<iframe src=”https://www.facebook.com/video/embed?video_id=10151753311611140&#8243; width=”568″ height=”320″ frameborder=”0″></iframe>

A terrifying ordeal

From the South Bend Tribune – South Bend, Ind.
Author: ALICIA GALLEGOS
Date: Nov 22, 2009
Start Page: A1

MISHAWAKA — The February afternoon was bright and sunny for the first time that winter as the then-19-year-old woman stopped at Taco Bell for lunch.

Sara had traded breaks with another hair salon employee that day, she later recalled at an interview at her South Bend home.

It is The Tribune’s general policy not to name victims of crime; her name has been changed.

Sara sat in her car behind the hair salon where she works, eating the rest of her meal. Suddenly, she remembers the driver’s-side door of her Toyota Corolla swinging open and a man standing above her.

“He said, ‘Scoot over!'” she recalled. “I started screaming and holding down the horn.”

The stranger, who Sara would later learn was a convicted sex offender recently released from prison, was Michael F. Lindsey, then 47.

Sara remembers trying to quickly crawl out of the passenger-side door.

“He grabbed me by the hood,” she said. “He got me back (inside).”

Lindsey, who had a knife, told Sara to sit on the floor of the passenger side and not to move. He then put the car into gear and started driving.

Sara started questioning the man. Lindsey, she said, told her he had “done something bad” and had to get away.

“I said, ‘Just promise me you won’t hurt me.'”

The woman remained calm as the two drove on. Lindsey was relatively friendly, she said, making small talk. He agreed with Sara when she told him she would have to eventually call police. He told her the story would make a good one to tell her grandchildren someday, she remembered.

“I knew, obviously, I wasn’t in a good situation,” Sara said. “But I honestly thought he would drop me off in like a half-hour.”

The young woman had no idea the drive would instead turn into a five-hour nightmare and land her in a desolate farm field in the middle of nowhere.

Haunting phone call

The phone rang close to 5:30 p.m.

It was the salon manager, Sara’s mom later remembered. She told Sara’s mom not to panic but that Sara had never returned from her lunch break.

“We knew immediately something was wrong,” Sara’s mom recalled.

Sara’s parents called police, who suggested they try area hospitals before filing a missing person’s report. Sara’s father did that, but no one had been admitted under his daughter’s name.

The parents were frantic. They later met Mishawaka police at the hair salon and filed a report.

Ironically, Sara’s mom said the family had just seen the movie “Taken,” in which the main character’s daughter is kidnapped. Remembering a scene in which one character uses cell phone GPS tracking, the parents headed to the AT&T store to inquire about finding their daughter that way.

A police officer later met them to give permission for the store to use the method. The data sent waves of dread through them.

“They said, ‘Does she know anyone in Lafayette?'” Sara’s mom recalled. “‘Because she’s headed in that direction.'”

‘Just complete fear’

Darkness was setting in as Lindsey pulled Sara’s car into the lot of an abandoned farm. The young woman had been sitting on the floor of the passenger side for at least an hour and had no idea where she was. Lindsey looked unsure of what to do, Sara remembered, then told her to get out of the car.

“I’m telling him he can either let me go and drive away or stay there and let me drive away,” she recalled. “He was really indecisive, going back and forth.”

But then Lindsey grabbed her arm and led her into the empty barn. He seemed to suddenly snap, Sara said, from the sociable driver to another, darker person.

The man cornered the petite teenager in the barn. He demanded she undress.

“I just stared at him in the eyes, and said, ‘No, you’re not doing this,'” Sara remembered.

Anger flashed across Lindsey’s face, Sara recalled. He grabbed the woman by the coat and threw her to the ground.

“He takes my tights down,” Sara remembered. “He’s straddling me, he takes off my boots. I’m telling him he promised he wouldn’t touch me. I told him, ‘You’re a sick man!'” Lindsey, she said, acknowledged that he was sick.

When Sara told him he was going to be caught, she said he replied, “I’m already caught.”

The man was bent above her when Sara said his mood abruptly changed again. He suddenly stopped and released her. Lindsey told her to get dressed, and he led her back to the car.

They drove on in silence.

“After that, it was just complete fear,” Sara said.

As other vehicles passed, Sara tried to signal them with her eyes, she said. Hours passed. Towns came and went.

Finally, Sara spoke up, telling him he promised to have her home by dark. The man eventually pulled into another abandoned farm.

At last, Lindsey agreed to let her go, but only after she agreed to wait in the field for an hour after he left.

“As he was leaving, he gave me a blanket (from the car),” Sara said. “I told him, ‘Thank you for not touching me.’ And he drove away.”

Pitch blackness surrounded the young woman as she started out to find help in the frosty night. She followed the sound of a barking dog and about 40 minutes later came upon a house.

An elderly woman opened the door when she knocked, Sara remembered, and let the girl inside. “The second I walked into the house, I started bawling,” Sara said.

Reuniting

A short time after their daughter’s cell phone had been found, Sara’s dad says a police officer pulled him aside at the AT&T store.

Officers had just heard from White County police that Sara had been found: She had been abducted, but she was safe.

Officers offered to send a car to bring her home. “I said, ‘No, we’re going to get her,'” Sara’s mom recalled. “I needed to see my daughter.”

As the couple started what seemed to be an endlessly long drive, Sara called her mom’s cell phone from the White County station.

“I think we both just started crying,” the mother remembered. “I think we could both barely speak. We were just so relieved to hear each other’s voices.”

Sara was later able to identify Lindsey in a photo lineup.

“The more I found out about him, the more I freaked out,” Sara said. “I saw what he was capable of doing. I realized how lucky I was.”

‘It can happen to anyone’

Today, Sara and her family are doing their best to move on from the chilling abduction ordeal.

Lindsey was eventually captured and recently sentenced to 40 years in prison in the abduction.

At first, Sara, now 20, refused to go anywhere alone, her mom says. Only recently has she started driving again (now in a new car) or going anywhere solo, she said. Family members say the nightmare of Sara’s abduction crosses their minds every day.

But Sara’s parents also know how blessed they are.

“There are people who don’t get their children back,” Sara’s dad says, with tears in his eyes. “I couldn’t imagine going the rest of your life not having her back.”

Sara adds that although she tries to remain upbeat and positive, her perspective on life has changed. She is constantly checking her surroundings, making sure doors are locked, and wondering about possible dangers.

But the young woman also is determined not to let the experience keep her from moving forward. She has since returned to work and often spends time with friends.

“I don’t think it should be a thing that holds any one of us back,” she said. “But it’s something to tell people, to open their eyes.

“In the end, it can happen to anyone.”

 (This story ran with another article about the past life and future arrest of sex offender, Michael Lindsey. His story is detailed below.)

Can Sex Offenders Be Cured?

Filed under: Tribune stories- investigative — ali4blog @ 4:14 am Edit This

Lindsey

From the South Bend Tribune

Can sex offenders be cured? By Alicia Gallegos Tribune Staff WriterSource: news Sunday,November 22, 2009 Edition: mich, , Page A1

---

SOUTH BEND – Despite a disturbing criminal past, friends and family believed Michael Lindsey had made significant strides in the decades he spent behind bars.

For more than 20 years, the man was a model prisoner, espousing deep religious beliefs, completing law courses and assisting other inmates with criminal cases.

Upon his initial release, officials say the man complied with all parole regulations, fulfilled treatment requirements and was holding down a full-time job and adjusting well to married life.

“I thought if anybody in the world can make it on release, it would be Mike,” said prison minister Tim Blakley, who has known Lindsey for almost 10 years.

But just months after being allowed back into society, Lindsey did more than just violate his parole. He led authorities on a frenzied chase across county lines after three attempted abductions and one kidnapping.

Perspectives differ on what led to Lindsey’s breakdown and subsequent crime spree.

Some believe he was never truly rehabilitated from his past sexual deviance and was a ticking time bomb.

But others, including Lindsey himself, say it was the overwhelming pressure to re-acclimate into society and a lack of preparation that fueled his failure. Debate also exists about whether the motivation for his latest offenses was sexual.

Although not a segment of society for which most residents feel sympathy, the reality is that 10,000 to 20,000 sex offenders are released back into the general population each year, according to a report by the Center for Sex Offender Management, a U.S. Dept. of Justice project.

Making sure sex offenders are prepared to enter society properly rehabilitated greatly reduces recidivism and enhances overall public safety, says the report.

But experts argue about how prepared sex offenders are when the cell door opens and whether enough re-entry programs are available.

In the case of Michael Lindsey, a long-term prisoner with the darkest of pasts, the question becomes: Was his future doomed from the start?

Low risk for re-offending

Jan Lindsey met her husband in 2001 while he was incarcerated at the Correctional Industrial facility in Pendleton, Ind.

The relationship started innocently when the two began writing letters, Jan Lindsey said during a recent phone interview.

Jan was doing ministry work at the time, she said, and had been asked by a pastor whether she would correspond with several inmates, including Lindsey.

Right away, she knew he was different, she said. He was extremely educated and positive, never asking the woman for money, as other inmates did. The letters continued for years until the friendship turned romantic. They married several years later at the prison.

Jan knew about Lindsey’s past.

The now-48-year-old man was in prison for rape and child molesting out of Elkhart County and was completing a sentence of 50 years, of which he served half for good behavior. The two cases in which Lindsey was convicted involved a woman and a 13-year-old girl abducted at knifepoint.

“I knew what he did before was terrible,” Jan Lindsey said. “(But) that wasn’t who he was anymore.”

Jan asked a prison psychologist about Lindsey and said the doctor told her he had shown true remorse for his actions and was considered “low risk” for re-offending.

She believed him. So did Blakley, who also sent Lindsey letters and felt the man was “1 billion percent rehabilitated,” he said.

While in prison, Lindsey had taken therapy classes, his wife said. He also completed Sex Offender Management and Monitoring.

All sex offenders in the state must complete SOMM before being released, according to Adam Deming, psychologist and executive director of SOMM.

The time and length of the program depends on the sex offender and his or her level of risk, says Deming, but much of the treatment focuses on cognitive behavior therapy, accountability, and formulating a relapse prevention plan.

Individual Indiana prisons do not have the program available, but inmates are sent to the New Castle facility when treatment is deemed necessary and room is available.

But even with the required prison programs, Jan Lindsey says, her husband was missing something when he was finally paroled in 2008.

Changes in 25 years

The world he entered upon his release was very different that the one he left 25 years earlier, Lindsey said in a shaking voice during his recent sentencing.

At first, he felt he could adjust and do well, he said, but his confidence soon started to waiver.

“It really started to overwhelm me,” he said during sentencing. “I didn’t know how to get gas, how to order food. I started wondering if I should even be out.”

Lindsey had hoped to find work as a paralegal when he was released, but he was not allowed. He also applied for several re-entry programs, he said, but was not accepted.

Instead, he found work at a factory, working an exhausting third shift, says his wife. The couple also had housing issues, as Jan’s home was not suitable for sex offender requirements, and the two had to move.

Stress started to consume Lindsey, Blakley said, and he was not getting along well with his boss at work.

But his marriage was thriving, Jan Lindsey said, adding that her husband was always good to her, making dinner and mowing the lawn. But Lindsey hated having to make so many decisions, she said.

“Life is so fast out here,” Jan Lindsey says. “It’s so slow for them in there. How do you prepare someone for something like that?”

Before leaving prison, Lindsey did complete a re-entry component of SOMM. Prisoners are introduced to the re-entry aspect about nine months before release, according to Deming.

The transitional program helps prisoners review possible housing and employment options as well as addresses parole stipulations they will face, Deming says.

But aside from the nine-month re-entry program, few community transitional programs, halfway houses or community re-entry facilities even consider taking sex offenders.

According to Greg Cress with South Bend Community Re-Entry, specific DOC criteria prevents sex offenders from being allowed into his program.

Traditionally, lower level offenders are eligible for the local re-entry program about nine months before release. The program addresses life skills, substance abuse and job readiness.

A recent addition also now allows prisoners to attend 18 to 24 months before release.

“Some offenders need a little more time,” Cress said. “The longer you’ve been institutionalized, the more difficulties you’re going to have coming out.”

Cress says that at one time, sex offenders were allowed in the program, but that was 20 years ago. Because of the risk to the community, corrections officials generally want sex offenders to serve their entire sentences before being around civilians.

At the St. Joseph County DuComb Center, it’s possible to accept some types of sex offenders, but that doesn’t happen frequently, says interim Program Manager Dave Nickerson.

And Doug Huyvaert with the South Bend Parole Office says parole officers do not send sex offenders to community transitional programs.

“I do not know of any cases in my district,” he said.

Eight months later

Treatment continued for Lindsey on the outside.

He was going to weekly treatment sessions and receiving regular assessments, Huyvaert says, adding there were no red flags in his file until the day Lindsey missed a meeting.

The date was Feb. 24.

Lindsey had been out of prison just eight months.

Later, Lindsey would insist that missing work the night before made him fear he would violate his parole. He says he was overwhelmed, and only wanted a vehicle to run away.

He first confronted a Mishawaka woman with a screwdriver and demanded her car. She screamed, and Lindsey ran away. The man later abducted a 19-year-old woman at knifepoint and drove with her to White County, before leaving her in a field.

Police later arrested Lindsey in Jasper County after a third abduction attempt.

Authorities previously said Lindsey never physically or sexually harmed the 19-year-old woman, and charges to the contrary were never filed.

But a deputy prosecutor said during sentencing that it was untrue that nothing of a sexual nature happened.

The now-20-year-old woman said Lindsey straddled her at one point and forced her to take off her tights before changing his mind and letting her go. Lindsey admitted in court that he thought about doing something sexual, but then came to his senses.

‘Doesn’t cure an illness’

St. Joseph County Superior Court Judge Jerome Frese sees hundreds of sex offense cases come through his courtroom each year and says the crimes can be some of the most heinous.

Frese could not comment specifically on the Lindsey case but spoke generally about sex offenders and treatment resources while incarcerated.

Frese spoke highly of the SOMM program but argued re-entry and treatment services should start early in prison time. “The problem is that, ironically, they don’t give it to someone until their release date,” he said. “What happens is that it’s eight to 10 years before (a person) is allowed to qualify for that program.”

Deming, however, believes the program and services offered by the DOC gives inmates the necessary tools to succeed in society. The re-entry component of the SOMM program is highly effective, he says, adding that in three years, inmates who complete the program have shown only a 1 percent rate of returning to prison with a new sex crime.

But Jan Lindsey wishes more had been done for her husband to prepare him for life in society. She does not believe his recent crimes were sexually motivated.

At the very least, she believes, if Lindsey had had a mentor when released, it would have helped.

The woman once envisioned growing old with her husband, she said, but knows now that can’t happen. Lindsey pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 40 years in prison for the Mishawaka offenses and six more years in Jasper County.

He remains at the St. Joseph County Jail awaiting transport to prison.

Jan Lindsey said she has not yet filed for divorce but knows she must move on.

Meanwhile, the family of his now-20-year-old victim says Lindsey should have never been back in society.

“That fact that he did what he did tells me he was not reformed,” the victim’s mother said.

Her husband says he has compassion for Lindsey’s sickness and that he has prayed for him, but he also holds much anger.

“I think he’s a very sick person,” the dad said. “Putting someone away for 25 years doesn’t cure an illness.”

Major ruling overturned as gene patents are declared valid

Graphic details come out in trial testimony

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source:  news
Thursday,December 17, 2009
Edition: mich, , Page B9

________________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — Before the lifeless body of Dawn Brooks was pulled from her burning home by firefighters, the woman had suffered a litany of unrelated wounds, all of which were potentially fatal.

Forensic pathologist Dr. Joseph Prahlow testified Wednesday that Brooks had brain trauma, a broken bone in her neck consistent with strangulation and had severe stab wounds in her face and neck.

Graphic autopsy photos showed the woman’s badly bruised body, including one stab wound to Brooks’ inner arm that was 7 inches deep and went through to the outer side.

“The extent of these injuries could have been enough to cause death in and of themselves,” Prahlow said. “…(But) these did not kill her by themselves.”

It was the fire that had engulfed Brooks’ home and created toxic carbon monoxide fumes which ultimately led to Brooks’ death, Prahlow told jurors.

The disturbing account of the 29-year-old woman’s death marked the second day of testimony in the case against 25-year-old Julius Anderson, Brooks’ boyfriend.

Anderson is charged with murder and two counts of arson in Brooks’ killing.

Before the autopsy photos were shown, St. Joseph Superior Court Judge Jane Woodward Miller warned family members in the courtroom of their graphic nature and asked that spectators leave if they were uncomfortable. She also gave Anderson the chance to view the photos privately before jurors saw them.

Anderson held a crumpled tissue in his hand and appeared to be distraught as he briefly left the courtroom to view the photos. Later, he looked away with his hand covering his face as the photos were shown on a large courtroom projector.

Prahlow told jurors that tissue in Brooks’ body showed significant signs of soot inhalation.

“That indicates to me she was actively breathing air in and out while the air was filled with smoke,” he said.

On cross examination, defense attorney Michael Tuszynski asked Prahlow if he was able to tell which wounds happened first or what position Brooks’ body was in during the injuries. Prahlow said he could not be certain of either.

Jurors also heard from friends of Anderson who were hanging out with the man and his girlfriend the night Brooks was killed. Both said the foursome had spent a typical day together, driving around, eating out, and later drinking at Brooks’ home. The couple both said they believed the argument Anderson and Brooks were involved in that night was minor.

The subject of DNA was also a major part of the state’s evidence Wednesday and included an expert from the Indiana State Police lab who analyzed evidence from the crime scene.

Forensics scientist Rebecca Tobey said that DNA from both Brooks and Anderson was found on a knife later recovered from Brooks’ home. The major DNA contributor on the knife’s tip was Brooks, she said, while the main DNA source on the handle belonged to Anderson. Other items such as a blood-stained T-shirt showed a mixture of the couple’s DNA, Tobey said.

But Tuszynski questioned another determination made by Tobey, that another person may have contributed to some samples of the T-shirt, besides for Anderson and Brooks. That is, during testing, Tobey said that a third possible DNA pattern was found, but could not be confirmed.

Tuszynski also inquired about hairs found on the shirt that were never tested.

The prosecution in the Anderson case plans to rest today.

Doctor: Baby’s bones broken

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source:  news
Wednesday,January 27, 2010
Edition: mich, , Page A1

_________________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — The first red flag that little Maya Jane Escobedo may have been suffering from abuse at the hands of an adult came when the baby was just 5 months old.

During Maya’s trip to the pediatrician in 2006, Dr. Frances Dwyer noticed that the baby’s elbow was swollen and appeared to be broken, she testified Tuesday.

The doctor had seen the baby a few weeks prior for a dislocated elbow and initially believed the child’s mother when she explained that her 3-year-old son had been too rough with the girl, pulling on her arm.

But this time, Dwyer testified that she had her doubts. Further X-rays revealed the child had several fractures including a broken collar bone and broken rib.

“When you have a 5-month-old that doesn’t walk, doesn’t run, it’s a concern,” Dwyer said.

Tuesday marked the first day of testimony against Kristina Byers-Escobedo. The 31-year-old mother is charged with neglect of a dependent, a Class B felony in connection with 2-year-old Maya’s death.

Prosecutors allege Byers-Escobedo failed to protect her daughter from a life of abuse by the girl’s father. The 2-year-old died from a severe head injury in 2008.

During opening statements, St. Joseph County Chief Deputy Prosecutor Ken Cotter told jurors that evidence would show Byers-Escobedo lied about the origins of her daughter’s injuries many times along with neglecting to relay medical history to doctors, even taking her daughter to an out-of-town physician for treatment.

“During the course of Maya’s life, she had been traditionally and routinely injured, where bones were broken,” Cotter said.

But defense attorney Michael Tuszynski said evidence would prove Byers-Escobedo did not inflict any injuries her daughter suffered and that her husband, Valentin Escobedo, gave his wife explanations about the wounds.

Trial information would show his client was unaware of the severity of many of the injuries, Tuszynski said, and that the facts of the case would not add up to negligence.

A parade of workers from the Department of Child Services testified during Tuesday’s trial, detailing their investigation that ended shortly before Maya’s death.

Maya was first removed by DCS after the pediatrician had discovered the broken elbow in 2006. The baby was sent to live with Byers-Escobedo’s parents in Shelbyville, Ind.

Christine Beckman-Johnson of DSC supervised that first detainment of Maya and explained that the department’s first priority is the safety of a child, but that reunification “based on the safety of the child,” is also a high priority.

That’s why after ordering Byers-Escobedo and her husband into parenting classes and therapy, Maya was eventually allowed back into her mother’s home, on the condition that her father not reside there.

Tammy Reihl, a DCS family case manager, testified that she made regular visits to Byers-Escobedo’s home after the child was returned. At the time, Maya was healthy, she said and she found no indication Escobedo was living there.

But in September of that year, Maya was back in the emergency room, this time with what appeared to be a severe blood clot in her mouth. It was also determined that Escobedo had been living with the family, in violation of DSC terms.

Again, Maya was removed and sent to live with her grandparents.

But in November 2007, the baby was allowed back into her mother’s South Bend home. Reihl conducted regular home visits, she said, and both parents complied with DSC conditions, which included Escobedo receiving a mental evaluation from a court-appointed psychologist.

In June 2008, the DSC case was closed and both parents allowed complete access to the child.

“Did you meet with Kristina again?” Cotter asked Reihl.

“No.”

“Did you meet with Maya?”

“No, legally I cannot after the case is closed.”

Near the end of Tuesday’s trial, twin sisters and friends of Byers-Escobedo, Jeana and Jerrica Tripp, testified about having hung out with the woman the night before Maya was fatally injured. The three young women knew each other from college, they said, and decided to call Byers-Escobedo for a short movie outing.

Jerrica Tripp remembered Byers-Escobedo calling her the next day in hysterics, explaining that Maya had been hurt while she was gone and might not live.

“Did she say how (Maya) was injured?” Cotter asked.

“She said Val (Escobedo) had said she’d fallen out of her crib.”

During the conversation, Jerrica Tripp said that Byers-Escobedo admitted to lying to hospital officials, telling them she was home when Maya was injured. Tripp said Byers-Escobedo indicated the explanation was easier than going into all the details.

“She thought that it was really an accident,” Tripp said of Maya’s being hurt.

The case against Byers-Escobedo resumes today at 9:30 a.m.

Staff writer Alicia Gallegos: agallegos@sbtinfo.com (574) 235-6368

Suit seeks to void Gabriele will

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source:  news
Tuesday,July 21, 2009
Edition: mars, , Page B1

__________________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — The brother-in-law of Philip Gabriele is asking a court to revoke the doctor’s will, claiming a depressed Gabriele was being unfairly influenced when he penned the document.

A civil lawsuit filed by Jon Alex Dawson, brother of Marcella Gabriele, alleges the couple’s will was improperly executed and lists the doctor’s purported best friend, Susan Manuszak, as a defendant. Also named in the suit are Gabriele’s mother, brother, and sister.

The lawsuit, a copy of which was obtained Monday by The Tribune, in part reads:

“Philip Gabriele was of unsound mind, in that he lacked sufficient testamentary capacity to know the extent and value of his property, the natural objects of his bounty and their just desserts, due to severe depression or other mental illness …”

When reached by phone, Dawson said he could not comment on the case and referred all questions to his attorneys. Phone messages left for his attorneys, Timothy Kalamaros and David Wemhoff, were not returned Monday afternoon.

Manuszak also did not return a phone message seeking comment on the case.

The official will, which is included in lawsuit documents, is dated June 11, just four days before Gabriele and his wife were found dead at their Elkhart office.

Gabriele’s gunshot wound is said to have been self-inflicted, while Marcella’s case is still considered a homicide.

Manuszak previously told The Tribune the couple left everything to her, but also said “after all the debts, attorney’s fees, and everything’s paid,” that nothing would be left.

A copy of the will, obtained Monday by The Tribune along with other court documents, lists Manuszak, as “best friend,” and states she is to receive 75 percent of Gabriele’s gross estate. The only other person listed on the will is Janet Jordan, Gabriele’s mother, who was to receive 25 percent of the estate, according to the document.

Dawson’s lawsuit makes various claims as to why the will should be revoked, including:

* One of the witnesses to the will was Marcella Gabriele, “who as Gabriele’s wife was an intestate heir and not a proper witness”

* The decedent’s mental faculties were “severely weakened and easily subject to influence due to his health, mental illness and depression and the stress of this criminal investigation and eventual indictment …”

* Manuszak allegedly “encouraged or procured the preparation of the purported will, suggested its provisions, and caused its improper execution …”

The lawsuit also alleges that the counsel for the defendants, Baker and Daniels LLP of South Bend, should be disqualified from the case because of a conflict of interest. The suit claims that because the firm represented the Gabrieles in their criminal case, they may not properly and ethically represent Philip Gabriele’s estate.

An attorney for Baker and Daniels listed on the lawsuit did not return a phone message Monday seeking more information.

Staff writer Alicia Gallegos: agallegos@sbtinfo.com (574) 235-6368

Former surgery center workers sentenced for thefts

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source: news
Tuesday,February 9, 2010
Edition: mich, , Page B2

_________________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — In a firm voice, Dr. Stephen Zucker spoke Monday about the practice he spent his life building and the near financial ruin caused by the actions of three former employees.

“Our accounts receivable are extremely depleted,” Zucker told a judge. “The good name of our practice has suffered … I’m faced with the possibility of losing the practice I’ve worked so hard to build.”

Zucker asked U.S. District Court Judge Robert L. Miller to send former employees Kyleen Purcell and Brandi Parks to prison for their thefts against Plastic Surgery Center P.C.

Purcell, 38, pleaded guilty to stealing more than $13,000 from the employer, while Parks admitted to taking close to 10,500 pills of hydrocodone, an addictive painkiller. Parks acknowledged taking the pills herself and distributing them to her husband.

A third employee, Bobbi Pennington, has admitted to taking more than $275,000 from the practice. She will be sentenced later this month.

Miller sentenced Purcell on Monday to one month in prison and three years of supervised release.

Parks was sentenced to two months in prison and three years supervised release. Both women were also ordered to pay restitution to Zucker’s practice.

Purcell sobbed through much of the sentencing hearing, gasping for breath during Zucker’s speech and through her own statement to the judge.

“I’m so sorry for what I have done,” Purcell said through tears. “I don’t know how I let myself get caught up in this. … I’ve lost friends, it’s ruined my life.”

Parks also cried while addressing the court.

“I just want to say I’m so sorry to Dr. Zucker,” she said while turning back to face the doctor. “My big problem was not getting help (before). I’m so sorry for what I did.”

Defense attorneys for both women asked Miller for leniency, citing no prior criminal histories and extreme remorse by both defendants.

Attorney William Stanley said Parks suffered from a serious substance abuse problem and that being caught saved her life. She is currently undergoing treatment, he said.

But assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Schmid asked Miller to look at the repetitiveness of the crimes and their long-standing impact.

Schmid added that Parks’ theft — which included ordering and then stealing medication — also could have affected Zucker’s license.

Also in question was the fact that Parks is four months’ pregnant and due in June.

Stanley said speculation that Parks became pregnant in order to gain sympathy from the judge was untrue and that the pregnancy had been a surprise.

Schmid, however, questioned the timeline that Parks became pregnant, which happened to be right after she pleaded guilty.

“It’s an extremely unfortunate circumstance that the defendant finds herself pregnant and facing prison time,” he said.

After the hearing, Zucker said the prison sentences for his former employees could have been much stiffer.

“I think the defendants should consider themselves highly fortunate,” he said. “They came away with much less punishment than they could have had.”

However, Zucker added he was pleased with the government’s investigation and the overall outcome of the case. He said he also was appreciative of the strong showing of support by employees and friends who attended Monday’s hearing.

Thrill from big tip turns into fear

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source:  news
Wednesday,September 16, 2009
Edition: mich, , Page A1

________________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — Talk about a big tip.

Earlier this year, a former catering employee at the University of Notre Dame mistakenly was paid more than her share of a gratuity — about $29,000 more.

Instead of returning the money, a recent lawsuit filed by the university alleges that Sara Gaspar spent the extra cash on bills and a new car. Now, the college wants its money back.

Gaspar, meanwhile, says she tried to alert the university about the large sum that showed up in her bank account, but that when her messages weren’t returned, she decided it was meant to be.

“I guess because it was there and I was in a bad situation, I went out and spent it,” Gaspar said when reached by phone.

A spokesman for Notre Dame on Tuesday said officials could not comment on the case because it was a pending legal matter.

Gaspar, 47, started working for the university’s catering department, Catering By Design, in January, according to court documents.

On April 17, the employee was to be paid a gratuity of $29.87, but because of a “mistake,” court documents say a total of $29,387 was deposited into her account.

Although, the lawsuit claims Gaspar never notified the university about the inappropriate gratuity, Gaspar insists she did.

The woman says she called the university at least three times, saying, “I think there’s a problem.”

But Gaspar says catering officials told her there was no mistake and that supervisors told her only that they would pass the message on to the human resources department.

When she didn’t hear back, Gaspar said she assumed the gratuity was intentional. After years of medical problems and hard times, she believed she was finally catching a break.

“I was so excited,” Gaspar said. “I thought, I could pay some of these bills.”

The former employee has also since contacted an attorney and says she was told that because the money was under “gratuity” and not “wages” that she was entitled to it.

The enormous tip indeed went toward medical bills and a 2002 Volkswagen Jetta, Gaspar said.

It wasn’t until May that university officials discovered the mistake and contacted Gaspar, according to court documents. Notre Dame is now seeking repayment of the $29,387 plus attorney fees and other court expenses.

However, Gaspar says there is no money to be collected. It’s all gone.

“I don’t have anything,” she says.

Gaspar was fired from her job with the catering department after the university found the tip blunder. She now works part time at a local restaurant, while living with her mother in Granger.

The thrill of the big tip has now turned to fear.

“How am I ever going to win against them?” she says. “Nobody wants to take this case.”

Judge rejects recusal motion

From the South Bend Tribune

By Alicia Gallegos
Tribune Staff Writer

Source:  news
Thursday,September 10, 2009
Edition: mars, , Page B1

_______________________________________________________

SOUTH BEND — A judge has denied a motion to recuse herself from the proceedings of more than 80 anti-abortion advocates who plan to take their trespassing cases to trial.

Attorney Thomas Dixon, filed a motion in August asking for a change of judge in the trespassing cases because he believes that St. Joseph Superior Court Judge Jenny Pitts Manier is biased.

Dixon represents 88 clients who were arrested on the University of Notre Dame property in May during the protest of commencement speaker President Barack Obama. Several additional trespass cases are not being fought in court and/or are being handled separately from the 88.

Dixon and fellow attorney David Wemhoff cited three grounds for the requested recusal, including: that Manier ruled against a pro-life plaintiff in a previous case, that Manier’s husband is a retired Notre Dame professor and a “recognized leader” (of Notre Dame) and that even without actual bias is the perception of bias because of the above reasons.

“We believe there’s a bias contrary to the clearly established law,” Dixon said when reached by phone Wednesday.

In her seven-page denial filed Wednesday, Manier denies having any personal or judicial bias in ruling over the trespassing cases.

The previous case in question, Kendall vs. City of South Bend, centered around a dispute on space limitations between an anti-abortion group called Innocent and a women’s medical center.

In 2005, Innocent officials challenged a city of South Bend injunction enforcing limited distance to the women’s center, according to court documents, which landed both parties in court.

But Manier points out that her decision in the matter had nothing to do with which side was found to be justified. Instead the judge ruled only on the matter of summary judgment in the case. Summary judgment refers to when arguments are made as to why a case should or should not move forward.

In the Kendall case, both the plaintiff and the defendant filed cross motions for summary judgment, Kendall’s attorney arguing that the imposed buffer zone was unconstitutional.

Manier denied Kendall’s motion and granted summary judgment for the city of South Bend. The judge, however, still found that questions of fact existed to be resolved about the distance limitation, according to the judge’s order.

The Kendall case was ultimately dismissed by both the plaintiff and defendant in 2007 and no final judgment was ever entered.

The judge does acknowledge that her husband, Edward Manier, was a tenured professor at Notre Dame for 48 years and now holds emeritus status.

But she points out that he receives no compensation from the university and that the impact of the trespassing cases would not affect his retirement income. She adds her husband has no personal or professional interest in their outcomes.

The judge also notes that while Dixon refers to Edward Manier as a “recognized leader of the University,” that the former professor frequently clashed with university officials.

“The primary focus of Edward Manier’s activities at the University outside the classroom during his tenure were issues of academic freedom and faculty governance,” the judge wrote. “His stance on such issues was, almost without exception, contrary to the position of the University.”

Manier wrote that she has no knowledge of her husband’s opinions on the current cases and that they remain as just that — his opinions.

When reached by phone Wednesday, Dixon said he plans to file a motion to reconsider the change of judge.

The attorney also plans to file a motion with the court to dismiss all of the trespassing cases he is representing.

The next hearing for Dixon’s clients is set for Dec. 3.

Staff writer Alicia Gallegos: agallegos@sbtinfo.com (574) 235-6368

Cell phone ban in court?

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Cell phone ban in court?, posted with vodpod