Originally Posted - October 18, 2005

return home

CLEARWATER, FL--Is bail in the amount of $25,000 reasonable for a charge of contempt of court?

Can a judge issue an arrest warrant for someone when an appellate court has stayed proceedings in that action before that judge?

Do we live in some Third World country where the courts do the bidding of the connected, where judges are for sale, where the law means nothing, and where the mainstream press is afraid to cover a scandal involving corrupt judges and a powerful Republican law firm that boasts of its connections and ability to improperly influence judges?

Those are questions being asked by Tampa attorney Mark A. Adams.

Adams is the subject of criminal contempt charges brought against him by Sixth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Crockett Farnell and the politically connected Battaglia law firm of St. Petersburg, will appear for a hearing Wednesday, Oct. 19, at 1 p.m. in Courtroom 20 of the Pinellas County Criminal Justice Center in Clearwater before Judge Robert E. Beach.

Based on the history of the case, it appears that the first thing that should happen is that Beach recuse himself.

Adams is currently facing six months in jail after being charged with contempt of court by Sixth Circuit Court judge Crockett Farnell.

Timothy Weber of the law firm Battaglia, Ross, Discus and Wein, an attorney who represents clients in civil litigation brought against them by clients of Adams, is the complainant against Adams in matters leading to the contempt charges lodged by Farnell.

Farnell has finally recused himself and Beach has been appointed against vehement objections of Adams.

"Unfortunately, Judge Beach has shown that he is willing to ignore the law to rule in favor of the Battaglia firm", Adams says. http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/092305ContemptHearingFLAtt.html and http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/101005JudiciaryProbe.html

However, its questionable why Beach is even presiding in the case as he is retired and there are a host of elected judges qualified to hear the case who are available.

The retired judge was assigned to the civil wrongful-death lawsuit filed against the Church of Scientology by the estate of the late Lisa McPherson, a lawsuit settled out-of-court in secret with Beach apparently forcing a settlement without trial---perhaps in order to save face for state attorney Bernie McCabe.

The litigation, in Pinellas County courts for seven years, alleged that church workers let McPherson die in 1995 in the Fort Harrison Hotel where she spent the last 17 days of her life being care for by Scientologists.

In the McPherson case, Beach was paid by both sides to oversee depositions in the case and in during courtroom proceedings, he informed both sides that the court wanted the case to "go away. Beach even replaced the McPherson estate's lead attorney, Ken Dandar, with another attorney, saying, "I feel more secure with him guiding this case than I do you".

McCabe and the state attorney's office had brought criminal charges against the church as a result of McPherson's death but then withdrew them after former Pinellas County chief medical examiner Joan Wood changed her autopsy report. McCabe said that prosecutors still believed that McPherson died as the result of neglect at the hands of church members but that the credibility of Wood would preclude successful prosecution of charges of abusing a disabled person and practicing medicine without a license.

Wood had changed her original autopsy report saying the McPherson's death was accidental rather than the result of dehydration and too much bed rest while in the care of the Church of Scientology.

Together again are McCabe and Beach in the Adams case with McCabe's office prosecuting Adams on the Battaglia firm's complaint.

Firm principal Anthony S. Battaglia contributed $250 to the 2004 reelection campaign of McCabe and the law firm contributed another $250. McCabe was uncontested in the election.

Beach is a former chief judge for the Pinellas County Sixth Judicial Circuit. As a retired judge, he has been appointed rather than elected to sit as a judge, bypassing the will of the people, without having to be accountable to the voters, and he has been serving as a senior judge without being elected.

The motions which have been set for hearing Wednesday before Judge Beach have been docketed but ducked for quite some time now apparently due to their embarrassing nature, according to Adams.

In fact, at a hearing in this case on Sept. 30, Chief Judge David A. Demers, of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, claimed he didn't know that motions pending by Adams had been set to be heard by him on that date even though prior to this hearing his judicial assistant admitted to a reporter that he was aware. However, at the Sept. 30 hearing, Judge Demers did admit that he did not comply with the law when he reassigned this case to Judge Beach. http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/092305ContemptHearingFLAtt.html

Judge Demers then reluctantly followed the law requiring him to refer the Adams case to the Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court for selection of a new judge, but according to Adams, Demers sent a misleading letter to the Chief Justice which implied that the case had been reassigned to Judge Beach after Judge Farnell entered an order disqualifying himself. In fact, Adams says, after Farnell disqualified himself in this case, it had been randomly reassigned to Judge Bruce Boyer. The Chief Justice apparently relied on Judge Demers' misrepresentation and appointed Judge Beach to hear this case. Adams says that a motion for rehearing of that decision was been filed Tuesday which points out Judge Demers' misrepresentation and which includes a request to refer Judge Farnell to the Judicial Qualifications Commission for investigation of his alleged willful violation of an order of the Second District Court of Appeal staying proceedings in this case.

Adams also asked Chief Justice Pariente on Wednesday, Oct. 5 to initiate an investigation of the "officers of our courts who were involved with….violations by the Judicial Qualifications Commission and the Florida Bar in order to help preserve the integrity of our judiciary".

Judge Pariente has not yet responded to Adams' requests.

Adams says that although Farnell has been under what he terms "a cloud of suspicion" for some time, Judge Demers recently appointed Judge Farnell to the position of the Chief Administrative Judge of the Criminal Division of Pinellas County's Courts, a position that had previously been held by his wife, Judge Dee Anna Farnell. The reason for this promotion and demotion is not clear, Adams says, "but it appears to have something to do with who is doing favors for whom and sexism in the old boys club".

Beach will also decide Wednesday if bail in the amount of $25,000 is reasonable for a charge of contempt of court and whether Judge Farnell's order for the arrest of attorney Adams, issued in violation of the Second District Court's order staying proceedings should be vacated.

According to Section 903.046 of Florida Statutes, the purpose of a bail determination in criminal proceedings is to ensure the appearance of the criminal defendant at subsequent proceedings and to protect the community against unreasonable danger from the criminal defendant. http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0903/SEC046.HTM&Title=->2005->Ch0903->Section%20046#0903.046

The assistant state attorney from McCabe's office is expected to raise a number arguments in opposition to any reduction of the amount.

Although Florida court rules provide that at least one portable television camera be permitted in any proceeding in any trial court, Judge Beach has previously refused a journalist's request to videotape a hearing in proceedings pertaining to Adams. Beach had allowed the journalist to videotape a previous hearing but then he threatened to hold her in contempt of court if she provided a copy to anyone before giving him one.

In Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Lewis, 426 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1982), the Florida Supreme Court cited its decision from 1979 allowing a camera in court, and it stated that public access to the courts is an important part of the justice system because it serves as a check on corrupt practices by exposing the judicial process to public scrutiny and it protects the rights of the accused to a fair trial.

"Why would Judge Beach want to keep the public from knowing what is going on in this case?", Adams asks. "Is he trying to help cover something up?" 10-18-05