DA seeks additional information in case of Dougherty Probate Court judge

by Alan Mauldin

Nov. 25—ALBANY — A prosecutor investigating charges against Dougherty County's Probate Court judge is awaiting reports before making a decision on whether to present the lingering case to a grand jury or dismiss charges.

Judge Leisa Blount was arrested and charged in March 2020 after Dougherty County Sheriff Kevin Sproul asked the GBI to launch an investigation. The case was assigned to Southern Judicial Circuit District Attorney Brad Shealy, who said this week that he is waiting for reports from the GBI.

"I had to request some additional information from the GBI, and they have not gotten it back to me," he said. "'I'm hoping to get it back now."

Specifically, the district attorney is seeking additional witness statements and layouts of the courtroom area.

Shealy said he is not ready to make a decision on whether the case merits being presented to a grand jury, but he hopes to make a determination by January.

"No, not until I have all the evidence," he said. "I don't like to make a decision until I have all the evidence in. I think that's fair to the individual. They're having to get those witness statements and put together a report. Hopefully, I can get that pretty soon."

Blount was charged in March 2020 with one count each of terroristic threats and violation of oath of office.

The GBI alleges that Blount made threats against an employee who works with the county's Facilities Maintenance department.

The alleged victim, who was not present at the time that Blount had the conversation with county employees, had reportedly entered Blount's office while she was in the office during a time when he was not assigned duties in that part of the building.

In an affidavit filed in court, Blount indicated that the employee acted strangely. In one instance he told her he was there to turn off the lights, and in the other he did not give an answer for why he was inside the Probate Court area.

During a meeting with officials from the county and sheriff's office, Blount made a remark about defending herself and that she was allowed as a judge to bring a gun inside the building for protection.

Albany attorney Maurice King Jr., who is representing Blount, said that the last he had heard, the GBI had not spoken with the county employee who is the alleged victim in the case.

"They've talked to everybody in the case but the alleged victim, who has said he was not threatened," King said. "That's what he told a coworker. It was my understanding the GBI did not talk to the alleged victim before the charges were filed."

Shealy seems to be doing his due diligence, King said, but the incident does not seem to rise to a matter that could be successfully prosecuted.

"I just don't think they need to waste taxpayers' money on a case like this," he said. "Sometimes you have when time passes that cooler heads will prevail, and I hope that's what's happening here."

Full Article & Source:

DA seeks additional information in case of Dougherty Probate Court judge

Dougherty County Probate judge's attorneys respond to March terroristic threats charge

By Alan Mauldin

Dougherty County Probate Court Judge Leisa Blount, center, is flanked by attorneys Maurice King Jr., left, and Pete Donaldson. Blount, charged in March with terroristic threats and violation of oath by an officer, is seeking a speedy disposition of her case.
Staff Photo: Alan Mauldin

ALBANY — Attorneys for the Dougherty County Probate Court judge accused in March of making terroristic threats against a county maintenance employee are asking for a speedy disposition of the case.

The issue revolves around the employee entering Judge Leisa Blount’s office on two occasions after office hours when she was working alone in her office. Blount expressed her fear about the behavior of the employee, who apparently did not have any duties in the building at the time, to the Dougherty County Sheriff’s Office and county staff.

Maurice King Jr. and Pete Donaldson, who are representing Blount, told reporters on Tuesday that the elements of the case do not merit a criminal indictment and that the charges should be dismissed.

The two Albany attorneys appeared with Blount, who has continued working since charges of terroristic threats and violation of oath by a public officer were filed in late March, at a news conference at King’s office.

The case has been referred to the office of District Attorney Brad Shealey of the Southern Judicial Circuit based in Valdosta for investigation.

“This is not a case that meets any criteria that would suggest any violation of any criminal (statute),” Donaldson said of the charges, which were filed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation after the case was referred to the agency by Dougherty County Sheriff Kevin Sproul. “We are asking the district attorney in Valdosta to move this case along.”

Blount is not filing a civil suit in the matter or seeking damages, but is looking to settle the matter, which should not have resulted in the filing of criminal charges in the first place, Donaldson said.

As a judge, Blount has been placed in a kind of legal limbo because grand jury sessions mostly have been suspended for more than a year, the attorneys said, and it is imperative that she clear her name to continue to enjoy the confidence of the public she serves.

“(People) of Dougherty County have a right to know the courts are being operated properly,” Donaldson said. “As long as this case is out there, there is a cloud in the air. We would like to remove that.”

The attorneys also pointed to an investigation by the state Judicial Qualifications Commission, which investigates complaints against judges.

After reviewing surveillance videos and witness statements obtained by law enforcement, the agency wrote that its panel “has concluded that the institution of disciplinary action is not warranted at this time.” It added that no action will be taken unless new or additional information comes forward.

In an affidavit filed in the criminal case, Blount described the two incidents involving the county Facilities Management Department employee. On around Jan. 25, 2021, the employee used a master key to enter the back door of the Probate Court offices. The employee had no cleaning supplies or cart for removing trash, was not assigned to clean the area and had never entered the Probate Court area to turn out lights since Blount had been serving as judge in April 2020, the affidavit said.

When questioned by Blount, the employee said he was in the building to turn out the lights and did not exit when she told him that she turns off the lights when she leaves, according to the affidavit. He eventually left when she picked up her cellphone. Blount was told by county staff that the employee was not assigned to perform any tasks in the Probate Court offices after hours.

On March 10, at about 5:53 p.m. the employee used a master key to enter the back door of the offices again, Blount said in the affidavit. Blount went to the door of her chambers and asked the employee twice why he was in the office, but he did not answer.

Blount sent emails, included in the court filing, about the incidents and had a meeting with representatives from the sheriff’s office and the county. During that meeting, she asked Chief Deputy Sheriff Terron Hayes for permission to bring her pistol into the courthouse for protection.

She told Hayes that she has weapons training in which she was instructed that a weapon is not to be used to scare or injure but in circumstances in which their use is required to be aimed at the target’s head or chest. For that reason, she did not carry a weapon because she did not want to have to use it, Blount wrote.

“She said, ‘I will protect myself,’” Donaldson said “Somehow that has been turned into a terroristic threat.”

Blount never brought a weapon into the building, although judges are authorized to possess a weapon inside a courthouse and no permission is required from the sheriff. The maintenance employee was not present during the discussion with Hayes, the affidavit said. He did not file a complaint in the case.

Full Article & Source:

Dougherty County Probate judge's attorneys respond to March terroristic threats charge

WXYZ appealing order from Metro Detroit judge in First Amendment battle

PONTIAC, Mich. (WXYZ) - It’s the story several lawyers did not want you to see:  The 7 Investigators are looking into allegations of problems in the probate guardianship system.

• Michigan families speak out about losing to loved ones to guardianship
•  
• Metro Detroit woman says probate guardianship case is tearing family apart

Last week, a judge stepped in and issued a restraining order, preventing Channel 7 from showing any pictures or videos of two of the people at the center of the story, Janet and Milan Kapp.

On Tuesday that judge said he’s standing by that decision.  So now WXYZ is heading to the Court of Appeals.

Mila Kapusta and several other local families asked the 7 Investigators to make their stories public.  Those who asked us to investigate say they’ve lost control of their loved ones to court-appointed guardians.

Many of these cases end up in probate court because of family disputes, and the Kapp family fight prompted these two sisters to try to stop the 7 Investigators from using pictures of their parents in our investigation.

Just hours before the story was supposed to air last Thursday, Lorrie and Sandy Kapp got a judge to issue a Temporary Restraining Order, preventing us from showing you old family pictures that had been provided to us by their other sister, Mila.

Tuesday during a show cause hearing, Judge Daniel A. O’Brien continued that restraining order, saying his job was to protect Mr. and Mrs. Kapp, who are now in their 90s.

“I am granting the injunction against Channel 7 and they are restrained.  It is in fact a prior restraint I gotta admit, but they are not to use any photos or video of Milan and Janet Kapp in any broadcast,” said Judge O’Brien.

WXYZ’s attorney Jim Stewart argued that Judge O’Brien’s initial restraining order was unconstitutional.

“A court cannot order someone not to publish something.  It’s called a prior restraint of speech and it’s been held to be presumptively unconstitutional,” said Stewart.

Legal experts say “prior restraint” is typically only used in cases where there is a threat to national security.

Clearly there is no such threat in this story, and this is now about much more than just pictures.

“You can’t have the government telling somebody what they can and can’t say when they’re covering a newsworthy event,” said Stewart.

Because WXYZ cannot allow Judge O’Brien’s order to set a precedent for other government officials limiting our news coverage – as protected by the First Amendment – we are appealing his order.

Full Article & Source:
WXYZ appealing order from Metro Detroit judge in First Amendment battle

Probate judge granted program that could erase attack charge

WATERBURY, Conn. –  A Connecticut probate judge charged with choking his wife was accepted into a diversionary program on Tuesday that could result in charges against him being dismissed.

Judge Martin Landgrebe appeared Tuesday in Waterbury Superior Court and was accepted into the state's family violence education program. If Landgrebe completes the program, charges of misdemeanor strangulation and disorderly conduct would be dismissed next year.

Landgrebe continues to preside at Housatonic Probate Court in New Milford. He and his lawyer declined to comment on Tuesday.

Assistant State's Attorney Karen Diebolt did not object to Landgrebe's entry into the program. A full protective order barring Landgrebe from having contact with the woman was downgraded during Tuesday's court hearing to a residential protective order, which means he can have contact with the woman but has to stay away from her home.

Court documents do not identify the alleged victim, but Landgrebe's lawyer, David Moraghan, previously told the Connecticut Law Tribune that the woman is Landgrebe's wife.

Landgrebe turned himself in to police on Aug. 9 after learning there was a warrant for his arrest following a fight with the woman, according to court documents. The woman told police that Landgrebe pinned her in the grass by holding her throat, but that at no time did she have difficulty breathing.

Landgrebe told police he was defending himself. His lawyer has said that Landgrebe actually was the one who was assaulted.

Landgrebe filed for divorce soon after the incident, but withdrew the filing on Sept. 7, according to court documents.

Full Article & Source:
Probate judge granted program that could erase attack charge

Controversial Judge Retires

Judge Pat Ferchill retires

Tarrant County Judge Pat Ferchill announced his retirement effective Aug. 31 after sitting on the bench for 35 years in Probate Court No. 2. Ferchill was two years into a four-year term that expires in 2018. He will continue to sit on the bench as a visiting judge until county commissioners appoint his successor.

Some people might shed a tear for Ferchill’s departure, we suppose. Probate courts resolve some sticky family dramas at times.

“The county is going to miss him more than they’ll know after he’s actually gone,” Associate Judge Lin Morrisett told us on the phone this week.

You know who won’t miss him? The families who have described how a guardianship system overseen by Ferchill and fellow probate Judge Steven King have ripped apart families unnecessarily in the name of greed and power. The first case we examined in the Fort Worth Weekly involved Kathie Seidel, a mother who adopted a child from Russia but later lost custody after a guardianship hearing was held by Ferchill without Seidel being present (“Saving Katia,” July 2, 2008). After that article appeared, dozens of families called the Weekly to describe similar horror stories of a powerful court system under the influence of money-hungry attorneys and healthcare facility operators more interested in lining their pockets than doing what is best for families. Associate Editor Jeff Prince has written numerous stories about the probate system and has compiled a long list of local families who describe being victimized by the probate courts.

Frank and Chila Covington were one of those families. Ferchill removed them as guardians of their Down Syndrome daughter, Ceci, without bothering to let them know that their parental rights were being questioned. Yep, the court has that power and wielded it like a baseball bat against them in 2009. The Covingtons’ crime? They did not want their daughter to be administered psychoactive drugs that they say put her in a stupor. They preferred a more natural approach to treating her mental problems.

The Covingtons say Ferchill’s decision to remove them as guardians was a way to pad the pockets of attorneys and caregivers who profit from working with Guardianship Services, Inc., the program that Ferchill and his attorney buddies helped establish in 1998 allegedly to provide help for people in need.

Ferchill just wanted to send people to Guardianship Services, Chila said.

“We were just somebody else he could manipulate,” she said. “It is just greed.”

The Covingtons spent about $400,000 in a years-long fight to regain custody of their daughter.

Kathie Seidel (with son, Greg)

Ferchill “devastated our lives with lies,” Chila said. “They decided to control my daughter’s destiny by saying she was psychotic.”

Another local woman, Dorothy Luck, was put under guardianship after the probate court decided she wasn’t mentally sound enough to manage her financial affairs correctly. Luck is elderly but quite sharp when it comes to her personal and financial affairs. But all it took was one complaint from a relative (who had a vested interest financially) and Luck found herself having to defend her abilities to take care of herself (“Grabbing the Purse,” Sept. 3, 2013). She proved herself capable time and again, but she couldn’t stand up against a court system so powerful that it can remove a person’s rights at will.

Over the next year or so, court-appointed attorneys charged about $500,000 to Luck’s bank account while, a’hem, valiantly fighting to protect her money from … uh … herself.

Seidel spent a decade fighting against Ferchill and the probate court’s methods, first as a lone voice in defense of Katia and, later, as part of advocacy groups such as G.R.A.D.E., or Guardianship Reform Advocates for the Disabled and Elderly, a group formed to help protect people from overzealous probate judges. Seidel died from cancer a few weeks ago, on August 16, at her Fort Worth home. She still blamed Ferchill for putting her family through hell unnecessarily. Shortly before she died, she e-mailed Prince.

“Things are pretty dicey with physical problems,” she wrote. “Of course, it is hard to do any letting go where my children and other loved ones are concerned. It won’t be difficult to let go of the physical challenges.”

After that first quick paragraph, she dived into the topic that drove her to rail against a powerful system for the last decade of her life. Her adopted daughter was put under guardianship, removed from her home, and prevented from seeing her mother for years.

Guardian Services “is being informed this week that I am terminal in hopes that we can get more visits with Katia,” who is 30 years old now and living in a group home, “and to prepare her for my death,” Seidel wrote. “It kills me to think of what K will go through in having so little family support through the grief she will encounter … also, I want her to be able to go to grief counseling  –– but am doubtful she will get it. We worked for more than six months trying to find money and a high-profile attorney to advocate for her knowing this might be coming.”

She ended her e-mail by expressing fears that the probate court would toss one more indignity her way as she was dying.

“If there is retaliation toward me (threatening to put me under guardianship), I have written a letter,” she said. Her son, Greg, “knows the location of it, and you may be interested in it.”

Seidel’s friends say she would have appreciated knowing that Ferchill will no longer sit on the bench.

Full Article & Source:
Controversial Judge Retires

2 probate judges disciplined for inappropriate behavior

DADEVILLE, Ala. (AP) — Two Alabama probate judges have been disciplined by a judicial court: one for sexting a litigant and the other for ruling on matters in her father's estate.

According to AL.com (http://bit.ly/2aZ9PZG ) Tallapoosa County Probate Judge Leon Archer was suspended Monday for six months without pay for sexting with a litigant. Archer admitted that sexually explicit Facebook messaging exchanges included photos of his genitals, taken while at the county courthouse.

Probate Judge Earlean Isaac was charged with ethical violations regarding her actions on distributing money from her father's estate. Isaac agreed to resign effective Saturday. She also will never seek judicial office again.

Both Archer and Isaac had worked out agreements with the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission on what their discipline would be before the Court of the Judiciary.

Full Article & Source:
2 probate judges disciplined for inappropriate behavior

BCI has an ongoing criminal investigation into ex-Mahoning County Probate Court Judge Mark Belinky

By David Skolnick

YOUNGSTOWN
There is an ongoing criminal investigation into former Mahoning County Probate Court Judge Mark Belinky, who, according to a state investigator’s affidavit, admitted stealing money from people he was a guardian over and falsifying court records, among other crimes.

Four affidavits from Ed Carlini, an Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation special agent, filed in September 2014, recently were unsealed in Youngstown Municipal Court with their details exclusively reported Thursday by The Vindicator.

“I can’t dispute what’s in the affidavit, but I can’t comment on it,” Dan Tierney, an attorney general spokesman, said Friday. “We stand by the information in the affidavit. The attorney general can’t comment on an ongoing investigation.”

In Carlini’s affidavits from 11 months ago he also wrote: “BCI is investigating Mark Belinky for crimes he committed from within the probate court, and in fact the auditor for the state of Ohio is currently conducting a special audit of the Mahoning County Probate Court to determine the breadth of Mark Belinky’s thievery.”

Brittany Halpin, a state auditor’s office spokeswoman, said Friday, “We do have a special audit [of the county probate court], and that audit is ongoing.”

In two of the affidavits, Carlini wrote that Belinky, a Boardman Democrat convicted July 9, 2014, of tampering with records, admitted to committing crimes “separate and apart” from that offense.

Belinky “admitted to stealing money from people that he was a guardian over and further has admitted to altering probate court documents to further such theft and has further admitted to using a Mahoning County probate computer to create false probate court records,” according to two of Carlini’s affidavits.

Belinky also used county employees, property and the county’s computer network for political purposes, Carlini wrote.

J. Gerald Ingram, Belinky’s attorney, declined to comment to The Vindicator about the investigation of his client.

Belinky resigned his judicial position May 8.

Dan Kasaris, a senior assistant attorney general, said during Belinky’s July 9, 2014, sentencing that the former judge was still being investigated, and the plea to the campaign-finance felony didn’t cover other potential crimes Belinky may have committed.

At that hearing, Kasaris said Belinky was being “very cooperative” with state investigative agencies and the FBI in “battling public corruption.”

Belinky was sentenced to 60 days of house arrest, 200 hours of community service and a $2,500 fine.

He admitted that during the 2008 campaign for his seat, Belinky falsified his financial records by not reporting debt and hiding the sources of loans.

The affidavits were used in September 2014 to obtain search warrants to seize computers, computer disks and software from then-county Auditor Michael V. Sciortino, a Democrat who is one of the three defendants in the Oakhill Renaissance Place criminal-corruption case.

It’s unclear why the information about Belinky was included in the affidavits.

Full Article & Source:
BCI has an ongoing criminal investigation into ex-Mahoning County Probate Court Judge Mark Belinky

Ohio Supreme Court urged to review Belinky’s tenure

Former county Probate Judge Mark Belinky

A veteran lawyer who has practiced extensively in the Mahoning County Courthouse offered this analogy to former county Probate Judge Mark Belinky’s sins of commission regarding guardianships: “It’s like a father coming home from work each day, knocking on his daughter’s bedroom door, entering and then proceeding to sexually abuse her because he knows she’s defenseless.”

The well-known lawyer, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity, was furious over Belinky’s admission that he stole money from people for whom he was a guardian and that he altered probate court documents to facilitate the theft. Belinky, who resigned from the bench in March 2014 in the midst of a criminal investigation into his activities, also admitted he used a probate court computer to create false probate court records.

The admissions were contained in affidavits filed by Ed Carlini, a special agent with the Ohio Bureau of Investigation.

“The first responsibility of a probate judge is to protect the people he is a guardian of,” the lawyer pointed out. “These are people who can’t take care of themselves. The probate judge has ultimate guardianship over individuals and over money.”

He described Belinky as a “depraved soul” for stealing from the handicapped – mentally or physically – who are at the mercy of the court.

We not only endorse that characterization of the former judge, but we would go a step further and say that he should be publicly condemned by all honest, law-abiding residents of this area. Why? Because Belinky presented himself as a paragon of virtue and the slayer of corrupt politicians when he ran for the judgeship in 2008, after being appointed in 2007 by then Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland.

In a May 2014 editorial after he had pleaded guilty to violating campaign-finance laws, we noted that he had resigned because agents from the BCI had a litany of criminal charges they were prepared to file against him if he did not cooperate with them in their wide-ranging investigation of government corruption in the Mahoning Valley.

APPEAL FOR SPECIAL MASTER
Belinky avoided jail time because he is said to be cooperating with investigators and the FBI, but given the latest revelations about his activities as a judge, we believe a fuller, independent investigation of his tenure on the bench is demanded.

We call on Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor to appoint a special master to determine the extent of Belinky’s criminal behavior.

The one question that demands to be answered is this: Was he acting alone, or were there other participants in the scheme to steal from some of society’s most vulnerable?

We find this case particularly egregious because we, along with lawyers specializing in probate law and the public, came to view Belinky as the exception to the political-corruption rule in Mahoning County.

GAMING THE SYSTEM
He was eminently qualified to serve on the bench because he had long practiced in the court. Now we see that he used his knowledge and experience to game the system.  (Continue Reading)

Full Article & Source:
Ohio Supreme Court urged to review Belinky’s tenure

See Also:
Former Probate Judge Mark Belinky Answers Questions About His Resignation 

Ohio Mahong County Probate Judge Mark Belinky Resigns!

Arrest warrant application for Probate Judge filed in Magistrate Court

CONYERS - A new chapter in the saga between Rockdale County Probate Court Judge Charles Mays and former Probate Court worker Freya Pearson has just started.

An arrest warrant application seeking Mays' arrest was filed by Pearson in Rockdale County Magistrate Court Tuesday morning. She is accusing him of committing two counts of thefts of services, two counts of theft by deception and forgery, all felony charges.

Pearson is seeking about $20,000 she claims is owned to her from her time spent working in the Probate Court office from February 2014 to June 2014. During that time span, she says she was paid $2,500.

Nine months ago, Pearson, through her attorney Michael Waldrop, who also serves Conyers' attorney, filed for an arrest warrant in Rockdale County Superior Court on largely the same charges. All the judges in the county recused themselves from the case so it was heard by DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Linda Hunter. During initial discussions at the April 15 hearing, Judge Hunter told Pearson and Waldrop that a case of this nature would best be handled in Magistrate Court.

Waldrop previously told The News, "[Magistrate Court is] better positioned to handle cases like this... She felt like it would be a better use of the court's resources."

The Superior Court hearing was put on hold after a question of conflict of interest arose regarding Waldrop serving as Pearson's attorney. Judge Hunter was to issue a written decision on the matter.

However, in May, the arrest warrant application was dropped in Superior Court and Waldrop told The News the Pearson camp would be filing for an arrest warrant in Magistrate Court to continue the fight in getting Pearson her justice.

Waldrop's announcement came after the Gary Washington, Mays' attorney, declared the situation between the two opposing parties over, since Waldrop and Pearson filed a motion to dismiss the Superior Court application for an arrest warrant against Mays without prejudice on May 5.

"It is over. It is finished. It is done," said Washington, during a press conference held at the Hawthorn Suites, 1659 Centennial Olympic Parkway, Conyers, on May 26.

""It's neither over, finished, nor done," Waldrop said at the time.

Full Article & Source:
Arrest warrant application for Probate Judge filed in Magistrate Court

See Also:
Accountability court effort led to legal woes for Probate Court judge

Mental Health Court Waiver Denied for Georgia Probate Judge Mays

Probate Judge Troubles Continue

Attorney for Rockdale Probate Court Judge Mays says case has been dismissed