Political Prisoner Elsebeth Baumgartner Jailed Again For 120 Days
Greg Szymanski
Baumgartner reluctantly accepted a plea deal after retaining a new attorney, Frank Gasper, as well as getting protection for her husband who was brought into her case on bogus drug charges related to a home invasion in violation of his 4 th amendment search and seizure rights.
For those following Baumgartner's case and the numerous bogus charges filed against her by corrupt Ohio officials, it has been called by insiders as one the most clear-cut examples of fascism, abuse of power and a Nazi-like approach to silencing someone who uncovered high-level corruption.
Baumgartner has been jailed already for more than 250 days, not counting her most recent 120 sentence on 27 contempt charges.
"I uncovered massive corruption at the state and federal level, tried to speak up at a city council meeting and ever since then I have been the target of what usually happened to political dissidents in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany," said Baumgartner recently before being jailed when she appeared on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal.
Baumgartner now faces sentencing on felony charges Monday which could add to her 120 sentence. Besides having the law twisted and being charged with a crime of speaking out at a public meeting, other charges include eight counts of intimidating a judge, four counts of falsification, two counts of retaliation and possession of criminal tools, a laptop computer.
Baumgartner and her web site partner were arrested last summer following a secret indictment which alleged that they had intimidated Markus by allegedly sending him emails expressing their opinions about various issues before him.
Called the ultimate travesty of justice by court observers and by her husband, Joe Baumgartner, this most recent jailing on 27 counts of contempt illustrates the kangaroo court-like atmosphere present in Ohio, as her case also clearly illustrates a total breakdown of the rule of law and respect for the rights of an individual, according to court room observers.
"I've been kept in a legal matrix and have all my due process and free speech rights violated," said Baumgartner.
Last year, for example, prior to a trial date in Dec. 2005 that never materialized, she wrote a letter to Daniel Kasaris, assistant Cuyahoga County prosecutor and the FBI, explaining the blatant abuse of power taking place in the Ohio judiciary.
Here is a copy of the letter telling why she is probably one of America's most prominent political prisoners:
Dear Mr. Kasaris: In response to your letter dated Dec, 2, 2005 attached hereto please be advised of the following:
1) The intimidation statute does not allow for charging people for sending emails. The statute and Ohio Jury Instructions require that a false document of a legally significant nature is filed, recorded or otherwise used in a malicious or otherwise illegal manner. Examples of false documents prosecuted as a form of intimidation under the intimidation statute include false liens, indictments, bankruptcy petitions, and sight drafts. I've researched the law nationwide and not a single jurisdiction criminalizes communications to a judge criticizing conduct of the case. Indeed, to date you have provided no discovery that proves any false statements of fact were knowing made by me in any communications. Emails are forms of communication like letters or facsimiles and charges may be filed only for truly threatening communications. For example, several recent newspaper articles report that people making serious threats such as threats to kill, maim and or rape could only be charged with menacing by stalking or aggravated menacing for sending threatening communications such as letters or posting threats on the internet.
Finally, to the extent that communications are related to pending litigation the communications are absolutely privileged under Ohio and federal law from all liability.
2) Any actions taken by me in allegedly sending any emails occurred in Florida from the time frame June 2004 until Sept. 4, 2004; and in Michigan from Sept. 5, 2004 until May 20, 2005. The emails you have provided in discovery concerning Aug. 15, 2005 emails (Counts 1, 2, of the Indictment) were not sent from presto4701 but were sent to Judge Markus from email addresses affiliated with people in North Carolina and California. Thus no act was committed by me in Ohio let alone Cuyahoga County.
3) Ohio case law has held that communications to a public official that travels as part of their job (and you have yet to provide discovery proving the essential element that Judge Markus is a public official such as his commission, oath of office and bond) occur at the location of the public office.
In this case Judge Markus, if in fact he can be shown to be a lawfully appointed Ottawa County Common Pleas Court Judge under the law of Ohio, would be deemed to receive communications in Ottawa County, Ohio. Moreover, Judge Markus conceded that any alleged criminal actions occurred in Ottawa County and indeed he had a duty to disclose everything by filing 32 unsworn criminal contempt of court citations against me in Ottawa County Common Pleas Court on Dec. 10, 2004. This was prior to ever reporting any imagined crimes to you on Dec. 21, 2004 as part of his interaction with you in Cuyahoga County criminal cases.
Similarly, my co-defendant is also subject to criminal charges in Ottawa County involving the same civil case Judge Markus presided over in Ottawa County Common Pleas Court. Again, the criminal indictment was obtained in February 2005, well prior to the facially defective indictment obtained by you in Cuyahoga County on June 30, 2005.
Indeed, I am waiting for you to disclose the sworn affidavit disclosing court officer misconduct allegedly stolen from the Ottawa County case file by Ottawa County prosecutor Mark Mulligan on Dec. 3, 2004, all transcripts of trial and all hearings in that case as well as exhibits sealed by Judge Markus that prove he awarded over $26,000 in sanctions against my husband based on fraudulent legal invoices as exculpatory evidence. These withheld documents will provide a substantial basis for my contention that Judge Markus appeared to collude with parties in my civil cases to award pre-determined outcomes and to aid and abet insurance fraud.
Similarly, I await disclosure of statements from BCI investigators in the possession of your associate James Gutierrez concerning interviews with Krista Harris and Debbie Pribanic about alleged drug trafficking, weapons running, abuse of public resources, having coerced sex with a murder trial witness, suborning perjury in a murder trial and other crimes committee by Erie County prosecutor Kevin Baxter. These statements are relevant to my defense in both Cuyahoga and Erie Counties. As you know Erie County prosecutor Kevin Baxter hand selected you to prosecute me in Erie County for allegedly stealing my own company car among other things in early June 2005 prior to your obtaining the indictment against me in this case.
Finally, your office has failed to disclose the affidavit of my husband filed with the Ohio Supreme Court which confirms my allegations and is thus exculpatory and the Complaint for Writ of Prohibition also filed with the Ohio Supreme Court. Your office defended Judge Markus in the case which concerned his filing 32 counts of criminal contempt of court in Ottawa county related to legal documents exposing attorney and judicial misconduct in case no's 01-CVC-136 and 01-CVC-223.
Incredibly those charges are unsworn, and date back to Dec. 10, 2004 well before Judge Markus seeking to have me indicted in Cuyahoga County for Ottawa County acts. I am being forced to go to trial before yet another retired visiting judge who is insisting I'm not entitled to a jury trial, notice of charges or any other fundamental right accorded criminal defendants despite the fact I am facing over nine years in jail. Bill Mason and Assistant Cuyahoga County prosecutor Jon Oebker argued on behalf of Judge Markus that sworn charges and notice of charges are not necessary to invoke indirect criminal contempt jurisdiction.
Next in June 2005, I requested Assistant Prosecutor Malamud provide me evidence of contracts and invoices for services related to Cuyahoga County employees providing legal services to other counties including James Gutierrez, Paul Soucie's and your services to Erie County and the services provided by Jon Oebker to Ottawa County on behalf of Judge Markus and or for personal purposes of county employees such as Bill Mason in personal lawsuits. To date he has failed to produce any documentation so I have to assume Cuyahoga County is allowing its employees to moonlight on taxpayers' time without contract or compensation. Thus your office is under a mandatory duty to disqualify itself because Bill Mason and many assistant prosecutors are necessary witnesses in my defense to prove my statements that judges and prosecutors are misusing their offices for personal gain as alleged in some of the emails attributed to me.
4) You have provided much material in discovery but unfortunately none of it is relevant to the elements you must prove in a case of intimidation, retaliation and possession of criminal tools. The Affidavit of Disqualification is already a matter of record with the court. The Ohio Supreme Court sent it to the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court on Nov. 10, 2005. As you know that created a stay in the case. However, you continued to file documents in the case and involve yourself in hearings after knowledge of the stay. For example, you filed a Motion to Incorporate Competency Ruling in this case on Nov. 15, 2005 while I sat illegally in jail and you didn't serve me with the pleading. You also provided additional discovery by fax to my husband while I was incarcerated. Finally you failed to serve me with Erie County material while I sat in jail but instead mailed the materials to my home and faxed the materials to my husband's fax.
I do not object to receiving materials at my husband's fax number when I am not incarcerated and or no stay is pending from the Ohio Supreme Court. My objection was and continues to be that you improperly served me while I was illegally in jail without cause or hearing and violated the Ohio Supreme Court stay in order to harass my husband and me. My husband is a likely defense witness for Mr. DuBois and certainly is a key witness for me and continues to be intimidated by the State as reported to the court in early October 2005. In fact while I was incarcerated the State of Ohio through Judge Markus and Ottawa County Prosecutor Mark Mulligan allegedly extorted $700 from him in order to drop a civil contempt of court charge related to my husband filing an affidavit of bias against Judge Markus with the Ohio Supreme Court. Discovery provided by you shows you are actively communicating with Mr. Mulligan and are well aware of the fact that he allegedly stole a sworn affidavit from civil case no 01-CVC-136 in Ottawa County Common Pleas Court.
My husband decided it was easier and cheaper to pay then fight a fixed system wherein he would have to pay a lawyer to defend him against a civil contempt charge for filing an affidavit of bias against Judge Markus, shut down his pharmacy for the day only to have the decision adjudicated by the self interested Judge Markus.
I do not deny that presto4701is my email address. However many other people had access to my email account. Moreover I categorically deny sending communications to Judge Markus from anywhere in the State of Ohio or admitting to sending Judge Markus an email that I knew would be downloaded in Cuyahoga County.
Judge Markus represented to me that he was an Ottawa County Common Pleas Court Judge and he encouraged me to use his corporate owned email address for his alleged visiting judge duties to communicate with him concerning Ottawa County matters after I caught him and opposing counsel communicating ex parte in my civil cases. Based on Ohio case law his office for purposes of communicating with me about Ottawa County cases is deemed to be located in Ottawa County, Ohio.
More importantly, you have yet to produce any proof that I made a false statement. Indeed you haven't even stated with any specificity what statements are false, that I knew the statements were false at the time or how Judge Markus was intimidated. Instead you've unjustly inundated me and the court with inflammatory documents intended to assassinate my character [this is a pattern with Kasaris] simply because I am a well educated Christian female who associates with diverse people and holds political, religious and or social beliefs that differ from your own and Judge Markus. I believe the justice system to be corrupt, unaccountable and in need of change while you and Judge Markus both of whom profit from the current system enjoy the status quo and unlawfully enrich yourself at the expense of the public and the integrity of the justice system. This is my opinion, an opinion I am entitled to hold under the US Constitution. Americans are not prosecuted for thought crimes or their opinions.
5) You claim that Supplemental Discovery is intended to provide me with "notice of the evidence the government may introduce against you." I've asked for Notice of Intent to use evidence against me and to date you have failed to respond. Moreover as noted above, you have failed to produce any relevant evidence other than the alleged emails themselves, two of which were not even sent by presto4701 that provides a scintilla of evidence to prove each and every element of your case against me.
Instead you have inundated me with irrelevant, inflammatory and highly prejudicial evidence while withholding exculpatory evidence in the State's possession. For example if you intend to use my disbarment, my pharmacy revocation, and falsification conviction as evidence against me, I insist you enter the entire case files so the jury can discern whether or not these actions were supported by credible evidence or if in fact they were political prosecutions conducted without due process in order to muzzle me about case manipulation via special prosecutor and or visiting judge appointments as well as the enormous problem of substance abuse among the bar and judiciary.
Further, you have claimed at a pre-trial that my opinion that Judge Markus is protecting the sexual abuse of children is false. In order to prove that is a false statement beyond a reasonable doubt you must prove the opposite is true beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words you must prove Judge Markus actively reports and ensures all allegations of child abuse are rigorously investigated, as he is required to do under the Ohio Revised Code as a mandatory reporter.
In order to carry your burden you must produce evidence that Judge Markus did in fact report the alleged rape and or emotional/physical abuse by Benton Carroll Salem Local School officials of [name withheld] to proper authorities as reported to him by me in Ottawa County cases and by my husband, a member of the BCS Board of Education in his Affidavit of Bias as provided to the Ohio Supreme Court which was copied to Judge Markus. You must show that the state conducted an investigation proving [name withheld] was never allegedly sexually abused by the brother of Democratic House Minority leader Chris Redfern as he and his mother claim or emotionally and physically abused by BCS School officials. In regard to this latter issue, I have specific findings from the Ohio Department of Education that BCS School official and Attorney Charles Burns in his capacity as Superintendent did in fact violate [name withheld] civil rights.
You must also produce an explanation of why Judge Markus argued as an attorney for Porter & Wright while serving as a private judge in the State of Ohio for allegedly concealing the names of reported child abusers to the taxpayer supported Cuyahoga County Ombudsmen Office in a case at the Ohio Supreme Court. Thankfully, Judge Markus lost that argument and the people have the right to know the names of reported pedophiles so they can take steps to protect their children and ensure that alleged child abusers are vigorously prosecuted instead of receiving protection due political influence with a judge prosecutor or law enforcement officer.
6) As noted above, you intentionally violated a stay in this case issued by the Ohio Supreme Court and faxed documents to an address for service when you knew I was illegally incarcerated. Further, your discovery to date has consisted of irrelevant and redundant material with no proof of the elements of your case. Thus, your self serving statement that supplemental discovery is not intended to harass and annoy is disingenuous. Annoying and harassing my family and me is the only possible reason you would intentionally violate a stay, allow me to be incarcerated without cause or hearing and send voluminous irrelevant documents to me at an improper address while incarcerated.
Finally you knowingly provided false information to the media through Jamie Dalton concerning the basis of the revocation of bond while a stay was pending on Nov. 14, 2005. You then unlawfully participated in two hearings that afternoon to harass me and fabricate evidence to support the revocation. While the stay was pending you filed a motion seeking to incorporate a finding a competency in this case, which is no longer relevant due the abuse suffered from the unlawful revocation, which has medically compromised my ability to defend myself. (See article published at www.erievoices.com Dec. 5, 2005 which includes the transcript of the Nov. 14, 2005 morning session.
Your office then filed a misleading pleading with the Ohio Supreme Court while representing Judge Saffold intentionally withholding from the court the fact that my bond was revoked without hearing or cause while the stay was pending simply because I asked for a continuance and expressed off the record my intent to amend the affidavit of bias against me to include additional evidence of prejudice and collusion in the case between the court bailiff and your office.
Consequently, I will not agree to your suggested stipulation for the following specific reasons: a) Far from being a legitimate criminal proceeding, this case is a transparent attempt to misuse the criminal justice system to advance a private cause of libel under the guise of criminal libel in order to chill speech critical of the Cuyahoga County prosecutor's office and the special prosecutor, visiting and or retired judge schemes in Ohio that allow the politically connected to manipulate case outcomes for their own financial benefit, to misappropriate public resources and or to target political enemies and whistleblowers.
For example, your office amazingly seeks to incarcerate me, a non-violent Christian civil rights activist, 50 years old married mother of two for 66 years for sending emails critical of retired judge Richard Markus conduct in my civil cases while at the same time seeking to incarcerate Ronald Dudas 60 years for trying to hire a hit man to kill Judge David Matia. When Judge Kathleen Sutula was the victim of an attempted hit due a shooting at her home, your office could only obtain a conviction for one count of intimidation. Yet your office seeks to incarcerate my co-defendant former Marine Corporal Bryan DuBois, editor of www.erievoices.com for over 16 years for questioning and reporting as an internet based investigative reporter on Judge Markus alleged case manipulation in Ottawa County on behalf of politicians Charles Burns and Kellen Smith who financially benefited from illegal public contracts in the BCS district.
Judge Markus, a client of your office and you both have financial interests in the case which require the disqualification of the Office of Cuyahoga County prosecutor. Most egregiously while I was incarcerated the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that at least one Cuyahoga County Judge agrees with me that there needs to be greater accountability on retired judges and that Judge Markus was actively lobbying Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court judges on behalf of continuing the accountable nature of the systems that personally insure him.
Your office has repeatedly proven itself to be unworthy of belief. In closing my response to your suggestion is that you dismiss this case pursuant to your duties under the Code of Professional Responsibility, Ohio and Federal law.
Very truly yours,
Elsebeth M. Baumgartner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Close friend, Angie Caputo, who has been following Baumgartner's case, added:
"Elsebeth is a truly awesome and courageous woman. Her case exposes the blatant corruption that exists in Ohio alone. She does not deserve this. I just hope that Judge Saffold does not pile on more jail time.
"Her attorney is Frank Gasper, a retired Cuyahoga County prosecutor. He told Else he has never seen anything like this. He seems to be working in her best interests so I am grateful that she was able to retain him even though it was less than a week before her trial. That was a lot of the reason why she accepted the plea deal. They offered her a 3-county global package that offered protection to her husband concerning the bogus drug charges and guarantees of an appellate bond in Cuyahoga County."
Greg Szymanski
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg also has his own daily show on the Genesis Communications Network. Go to www.gcnlive.com Greg Szymanski is an independent investigative journalist and his articles can been seen at www.LewisNews.com. He also writes for his own site www.arcticbeacon.com
Listen to my Radio Broadcast live Monday night at 8pm Pacific time on LewisNews, returning Jan. 1 2006 Radio http://webs.lewisnews.com/radio/index.htm. Greg is also regular on Rense.com the first Thursday of every month at 9-10 pm pacific time.