw Denise Lee in the back of her abductor's car, near the Charlotte-Sarasota County line, pleading for help. Call takers failed to alert deputies, who were patrolling nearby.
Nathan Lee's suit accuses Sheriff Bill Cameron and his employees of being negligent in investigating the abduction of Denise Lee and contributing to her death.
Denise Lee, 21, was later found buried in a shallow grave in North Port, a few miles from where Kowalski had seen her in the car driven by unemployed North Port plumber Michael King, who awaits sentencing for his conviction for murder, kidnap and rape.
Lee is seeking a jury award of more than the statutory limit of $200,000. He said the motion seems contrary to the motto "To serve and protect."
"I'm just extremely frustrated," he said.
The Sheriff's Office is arguing it "had no duty to protect Denise," Nathan Lee added. "I definitely think the citizens of Charlotte County should be concerned about that."
Cameron said the agency would not comment.
Sheriff's Office lawyers say Kowalski was never told to take any action other than observe King's vehicle, court documents show.
But Lee's suit alleges that the Sheriff's Office's handling of Kowalski's call prevented her "from taking other action to help Denise Lee, thereby increasing the risk of harm faced by Lee."
Link:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20091113/ARTICLE/911131037
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Saved for posterity "Letters to the Editor"
07/28/09
Not willing to sacrifice safety
Editor:
I hope Commissioner Duffy's colleagues join her in her support of Sheriff Cameron's budget.
The safety of our community and every family in it is at risk if further cuts are made. To reduce the budget further will mean layoffs. That, in turn, will mean increased response times.
Please ask yourself, "How long am I willing to wait for a deputy when I call 911?" Then ask, "Am I willing to take the risk that he or she might get there too late?"
I am asking everyone in Charlotte County to contact commissioners and deliver this message: We are willing to sacrifice many services due to the county's budget problems, but our safety is not one of them.
Jeff Jubenville
Port Charlotte
7/31/2009
Why are Charlotte costs so high?
Editor:
Having lived in Charlotte County for about 15 years, I have watched the typical government costs per voter rise by absurd annual rates with the new benefits provided bearing little relationship to same.
The Sheriff's Office is a blazing example of this, with new facilities and new vehicles of which four or more can show up at a fender bender. Meanwhile, sheriff's vehicles are observed watching red light runners,
speeders and no signal lane changers without any action. These visible situations are hopefully offset by more effective efforts elsewhere.
The voter outrage has dwindled to only an occasional outburst or some success at the polls in electing new players. This apathy is a sad reflection on all of us and something I hope the current commissioners and sheriff have the guts to change. Throw in the current economic
situation and one wonders how the current commissioners and sheriff can look into a mirror and be proud of their inaction.
As to the current sheriff's budget situation, using the sheriff's numbers and the current populations for Charlotte, Sarasota and Lee counties, the cost per capita for the sheriff's budget are: Charlotte, $390 per capita; Sarasota, $232 per capita; Lee, $264 per capita.
It appears that considerable fat exists in county government, especially within the Sheriff's Department. Once again, this voter is asking why.
Mike Reinhard
Port Charlotte
My thoughts: Let's see.. Charlotte spends $390 per capita, while Sarasota spends $232 per capita. Yet! Sarasota County handled four of the 9-1-1 calls regarding Denise superbly, while Charlotte County only handled one and well.... we all know by now what happened to Denise. In any case, it boggles the mind. And Mr. or Deputy Jubenville (I seem to remember seeing his name in the IA and he works for the CCSO, my bad if I'm wrong but I don't think I am) has the audacity to bring up 9-1-1 in his letter. I don't normally cuss all I can say is WTF?
Also in the news this past week was Sheriff Cameron helping a hapless boat while out boating himself. And he arrested two robbers while off duty when they ran a stop sign. What a guy! All he needs now is an "S" on his chest. I would love to see the Sun write a story on just how much this cast of characters gets paid. How much vacation time they get and any other perks they receive. Because the night Denise died they couldn't afford to pay an operator over time to watch the BOLO machine. Yet I hear and would love to have it verified that Bill Cameron is the highest paid Charlotte County employee. Hate to sound bitter but..... something stinks.
Again, all my opinions are my own and just a release of anger and frustration I feel. But Charlotte County really does need to wake up.
The Suns editorial today:
07/31/09
Growth in sheriff budget must stop
OUR POSITION: Sheriff's Office spending must be reined in.
Public safety is a basic function of local government. The men and women who protect and serve the residents of Charlotte County deserve and have our respect and admiration for the difficult and often dangerous work they do. But as work continues on next year's budget, it is clear to us that the growth of the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office budget has to stop and the department's spending aligned with fiscal realities.
Over the past few years, taxpayers have revolted against rising local government spending. Budget cuts forced by legislative fiat and exacerbated by revenue losses due to the collapse of the housing market have taken a significant toll on county government. This year alone, the commission slashed $50 million in operational costs and capital projects from the county budget.
Yet the sheriff's office budget since 2004 has risen 48.5 percent, from $40.5 million to $60 million. Over the same period, the population of the county has actually fallen, from about 157,000 to about 150,000.
The sheriff's budget is made up of three elements, including law enforcement, courts and corrections. The corrections element is actually a county function that the commission contracts out to the sheriff. The construction of a new county jail and its current expansion have contributed to the growth of the sheriff's budget, so for the purposes of this analysis, we have backed out jail operational costs.
The result? The sheriff's office budget has increased by a higher percentage. From 2004 to 2008, it has ballooned by 53 percent, or $15.1 million, from $28.5 million to $43.6 million.
Earlier this month, Sheriff Bill Cameron offered to trim 2 percent from his budget in response to a request from the commission to find 15 percent in cuts. Recently the commission voted 3-2 to reject that $58.6 million proposed budget. It remains to be seen whether the stalemate will be settled here or in Tallahassee, where Cameron could appeal to the governor if the commission holds its ground.
The rise in the budget is attributable to two initiatives undertaken by Cameron's predecessor, John Davenport, and continued upon Cameron's election in 2008: pay raises and hiring. We have supported the effort to bring officer pay in line with other area departments, so we will focus on the latter issue. Both Davenport and Cameron have been seeking a ratio of 2 officers per 1,000 residents. The current ratio is 1.8 officers per 1,000 residents.
The figure is arbitrary and obviously costly. Along Florida's Gulf Coast, only Collier County surpasses the ratio, while counties like Hillsborough (1.5), Pasco (1.3) and Sarasota (1.6) fall well short. According to the Department of Justice, the average ratio for areas with populations between 100,000 and 250,000 is 1.9.
The local ratio distorts reality because it includes the population for the entire county, but excludes the 37 police officers in Punta Gorda, where the sheriff's office performs only limited law enforcement duties.
We take public safety very seriously and have no doubt Sheriff Cameron is pursuing policies he believes best achieves our common goal. But the commission is correct to finally tighten the reins on spending in the sheriff's office and we encourage the board to stand firm.
Not willing to sacrifice safety
Editor:
I hope Commissioner Duffy's colleagues join her in her support of Sheriff Cameron's budget.
The safety of our community and every family in it is at risk if further cuts are made. To reduce the budget further will mean layoffs. That, in turn, will mean increased response times.
Please ask yourself, "How long am I willing to wait for a deputy when I call 911?" Then ask, "Am I willing to take the risk that he or she might get there too late?"
I am asking everyone in Charlotte County to contact commissioners and deliver this message: We are willing to sacrifice many services due to the county's budget problems, but our safety is not one of them.
Jeff Jubenville
Port Charlotte
7/31/2009
Why are Charlotte costs so high?
Editor:
Having lived in Charlotte County for about 15 years, I have watched the typical government costs per voter rise by absurd annual rates with the new benefits provided bearing little relationship to same.
The Sheriff's Office is a blazing example of this, with new facilities and new vehicles of which four or more can show up at a fender bender. Meanwhile, sheriff's vehicles are observed watching red light runners,
speeders and no signal lane changers without any action. These visible situations are hopefully offset by more effective efforts elsewhere.
The voter outrage has dwindled to only an occasional outburst or some success at the polls in electing new players. This apathy is a sad reflection on all of us and something I hope the current commissioners and sheriff have the guts to change. Throw in the current economic
situation and one wonders how the current commissioners and sheriff can look into a mirror and be proud of their inaction.
As to the current sheriff's budget situation, using the sheriff's numbers and the current populations for Charlotte, Sarasota and Lee counties, the cost per capita for the sheriff's budget are: Charlotte, $390 per capita; Sarasota, $232 per capita; Lee, $264 per capita.
It appears that considerable fat exists in county government, especially within the Sheriff's Department. Once again, this voter is asking why.
Mike Reinhard
Port Charlotte
My thoughts: Let's see.. Charlotte spends $390 per capita, while Sarasota spends $232 per capita. Yet! Sarasota County handled four of the 9-1-1 calls regarding Denise superbly, while Charlotte County only handled one and well.... we all know by now what happened to Denise. In any case, it boggles the mind. And Mr. or Deputy Jubenville (I seem to remember seeing his name in the IA and he works for the CCSO, my bad if I'm wrong but I don't think I am) has the audacity to bring up 9-1-1 in his letter. I don't normally cuss all I can say is WTF?
Also in the news this past week was Sheriff Cameron helping a hapless boat while out boating himself. And he arrested two robbers while off duty when they ran a stop sign. What a guy! All he needs now is an "S" on his chest. I would love to see the Sun write a story on just how much this cast of characters gets paid. How much vacation time they get and any other perks they receive. Because the night Denise died they couldn't afford to pay an operator over time to watch the BOLO machine. Yet I hear and would love to have it verified that Bill Cameron is the highest paid Charlotte County employee. Hate to sound bitter but..... something stinks.
Again, all my opinions are my own and just a release of anger and frustration I feel. But Charlotte County really does need to wake up.
The Suns editorial today:
07/31/09
Growth in sheriff budget must stop
OUR POSITION: Sheriff's Office spending must be reined in.
Public safety is a basic function of local government. The men and women who protect and serve the residents of Charlotte County deserve and have our respect and admiration for the difficult and often dangerous work they do. But as work continues on next year's budget, it is clear to us that the growth of the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office budget has to stop and the department's spending aligned with fiscal realities.
Over the past few years, taxpayers have revolted against rising local government spending. Budget cuts forced by legislative fiat and exacerbated by revenue losses due to the collapse of the housing market have taken a significant toll on county government. This year alone, the commission slashed $50 million in operational costs and capital projects from the county budget.
Yet the sheriff's office budget since 2004 has risen 48.5 percent, from $40.5 million to $60 million. Over the same period, the population of the county has actually fallen, from about 157,000 to about 150,000.
The sheriff's budget is made up of three elements, including law enforcement, courts and corrections. The corrections element is actually a county function that the commission contracts out to the sheriff. The construction of a new county jail and its current expansion have contributed to the growth of the sheriff's budget, so for the purposes of this analysis, we have backed out jail operational costs.
The result? The sheriff's office budget has increased by a higher percentage. From 2004 to 2008, it has ballooned by 53 percent, or $15.1 million, from $28.5 million to $43.6 million.
Earlier this month, Sheriff Bill Cameron offered to trim 2 percent from his budget in response to a request from the commission to find 15 percent in cuts. Recently the commission voted 3-2 to reject that $58.6 million proposed budget. It remains to be seen whether the stalemate will be settled here or in Tallahassee, where Cameron could appeal to the governor if the commission holds its ground.
The rise in the budget is attributable to two initiatives undertaken by Cameron's predecessor, John Davenport, and continued upon Cameron's election in 2008: pay raises and hiring. We have supported the effort to bring officer pay in line with other area departments, so we will focus on the latter issue. Both Davenport and Cameron have been seeking a ratio of 2 officers per 1,000 residents. The current ratio is 1.8 officers per 1,000 residents.
The figure is arbitrary and obviously costly. Along Florida's Gulf Coast, only Collier County surpasses the ratio, while counties like Hillsborough (1.5), Pasco (1.3) and Sarasota (1.6) fall well short. According to the Department of Justice, the average ratio for areas with populations between 100,000 and 250,000 is 1.9.
The local ratio distorts reality because it includes the population for the entire county, but excludes the 37 police officers in Punta Gorda, where the sheriff's office performs only limited law enforcement duties.
We take public safety very seriously and have no doubt Sheriff Cameron is pursuing policies he believes best achieves our common goal. But the commission is correct to finally tighten the reins on spending in the sheriff's office and we encourage the board to stand firm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)