|
Looks like Judge George Greer is the recipient of another award of sorts.
Pinellas County has become known throughout the country as the home of judicial tyranny in the persona of probate court Judge Greer, death judge in the Terri Schiavo case.
Time and time again, we hear how he supposedly followed the rule of law.
Award after award has been bestowed upon him in an attempt to brainwash the public into believing that he was right to kill an innocent woman whose original surrogate was seriously conflicted.
Now it appears he's being rewarded again, this time by the Florida Elections Commission, giving him a free walk for blatant violations of Florida's election laws and seemingly ignoring a sworn complaint filed with documentary evidence.
Is Bernie McCabe blocking the prosecution of Greer? According to the legislative intent of the election law statutes, McCabe himself should be charged with allowing the employees to his office to attempt to influence the judicial election.
Why hasn't Greer been sanctioned? A larger question is why is he still sitting on the bench? Why isn't Jeb Bush complying with the laws of Florida? Greer clearly failed to qualify for office. Why are some people allowed to violate the law in Florida with impunity while others are held to the letter of the law?
Is the FEC playing the Bernie McCabe card---ignoring the facts and complaints against Greer long enough so they can then claim the statute of limitations has passed? The statutes of limitations haven't passed in this matter as there's a two year window from the time of the alleged violation of law which occurred in Greer's case in August, 2004.
Is George W. Greer guilty of a misdemeanor for violating Florida's campaign laws?
The facts would indicate a resounding yes. In fact, there are precedent decisions by FEC prohibiting use of governmental buildings and soliciting political contributions in a governmental building.
During August, 2004, during the race for Sixth Judicial Circuit Court judge between Schiavo death judge Greer and challenger Jan Govan, Greer's 30-second TV commercial aired in and around Pinellas County, including the Fox TV affiliate and Bay News 9, supporting the candidacy of Greer for reelection, allegedly violating Section 106 of Florida's campaign law which prohibits candidates from using the services of state officers or employees in their campaign or using a building owned by a governmental entity to for campaign purposes. The film would seem to be clear and convincing evidence, sufficient to bring charges against Greer and his buddies, state attorney for Pinellas and Pasco Counties, Bernie McCabe; former Pinellas County Sheriff Everett Rice and Sixth Circuit public defender Bob Dillinger.
The commercial clearly shows Greer seated on the bench at the Pinellas County Courthouse. Included in the commercial endorsing Greer are Jim Hellickson of McCabe's state attorney's office, Paula Shea, assistant public defender and a uniformed officer of the Pinellas County Sheriff's Department with a sheriff's patrol car in the background. Those appearances are illegal by statute.
The interpretation of the state statutes would be that the use of governmental buildings and property for political purposes is prohibited. The statutes would also be interpreted that no candidate, not even George Greer, can use the service of any state, county, municipal or district officer or employee during working hours.
It would be the intent of the Florida Statutes to prohibit the political activity of municipal officers and employees for the purpose of influencing an election. By Hellickson and Shea appearing in the commercial along with the uniformed deputy, it appears that McCabe, Dillinger and Rice illegally used their positions and governmental resources to attempt to influence the election of Greer in violation of Section 106.15(2). Section 104.31(1(a) clearly states that no officer or employee of the state or of any county or municipality shall use his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with an election or nomination of an officer or coercing or influencing another person's vote or affecting the result of that election.
So why haven't McCabe, Rice and Dillinger been charged?
Interesting connection of Dillinger to the Schiavo case in that he is a member, along with Dr. Jon Thogmartin of the District 6 Medical Examiner's office, on the Florida Medical Examiner's Commission. Thogmartin, the handpicked choice for the ME's post by Bernie McCabe as head of the search committee, conducted the Schiavo autopsy along with Dr. Stephen Nelson, chairman of the state commission which is under the auspices of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. What a tangled web they weave when they practice to deceive. Is McCabe protecting everyone from prosecution?
And where's the Governor's office in this, afraid that he'll be charged with playing politics again? Isn't that what being in political office is all about, playing politics? Is Bush afraid to do his job that the voters elected him to do, especially in the Schiavo case?
Section 104.31(1((b) also prohibits officers or employees to pay, lend or contribute any part of his or her salary or any money or anything else of value (such as in-kind services such as the use of a sheriff's patrol car and employees) to any party, committee, organization, agency or person for political purposes.
It is very clear that state law prohibits the use of the courtroom for political purposes.
And Everett Rice thought he could be Attorney General? McCabe is prosecuting alleged wrong-doers and Dillinger defending them? These foxes are guarding the henhouse.
In that the statute of limitations for misdemeanors is two years, McCabe can't claim expiration of the statute in Greer's case but then he couldn't prosecute it because he is directly involved and should himself be charged under Florida Statutes Section 106 along with Attorney General candidate Rice and Dillinger.
A formal complaint against Greer was filed with FEC several months ago and thus far, FEC has refused to acknowledge its receipt. Accompanying the complaint was a DVD of Greer's TV commercial which clearly shows the alleged violations. That commercial can be seen here.
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/011706JudgingGeorgeGreer.html
If the warranted charges were levied against Greer and the warranted sanctions assessed, it could constitute grounds for his immediate removal from office by executive order of Gov. Bush and/or impeachment by the Florida House if Bush refuses to follow the rule of law and remove him for failing to legally qualify.
George W. Greer followed the Rule of Terri. George W. Greer abused his discretion and allowed Michael Schiavo to kill his wife and allowed the right to die movement to use Terri for their national agenda.
Greer refused to allow any evidence of domestic violence or abuse into the court record. He insulated the record as one observer said, making his decision to kill the incapacitated woman bulletproof.
He very carefully crafted his Feb. 11, 2000, death order, deliberately omitting the testimony of Jackie Rhodes so there could be no door to open on appeal. He twisted the testimony of Mary Schindler and Diane Meyer about the Quinlin case. He and Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, knew what the standard had to be and they carefully tailored the decision to meet the clear and convincing standard which constituted clear and convincing evidence of Greer's abuse of discretion.
Florida law allows a person's surrogate, in this case Michael Schiavo, to allow a county probate court to make a health care decision-the county circuit court which then becomes the surrogate. As of May 1998, when Michael Schiavo filed the petition to end his wife's life by removing her feeding tube after he had tried to kill her by septis by withholding medical treatment, Judge George Greer became Terri Schiavo's surrogate and he and only he could determine what Terri's wish would be albeit he never once personally visited her, never knew her. The issue of Michael Schiavo's credibility and those of his brother and sister-in-law rested solely in Greer's hands---as did the fate of Terri Schiavo. The only substantial evidence in the Schiavo case was that Michael Schiavo had and continues to have a serious credibility problem which should have caused his removal as guardian but of course then there's the issue of him lying on the guardianship application and the law office of Daniel Grieco swearing to it. The evidence presented by Schiavos contradicted by that of the Schindlers and Terri's best friends clearly did not meet the clear and convincing standard and Schiavo's petition should have been dismissed.
The Rule of Terri continues. No matter how much proof is presented against Schiavo, Greer or any of the principals of the case, they are allowed to escape prosecution or accountability.
In 1973, the legislature created the Florida Elections Commission to enforce the campaign finance laws. The Commission investigates alleged violations upon receipt of a legally sufficient, sworn complaint. If the Commission finds a violation of the election laws, it can levy a fine of up to $1,000 per count. The Governor appoints the chair of the Commission and members are appointed by the Governor from lists of names submitted by legislative leadership.
http://www.fec.state.fl.us/
Within five working days of receipt of a sworn complaint, the FEC executive director is required to send a copy of the complaint to the person against whom the complaint was made, in this case Greer. http://www.fec.state.fl.us/rules/index.html Upon receipt of a complaint, the executive director shall determine whether the complaint is legally sufficient, unless the executive director determines that the identity of the parties or witnesses or other factual or legal basis would prevent his or her determination due to an appearance of impropriety or a conflict as defined by Section 112.312(8), Florida Statutes. Upon the executive director's determination that he or she has a conflict or that action on the complaint would present an appearance of impropriety, the executive director shall refer the complaint to the Commission for a determination of legal sufficiency.
A complaint is legally sufficient if it meets the following criteria:
The complaint alleges a violation of Chapter 104 or 106 or Section 98.122 or 105.071, Florida Statutes;
The complaint was made under oath in the presence of a notary public or other person authorized by law to administer oaths;
The complaint contains the original signature of the complainant;
The complaint contains specific facts upon which the complainant bases the allegation of a violation of law; and
The complaint alleges a violation that occurred within two years of the date the complaint is filed with the Commission.
The complaint filed against Greer in early April meets all criteria.
When the executive director determines that a complaint is legally insufficient, the complainant and the respondent, in this case Greer, must be notified. The notice shall include the reason the complaint is legally insufficient and notify the complainant that he has 14 days to correct the stated ground of insufficiency. If the complainant does not respond within 14 days, the executive director shall close the case. If the complainant responds but does not provide information that corrects the stated ground of insufficiency, the complainant and the respondent shall be notified of complainant's right to seek the Commission's review of the executive director's finding that the complaint is legally insufficient.
Currently, over four months since the complaint was filed with a copy of the TV commercial in question, FEC has not contacted either of the complainants and has issued no determination that the complaint is legally insufficient. But neither will the FEC respond to inquires if the complaint is proceeding. If the FEC trashes the complaint, it has to advise the complainant why. So far, that hasn't occurred.
The law provides that the once the FEC finds the complaint legally sufficient, it is required to direct the executive to further investigate the complaint. So what's the status of the Greer complaint? Of course, all proceedings are confidential to shield the public from the truth and protect the accused. Why is it judges should be able to hide from the public review of the charges against him? The law dictates that their be an open courtroom in all matters except juvenile and a few other matters. The law provides that the individual conducting the investigation is required to prepare a report of the results of the investigation, including relevant documents or other evidence gathered during the investigation.
So far, it looks like the state of Florida has swept the substantiated complaint against Greer under the rug. The commission clerk is required to send a copy of the FEC's order determining probable cause or no probable cause to the complainant and to Greer. The complainants have received nothing. Why is George Greer above the law? Why is the Florida Elections Commission violating due process and failing to abide with the Fourteenth Amendment in denying equal protection? What happened to the complaint?
Who's protecting George Greer……and why? 7-23-06
Visit Our Home Page and Shop Amazon To Help
The North Country Gazette Stay Independent
«« Join Our Members Only Section »»
Introductory Special Offer, 30 days for $2.95!
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed by anyone without the express written permission of the publisher. This article is copyright protected and Fair Use is not applicable.
© 2006 North
Country Gazette
|
