TMC NEWS: SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT

RECALL ELECTION RESULTS

2009-12-22T19:18:00.000-08:00

ELYRIA CITY 1-A 812 79 89
ELYRIA CITY 1-B 910 123 134
ELYRIA CITY 1-C 1179 146 124
ELYRIA CITY 1-D 832 37 51
ELYRIA CITY 1-E 840 82 99
ELYRIA CITY 2-A 993 53 51
ELYRIA CITY 2-B 947 56 84
ELYRIA CITY 2-C 921 37 42
ELYRIA CITY 2-D 934 50 47
ELYRIA CITY 2-E 761 62 28
ELYRIA CITY 3-A 792 179 86
ELYRIA CITY 3-B 1309 150 125
ELYRIA CITY 3-C 791 190 87
ELYRIA CITY 3-D 873 239 75
ELYRIA CITY 3-E 620 90 55
ELYRIA CITY 3-F 1293 242 159
ELYRIA CITY 3-G 883 123 78
ELYRIA CITY 4-A 722 188 91
ELYRIA CITY 4-B 886 191 97
ELYRIA CITY 4-C 828 174 108
ELYRIA CITY 4-D 815 191 87
ELYRIA CITY 4-E 903 155 106
ELYRIA CITY 4-F 777 79 75
ELYRIA CITY 4-G 821 106 104
ELYRIA CITY 5-A 843 30 28
ELYRIA CITY 5-B 770 97 50
ELYRIA CITY 5-C 829 57 39
ELYRIA CITY 5-D 957 42 20
ELYRIA CITY 5-E 1020 61 46
ELYRIA CITY 6-A 871 101 94
ELYRIA CITY 6-B 713 49 52
ELYRIA CITY 6-C 1055 36 34
ELYRIA CITY 6-D 1012 67 56
ELYRIA CITY 6-E 1047 65 56
ELYRIA CITY 7-A 839 111 118
ELYRIA CITY 7-B 957 102 91
ELYRIA CITY 7-C 783 112 83
ELYRIA CITY 7-D 804 104 127
ELYRIA CITY 7-E 809 84 78
ELYRIA CITY 7-F 877 110 83
35628 4250 3137

WANT YOUR VOICE HEARD?

2009-01-01T12:11:00.000-08:00

Here is how you can have your voice heard on TMCNEWS.NET.

Email your comments to tmcnews1@aol.com - We put no limit on the number of words you use in your comments and will not censor or edit your comments. When emailing your comments please put the title of the story in the Email subject line.

You MUST include your full name and a phone number for us to confirm the validity of your comments. Your full name will appear along with your comments – your phone number will not be posted.

If you send a comment without a full name and phone number it will be deleted immediately.

Once your comments have been confirmed TMC NEWS will post them in the comments section to the related story.

GOLD CARD Members may post their comments directly to the story as long as their name is posted along with the comment.

BCS 2008 - 09 SCHEDULE

2008-12-07T18:08:00.000-08:00

EagleBank Bowl
Dec. 20 – 11 a.m.Washington, D.C.
ACC vs. Navy
ESPN

New Mexico
Dec. 20 – 2:30 p.m.
Albuquerque, NM
Mountain West vs. Fresno State
ESPN

St. Petersburg
Dec. 20 – 4:30 p.m.
St. Petersburg, FL
Big East vs. C-USA
ESPN2

Pioneer Las Vegas
Dec. 20 – 8 p.m.
Las Vegas, NV.
Mountain West vs. Pac-10
ESPN

R+L Carriers
New Orleans
Dec 21 – 8:15 p.m.
New Orleans, LAC-USA vs. Sun Belt
ESPN

San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia
Dec. 23 – 8 p.m.
San Diego, CA
Mountain West vs. Pac-10
ESPN

Sheraton Hawaii
Dec. 24 – 8 p.m.
Honolulu, HI
Hawaii vs. Notre Dame
ESPN

Motor City
Dec. 26 – 7:30 p.m.
Detroit, MI
MAC vs. Big Ten
ESPN

Meineke Car Care
Dec. 27 – 1 p.m.
Charlotte, NC
ACC vs. West Virginia
ESPN

Champs Sports
Dec. 27 – 4:30 p.m.
Orlando, FL
ACC vs. Big Ten
ESPN

Emerald
Dec. 27 – 8 p.m.
San Francisco, CA
Pac-10 vs. ACC
ESPN

Independence
Dec. 28 – 8:15 p.m.
Shreveport, LA
SEC vs. Big 12
ESPN

Papajohns.com
Dec. 29 – 3 p.m.
Birmingham, AL
SEC vs. Big East
ESPN

Valero Alamo
Dec. 29 – 8 p.m.
San Antonio, TX
Big Ten vs. Big 12
ESPN

Roady's Humanitarian
Dec. 30 – 4:30 p.m.
Boise, ID
WAC vs. ACC
ESPN

Texas
Dec. 30 – 8 p.m.
Houston, TX
Big 12 vs. C-USA
NFL

Pacific Life Holiday
Dec. 30 – 8 p.m.
San Diego, CA
Pac-10 vs. Big 12
ESPN

Bell Helicopter Armed Forces
Dec. 31 – 12 p.m.
Fort Worth, TX
Mountain West vs. C-USA
ESPN

Brut Sun
Dec. 31 – 2 p.m.
El Paso, TX
Pac-10 vs. Pittsburgh
CBS

Gaylord Hotels Music City
Dec. 31 – 3:30 p.m.
Nashville, TN
Vanderbilt vs. Boston College
ESPN

Insight
Dec. 31 – 5:30 p.m.
Tempe, Ariz.
Kansas vs. Big Ten
NFL

Chick-fil-A
Dec. 31 – 7:30 p.m.
Atlanta, GA
LSU vs. Georgia Tech
ESPN

Outback
Jan. 1 – 11 a.m.
Tampa, FL
Big Ten vs. SEC
ESPN

Capital One
Jan. 1 – 1 p.m.
Orlando, FL
Georgia vs. Michigan State
ABC

Konica Minolta Gator
Jan. 1 – 1 p.m.
Jacksonville, FL
Nebraska vs. Clemson
CBS

Rose presented by Citi
Jan. 1 – 4:30 p.m.
Pasadena, CA
Penn State vs. USC
ABC

FedEx Orange
Jan. 1 – 8:30 p.m.
Miami, FL
Virginia Tech vs. Cincinnati
FOX

AT&T Cotton
Jan. 2 – 2 p.m.
Dallas, TX
Texas Tech vs. Ole Miss
FOX

AutoZone Liberty
Jan. 2 – 5 p.m.
Memphis, TN
East Carolina vs. SEC
ESPN

Allstate Sugar
Jan. 2 – 8 p.m.
New Orleans, LA
Utah vs. Alabama
FOX

International
Jan. 3 – 12 p.m.
Toronto, Canada
UConn vs. MAC
ESPN2

Tostitos Fiesta
Jan. 5 – 8 p.m.
Glendale, AZ
Texas vs. Ohio State
FOX

GMAC
Jan. 6 – 8 p.m.
Mobile, AL
C-USA vs. MAC
ESPN

FedEx BCS National Championship
Jan. 8 – 8 p.m.
Miami, FL
Oklahoma vs. Florida
FOX

TRIBUTE: CAPTAIN MICHAEL MEDDERS

2008-10-13T19:14:00.000-07:00

TRIBUTE: SGT. LANE TOLLETT

2007-05-15T17:08:00.000-07:00

On May 5, 2007 the city of Elyria came together to pay tribute to Soldier Sgt. Lane Tollett. Sgt. Tollett was killed while on patrol in Baghdad. This video was made using photos taken on the day of Sgt. Tollett’s funeral by TMC NEWS. The music behind it is called “The Coolin” and was performed by Brigid’s Cross Live at the Summer Music Slam in Lorain, Ohio.

AMBER ALERT FROM WOOSTER

2006-12-30T19:35:00.000-08:00

AMBER ALERT
The Wooster Police Department and the State of Ohio issued an Amber Alert on December 30, 2006 after three children were abducted and the suspect threatened suicide. All three children were last seen at 544 Emerick Street in Wooster.

Emily Wallace, 4 years old. She's a white female 3 feet tall and weighs 40 pounds. She has blonde or strawberry hair and blue eyes.

Charisty Wallace, 14 years of age. She's a white female, 5 feet 5 inches tall and weighs 135 pounds. She also has blonde or strawberry hair and blue eyes.

Hannah Wallace, 10 years of age. She's a white female 4 feet 5 inches tall and weighs 90 pounds. She also has blonde or strawberry hair and gray eyes.

The suspect is Lisa J. Wallace, 38 years of age. She has blonde or strawberry hair and blue eyes. She's 5 feet 4 inches tall and weighs 205 pounds.

The vehicle is a Burgundy 2002 Chrysler Sebring 4 door with license plate dnq4104.

Anyone with information is asked to call 1-877-262-3764 or dial 911.

MILLER TRIAL: DAY THREE

2006-08-30T17:30:00.000-07:00

Day three of the trial started where I left off Tuesday night, Lt. Rohner still on the witness stand testifying about the tape recordings that were made while interviewing Director Miller. The second of two tapes were played this morning for the Jury to hear and it lasted about 47 minutes.

For the record, both interviews that were conducted with Director Miller by Lt. Rohner took place in the detective bureau at the Lorain Police Department. The interview room is wired to record conversations with hidden microphones with the recording device in a different room.

The first tape, run time of 1 hour and approximately 15 minutes, involved Lt. Rohner, Director Miller and Detective Carpentier and took place on November 19th 2003. The interview was at the request of Lt. Rohner for Director Miller to come down to the detective bureau from his office on the 7th floor at Lorain City Hall. Director Miller came down and had the hour and 15 minute conversation with the detectives, and as the defense team pointed out without a lawyer. Director Miller throughout the discussion seemed to be learning a lot of facts about the Johnson case from the detectives. It was apparent while listening to the tapes that Miller may have relied and trusted his subordinates a little too much. During the conversation Lt. Rohner asked a key question to Director Miller, he asked if he had contacted the Ohio Ethics Commission before entering into the contract.
From the recording:
Rohner: In order for me to conduct a proper investigation I am going to need to know how you presented it to the Ethics Commission and who you spoke to down there, umm, you said it was two weeks before this job started? (Pause) Do you remember?
Miller: Yeah… it’s been so long ago.

Spellacy questioned Rohner about when he had found out the specific dated as to when Director Miller actually contacted the OEC, Lt. Rohner stated November 20th. Spellacy then had Rohner read from the affidavit that Rohner had sworn out to get the search warrants for Millers office.
Rohner: During his statement Mr. Miller indicated his call was to the ethics commission in November 2002 prior to the approval of the equipment rental.
Spellacy: During this call, that was the call to Poli right? That is what you are referring to correct?
Rohner: Let me read what it says. (reads document) No, that’s not correct. He interviewed him on November 19th, 2002.
Spellacy: Oh, November 19th, on that tape that we just heard for an hour and 15 minutes he said he made the call in November, is that your testimony?
Rohner: Yes
Spellacy: You heard him say, I made the call in November.
Rohner: No, he didn’t say those words.
Spellacy: No, he didn’t did he?
Rohner: No.
Spellacy: But you put that in your affidavit when you raised your right hand and swore to the Judge did you not?
Rohner: yeah, and I stand by it.
Spellacy: Right. And then you even go on in paragraph 7 do you not sir and say that he stated November.
Rohner: (Reading out loud from the affidavit) Director Miller returned the next day to provide further information, indicating that he had actually made the call to the Ethics Commission in May of 2003.
Spellacy: that’s correct isn’t it?
Rohner: That’s correct. Not in November of 2002 as he had previously stated.
Spellacy: Right. Problem is, he never previously stated 2003 to you did he? Did he ever say November to you?
Rohner: Not in those words no.

The battle of what was said and how it was said went back and forth for quite a while. Although Spellacy was able to get Lt. Poli to admit to several mistakes and he also had the OEC lawyer stumbling over his testimony on cross examination, Lt. Rohner held strong to his belief that Director Miller Stated that he had contacted the Commission before the work began in 2002.

After Lt. Rohner was excused from the stand the Prosecution rested its case. The court broke for lunch and when it all started back up again the Defense presented one document into evidence then rested their case without presenting any testimony.

Both sides presented closing arguments and then the Judge read the instructions to the Jury before they were sent off to begin deliberations around 3:45. It was 4:35 when the Judge released the Jury for the afternoon, sending them home for the night. The deliberations will resume at 8:30 tomorrow morning.

MILLER TRIAL: DAY TWO

2006-08-29T16:47:00.000-07:00

The Prosecution opened their case by calling retired Lt. Poli to the stand. Poli, under direct examination, told the court that he was the one who opened the case pertaining to the Doug Johnson case on July 7, 2002. Prosecutor Cillo questioned Poli on the phone call that he received from Director Miller two days after Poli had questioned John Grills about his involvement in the Doug Johnson case.

Cillo: When you arrived at work on Monday, can you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what happened?
Poli: By that time I was working out of the Chiefs office as the Public Information Officer and I got there in the morning around 8 o’clock and I got a telephone call from Director Miller.
Cillo: Did you at anytime prior to that ever try to contact Director Miller in regards to this investigation?
Poli: No.
Cillo: Was it a call that you expected?
Poli: No.
Cillo: Can you tell the ladies and gentlemen what that call consisted of?
Poli: Director Miller asked me why I was investigating the leasing of equipment to the city. I asked him why are you asking me that question. What interest is it of yours? Then he replied to me that um everything concerning this lease was ok and that there was nothing wrong with it.
Cillo: Was there anything further in that conversation?
Poli: He did tell me that he contacted the ethics commission to make sure that everything was ok and he said that he was told that based on what was going on in the city concerning the lease that it was an ok lease, that there was no problem.
Cillo: Did Director Miller speak to you with regard to weather he had knowledge of ownership, who owned the equipment?
Poli: Yeah he did.
Cillo: What did he provide you with?
Poli: He admitted that he knew that Doug Johnson owned that equipment.

CROSS EXAMINATION (on this subject)

Stanton: Mr. Poli, you just indicated to Mr. Cillo that Mr. Miller had called you relative to the Johnson matter, is that correct?
Poli: That is correct.
Stanton: and you indicated that you could either stop the investigation or continue with it right? You could have made the choice at that time right?
Poli: I could have basically made that choice, yes.
Stanton: The point of the matter is sir is that Mr. Miller although he is the Safety Director of the city of Lorain, he has no authority to tell you or order you to stop that investigation is that correct?
Poli: No.
Stanton: And he didn’t tell you to stop that investigation did he?
Poli: No.

The State called John Rawski from the Ohio Ethics Commission next. Mr. Rawski is an attorney for the OEC working in the advisory division. During the Direct Examination Mr. Rawski said that he would never give an opinion based on situation that had already taken place. Later under cross examination, Mr. Spellacy asked if during a phone call with Lt. Poli did he give the Lt. an opinion? There was a brief exchange between the two about what Spellacy meant by the word opinion. Mr. Rawski did admit that he gave Lt. Poli an opinion about the case. Spellacy quickly asked why he would give Lt. Poli an opinion if his department does not give opinions, as Rawski had asserted earlier. Rawski, visibly shaken at this point, did not have an answer.

The States next witness was Lt. James Rohner a 24 year veteran of the Lorain Police Department. Lt. Rohner described how some detectives will mark evidence bags with the date that the investigation started not the date the evidence was bagged. Rohner stated that although the tapes from the Miller interview was placed in the evidence bag in November, the date marked on the bag was July 7th, the start date of the investigation.

Lt. Rohner, when asked by Nolan, advised the Jury that the Board of Control, staffed by Miller and Mayor Foltin only, was able to spend up to $15,000.00 without approval from council. When asked how much was paid to Grills in 2002, Rohner stated $15,000.00. When he was asked how much was paid to Grills in 2003 he stated $15,000.00. Nolan replied, “the very top amount of the Board of Control? Rohner answered, yes.
The next step was to play the audio tapes between Miller and the Lorain Detectives. The State started playing the tapes today but ran out of time so that is where the trial will pick up Wednesday morning.

MILLER TRIAL: DAY ONE

2006-08-28T21:33:00.000-07:00

The bell rang around 10 this morning in the courtroom of Judge Christopher R. Rothgery in the states case against Lorain Safety and Services Director Craig Miller. Both sides told Judge Rothgery that they were ready to proceed with the trial.
First piece of business: Jury Selection. Jury selection took a couple hours but a Jury was sworn in by Judge Rothgery shortly after the lunch break. The Jury consists of 7 women and 6 men. One will be picked as an alternate at a later time.

Allow me to introduce the players in this trial before we go any further.

The Judge: Honorable Judge Christopher R. Rothgery
The Prosecutor: Assistant Lorain County Prosecutor Anthony Cillo & Michael Nolan
The Defense Attorney: Mark A. Stanton & Kevin Spellacy

Opening Statements

Before opening statements were given and away from the ears of the Jury, the Judge reminded both sides of the agreement that they had reached about a time limit for statements. The Judge and the Prosecutor remembered it to be 15 minutes while the Defense recalled hearing 45 minutes. We were all glad when both sides stuck to the brief 15 minute opening statements. Here are some excerpts from both sides.

Prosecutor Anthony Cillo

The defendant in this case is Craig Miller; he is the Safety Service Director for the city of Lorain. As the Safety Service Director he has a lot of responsibilities. He is one of the top echelons underneath the Mayor in the city. His duties include administering the sewer department, municipal utilities, street department and handles purchase orders associated with them. He is a member of what is known as the Board of Control, at the time there were only two members, the defendant and Mayor Foltin. They would approve purchase orders that were over $5,000.00 and up to $15,000.00. Anything over $15,000.00 had to go to City Council. The defendant also as Safety Service Director was basically the boss of the Police Department. He didn’t do anything with the investigations, but he disciplined, hired and fired. The defendant had an obligation because of his position, to act in the best interest of the city. Not put his personal agenda in front of that of the cities.

The Prosecutor, after explaining the Johnson case in detail, tells the Jury that Lt. Poli from the Lorain Police Department received an “unsolicited” call from Director Miller on the Monday morning after the Lt. had interviewed one of the key players in the Johnson case on the Saturday before. Cillo stated that Miller told Poli “Why are you looking into this, I checked this out already, everything is fine”. Prosecutor Cillo characterized this as Miller seeking out an “underling” in the Lt. to get him to drop the investigation.

The Prosecution put forth their theory that Director Miller was trying to “avoid embarrassment” of his mismanagement and waste of money by spending $30,000.00 on renting the same type of equipment that the city already owned and was sitting idle during this time. The Prosecution also brought up that Director Miller, feared bad publicity was running in a contested election against Ron Mantini for city Auditor in October and his boss, Mayor Foltin was in a reelection campaign against former Mayor Kozura, fearing bad publicity during the campaigns. Cillo finished his opening statements to the jury by saying, “He violated his duty to the city for his own personal agenda”.

Defense Attorney Kevin Spellacy

Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, what you just heard is an interesting theory. I think it is interesting how they reached their theory, their conclusions; hopefully the evidence will shed some light on that. The state is asking you to believe that Mr. Miller deliberately, with purpose hindered an investigation and made a false statement. He just set forth a theory that the investigation would have somehow hindered his own election campaign I suppose. Well, the indictment in this case runs from November of 2002 through November 2003 and you heard one of the statements that they say he lied about was November 19th and 20th 2003, that’s after the election.

Prosecution objected and set the record straight that the investigation from November 2002 through December 2003, not November 2003. Defense acknowledged the mistake but quickly stated that December 2003 was also after the election.

The evidence will not only contradict the states theory in this case, but it will fly in the face of common sense. I suspect the evidence will demonstrate that Craig Miller, as Mr. Cillo pointed out is the Safety Service Director for the city, the person responsible for 14 departments, ultimately responsible for 500 employees, multi million dollar budget, a father of 4, a husband, an accountant, a son, a brother did the best he could, under circumstances that he was faced with at the time. He answered to the best of his ability questions that were placed to him by Lt. Rohner and Lt. Poli. The state would like you to believe for some reason that it was wrong for Mr. Miller to inquire if there’s an investigation going on in the utilities department. Why is that wrong if you are ultimately responsible for that person? I suggest to you that that flies in the face of common sense and will be demonstrated by the evidence.

Contract goes on, nothing happens, ditches getting cleaned. They do three ditches in total, one with a grade all and two with this equipment that we are talking about here. Then things quiet down, there are no problems. Then sometime 3 to 6 months later the city rumors start, city politics. Somebody said hey they got Johnson’s equipment down in that ditch. Poli starts an investigation sometime in June but prior to that when these rumors start, Miller does what he should do, he acts responsibly, he tries to verify the rumor, he talks to his staff, he calls the ethics commission. On May 21, 2003 he calls the ethics commission. He says, here’s what’s happening, here’s what I got, can you give me some advice and guidance? They tell him that they are not allowed to give him an opinion, but here’s the criteria, follow this criteria. Miller follows the criteria as he sees it. Sends an email that same day back to Mr. Hoffer, “Cleared with the ethics commission, proceed”.
Now unbeknownst to him the ditches, if not already completed they were in the process of being completed. Here’s somebody who frankly may not have been on the top of that particular part of the game, but he says proceed. But again, we’re not here to judge if he was a good safety service director, we’re here to determine if he made a false statement to this detective for the purpose to hinder an investigation.

Mr. Spellacy concluded his opening statements by telling the jury:
“We’re here and the evidence will bear out, we’re talking about a conversation, in words, a very small part of a conversation that lasted about 7 to 10 seconds, tops. Listen to everything Mr. Miller says and the tapes will run about an hour and 55 minutes, listen to everything and at the conclusion of that evidence, you will agree with me and maybe you will have an understanding why this case was brought and you’ll agree with me that Mr. Miller is not guilty.”

Court resumes Tuesday morning at 8:30.

It's Miller Time

2006-08-24T18:24:00.000-07:00

The trial of Lorain Safety and Services Director Craig Miller starts Monday and TMC NEWS Senior Courthouse Correspondent will be there. Before our courtroom coverage begins though, we thought we would give you a little background.

The Background
In 2003, the Lorain Police Department opened an investigation into Lorain Sewer Superintendent Doug Johnson. The investigation centered on Johnson leasing his personal construction equipment to the city of Lorain. Johnson has said all along that he had leased the heavy machinery to the city for $30,000.00, a huge savings from the competing bid of $176,000.00. Johnson leased the equipment through a friend’s name to the city to avoid any signs of impropriety.
After the investigation, Johnson was charged with theft in office, money laundering and two counts of unlawful interest in a public contract. On Friday August 11th, Common Pleas Court Judge Christopher Rothgery found Johnson guilty of the theft in office and two counts of unlawful interest in a public contract. Judge Rothgery however cleared Johnson of the additional charge of money laundering, saying that he didn’t believe Johnson knew that he was breaking the law when he asked his friend to bill the city for the equipment that he had rented.

Lorain Police state that during the investigation Miller lied to them about what he knew about the deal with Johnson. There is also the issue with Miller stating that he had contacted the Ohio Ethics Commission (OEC) to determine if the arrangement was legal. Lorain Police state that Miller had told them that he had contacted the OEC before the leases were signed, but when police told him that there were no phone records to support that claim, he changed the date to may of 2003. (Phone records do show that Miller had contacted the OEC in May of 2003). Police also state that several city employees claim that the city had already owned similar equipment and that it sat idle during that time. Director Miller ardently denies that claim.

So there you have it, the background. The trial begins Monday morning at 8:30 in the Lorain County Justice Center. We hope you will join us throughout the week for our coverage in this TMC NEWS: SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT.