Letter To Judge Baxter. DEF's CRIMES & MISCONDUCT Misstated by Court. Filed Nov 22, 2022)

Case 5:18-cv-00837-GLS-ATB Document 120 Filed 11/14/22 Page 1 of 7
Parry & Smith, PLLC

______________________
Attorneys and Counselors at Law

______________________
Jeffrey R. Parry, Esq. - partner [email protected]
7030 East Genesee Street

Fayetteville, N.Y. 13066
(315) 424-6115
(315)622-4829 – facsimile
- not for service of process -
September 22, 2022
Hon. Andrew Baxter

Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse
P.O. Box 7396
Syracuse, NY 13261-7396 Via Electronic Filing
Re: Kelly Glover v. The Onondaga County Sheriff’s Dept., et al.

Index No.:
Dear Judge Baxter,
First, I apologize for the last-minute submission of this letter. For important
reasons, I have been away from my practice and only just returned. I hope this does
not present an inconvenience to the Court.
It is my understanding that the conference now scheduled for November 14,

2022, will address the state of discovery and discovery deadlines. It is my intention
to request liberal deadlines despite Plaintiff’s desire, and mine as well, to move this
1
case forward expeditiously. Very simply, time is required to overcome the

misconduct and obstruction of both the defendants and their counsel. As such, to
give the Court some flavor as to the need to address these impediments I am
offering a few examples. To be sure, many more remain to be addressed but it is
not possible to completely inform the Court in the confines of this letter.
Nature of the Case
Very respectfully, at a previous juncture the Court wrongly summarized the

nature of the case as being about Plaintiff’s wrongful detention for a period of a
few hours. The Court’s error in this regard has caused me much worry ever since
and it is necessary to reflect upon the nature of the case if a reasonable path
forward is to be found. I do not mean my mention of this to be in any way impolite
or critical.
Specifically. the second cause of action in Plaintiff’s Complaint depicts a

Constitutional deprivation that is both blatant and systemic. In essence, Plaintiff
asserts, among other things, that records are routinely manipulated by the
defendants to hide and cover-up police misconduct and the abuse of citizens
including, of course, herself. As we are accusing the Defendants of grievous
misconduct, falsifying documents, destroying evidence and other acts which are
normally handled in a criminal court, it is perhaps not surprising that defendants
continue in their ways out of desperation. However, my client cannot complain to
the police as, of course, she has been damaged by the police. This suit therefore,
seeks more than mere money damages. It is a very real demand for justice.
The Arrest Report
I am quite sure that the Court is sick of hearing about the missing arrest
report along with the various other documents that remain missing. In fairness, the
Court has been critical of me for being stubborn in pursuit of this and related
documents. Opposing counsel has presented to the Court that its demise was a
mystery, that it may never have ever been drafted and, if indeed it was, it’s
disappearance was of no consequence because the Plaintiff was “never formally
charged”.
Previous to this writing, Plaintiff could only infer the existence of the arrest
report because of various other actions that would only occur if it in fact existed.
2
While a compelling argument was made in this regard, it is certainly not as good as
physical evidence of the documents existence.
There is now no question that the Arrest Report, Ms. Glover’s statement, the
statement of Matthew Parisi and other related documents existed upon the night of
her arrest and for several days afterward, that the defendants in fact possessed them
and that they sought to hide them outside of the structured archive system in place
at the Sheriff’s Department. Specifically, in response to a subpoena for records of
the Onondaga County District Attorney’s Office issued by this Court, an email was
produced that demonstrates that defendants had the various documents, and they
were seeking to remove them from the filing process. Exhibit A. (Defendant’s
reference to the CHAIRS system, by the way, is a red herring. Ms. Glover was
already in the CHAIRS system well before the email was written.)
Of importance for this conversation, emails such as this were demanded

during the course of discovery years ago. Literally, this email should have been in
my hands at the inception of the case. All these months of litigation could have
been avoided. This is the very definition of spoliation and misconduct.
As well, Ms. Felter informed this Court and myself of the great lengths
involved to investigate the loss of these documents, to ascertain their prior
existence and to procure them if possible. We were informed of various Deputies
researching the records and presented with the same conclusion, that they either
never existed or, if they did exist, they are simply gone and no one knows what
happened to them. We are to believe that they are simply lost without explanation.
Clearly however, the defendants knew that the arrest report, defendant’s
statement and other records once existed, they were seeking guidance to remove
them from the system (an illegality) and defendants obviously know what became
of them (another illegality).
Moreover, it is very clear that Ms. Felter, if she inquired at all into the
existence of these records, did not make inquiry of her own clients.
I would remind the Court that various other records, video records, etc. have
been found to be destroyed or missing contrary to County Policy and New York
State Law. Further, Mr. Murphy predicted that these documents existed and, in
fact, they did and possible still do.
3
I would further note that Plaintiff is positioned to prove that various

elements of the accusing instruments are fabricated to reflect well upon the author
and his supervisor. There is absolutely no doubt in this regard.
In the face of such misconduct, it would be foolish to trust the Defendants or

their counsel to simply produce evidence upon Plaintiff’s demand. As I have
mentioned to the Court previously, I am proceeding by subpoena over Ms. Felter’s
objections because counsel cannot be trusted. I cannot be plainer than that.
Other Misconduct
I have disclosed to the Court and Counsel evidence of misconduct in

covering up the misdeeds of this case that lead to the highest echelon of the
Sheriff’s Department. This will be the subject of depositions to begin, hopefully,
on December 4th with Ashly Smith (as discussed below). Other witnesses are
anticipated to be disclosed upon this subject in the aftermath of the deposition.
Although I cannot be sure of the exact number, I would anticipate at least four.
Will Jones
Similarly, the complaint as to misconduct of Defendant Albanese as

submitted by supervising Deputy Will Jones has been declared to be non-existent
by defense counsel because, we are told, it was never formally submitted. My
office has evidence to the contrary. Presumably, so does opposing counsel.
However, Ms. Felter, without being able to articulate a proper objection, insists
that I not utilize a subpoena to produce both he and the records. Instead, I am
apparently to trust her to merely “produce” him and the records she claims do not
exist.
While common sense points to the possibility that the records may no longer
exist, for obvious reasons I will be submitting a subpoena for the Courts signature.
I can think of no reason why a subpoena would not be appropriate and it is
certainly my client’s right to request one. Moreover, the use of a subpoena has
proven to be the only effective tool as noted above.
Personnel Records, Training Records, Disciplinary Records.
4
For all practical purposes, none of the above material was never provided
upon multiple requests.
In particular, it is not contested that Officer Albanese was subject to various

disciplinary proceedings during his remarkably brief tenure at OCSD. In spite of
the fact that these are no longer protected by Civil Rights Law 50-A and that the
New York Courts have declared these records open to public scrutiny (whether the
defendant was found guilty or not), nothing has been forthcoming.
In a case such as this, it is fundamental that personnel records, training

records and disciplinary records are subject to disclosure and the repeal of Civil
Rights Law 50-A merely closes a very ugly exception. In fact, they are even
subject to common FOIL requests. As such, there is no longer even a pretense to
deny such disclosure (and, I would argue, they should have been disclosed even
under the old law). See NYCLU v City of Syracuse 690 CA21-00796
(002602/2021), N.Y. App. Div., 4th Dept.
To offer only one example, Albanese was subject to Daily Observation

Reports under the Field Training Program. These should be comprised of hundreds
of documents as to his daily performance and we have been given none. These are
entirely necessary to moving forward and, as they have not been provided and it
was presented that nothing remains to be disclosed, I will submit a subpoena for
relevant documents.
Deposition of Kevin Murphy
After a lengthy and repetitive series of demands by defense counsel, the

deposition of Mr. Murphy was scheduled for October 31st, one of the few days he
was available due to his medical condition. Ms, Felter cancelled a few days in
advance because, in her words, the deposition was not “confirmed”. I am not aware
of any law in any jurisdiction that requires me to “confirm” a deposition and, as
Ms, Felter is well aware, Mr. Murphy’s deposition in Murphy v Onondaga Cty, et
al. was conducted a few days previous to this date with no need for a
“confirmation”. Mr. Murphy, in fact, was eager to appear in spite of his condition.
I would suggest that a more plausible excuse is that the deposition was very
close to election day.
5
Now, Ms. Felter wants to reschedule. Although I very much want this to go
forward I must inform the Court however, that Mr. Murphy is not presently
available. I am aware that he was brought to the hospital on an emergency basis a
few days ago. I am not presently aware of his condition so, rescheduling will
simply have to wait.
I would also note that opposing counsel cancelled another deposition

previously, citing a lack of confirmation. This is a technique she utilizes to her
advantage and, is she does it again, I will be seeking sanctions.
The Deposition of Ashley Smith
Defense counsel is now eager to depose Ashly Smith and so am I. However,

I am very sure that Ms. Smith’s contribution to the fact pattern will exceed
counsel’s expectations. Although I have never spoken to Ms. Smith, I am preparing
additional documents to enable the production of additional evidentiary materials
germane to the deposition. As mentioned above, I will undoubtedly be
supplementing the witness list in the aftermath of the Smith deposition.
The Deposition of Jamie Olden
Defense counsel is likewise eager to depose Ms. Olden. However, when I

met Ms. Olden several months ago, she informed me that she would be moving.
This has apparently occurred, and we are presently inquiring into her present
whereabouts. I have yet to receive a response and I cannot reply to counsels
repetitive requests at this time.
I can say without equivocation that the methods employed by defendants are
beyond the bounds of legal behavior. This has led directly to the delay and
frustrations noted in this case. However, while this matter has been long on the
Court’s docket, we have made significant headway in the face of persistent illegal
resistance. Delays cannot be attributed to the plaintiff, and she should not suffer
from lack of discovery, investigation or the appropriate support of the Court
because defendants utilize unethical methods.
I trust you will give all of this your careful consideration in arriving at an
6
appropriate, and liberal, schedule in the upcoming conference.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrey Parry

Letter To Judge Baxter. DEF's CRIMES & MISCONDUCT Misstated by Court. Filed Nov 22, 2022)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Letter To Judge Baxter. DEF's CRIMES & MISCONDUCT Misstated by Court. Filed Nov 22, 2022)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 5:18-cv-00837-GLS-ATB Document 120 Filed 11/14/22 Page 1 of 7

Parry & Smith, PLLC

Attorneys and Counselors at Law

7030 East Genesee Street

September 22, 2022

Hon. Andrew Baxter

Re: Kelly Glover v. The Onondaga County Sheriff’s Dept., et al.

Dear Judge Baxter,

It is my understanding that the conference now scheduled for November 14,

case forward expeditiously. Very simply, time is required to overcome the

Nature of the Case

Very respectfully, at a previous juncture the Court wrongly summarized the

Specifically. the second cause of action in Plaintiff’s Complaint depicts a

The Arrest Report

Of importance for this conversation, emails such as this were demanded

I would further note that Plaintiff is positioned to prove that various

In the face of such misconduct, it would be foolish to trust the Defendants or

I have disclosed to the Court and Counsel evidence of misconduct in

Similarly, the complaint as to misconduct of Defendant Albanese as

Personnel Records, Training Records, Disciplinary Records.

In particular, it is not contested that Officer Albanese was subject to various

In a case such as this, it is fundamental that personnel records, training

To offer only one example, Albanese was subject to Daily Observation

Deposition of Kevin Murphy

After a lengthy and repetitive series of demands by defense counsel, the

I would also note that opposing counsel cancelled another deposition

The Deposition of Ashley Smith

Defense counsel is now eager to depose Ashly Smith and so am I. However,

The Deposition of Jamie Olden

Defense counsel is likewise eager to depose Ms. Olden. However, when I

appropriate, and liberal, schedule in the upcoming conference.

Very truly yours,

You might also like