Lorain County Prosecutor
has denied a request from Sheriff Phil Stammitti to seek a special prosecutor to investigate allegations of impropriety regarding the county’s ongoing radio contract dispute, but the sheriff is puzzled by the decision.
“I am petitioning you to request a special prosecutor, so that the Lorain County Sheriff’s Office can investigate claims that you have already indicated that the Office of the Lorain Prosecutor’s Office cannot be involved in based upon having a conflict in representing both Commissioners (David) Moore and (Jeff) Riddell in your capacity as the Lorain County Prosecutor,” Stammitti wrote in a letter to Tomlinson on Oct. 24, according to the document.
Tomlinson detailed a list of reasons why he decided against seeking a special prosecutor in a letter to Stammitti on Nov. 6, according to the document.
“First, as you point out, the issues you want to investigate are also the subject of two lawsuits now pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. In this regard, I have every confidence that the issues you want to investigate will be well vetted in that litigation,” Tomlinson wrote.
The county is being sued by Cleveland Communications Inc. (CCI), which lost a $7.7 million contract to supply Lorain County sheriff’s deputies and county fire departments with emergency radios, after the commissioners rescinded the contract in January.
Cleveland Communications Inc. alleges the commission’s rescission of the contract was a breach of contract, according to the lawsuit filed Jan. 20 in Lorain County Common Pleas Court.
Former 911 Director Harry Williamson also has a pending lawsuit against the county for wrongful termination among other allegations.
“Per you letter dated November 7, 2023, about a special prosecutor being appointed, I find your response to my request both puzzling and disingenuous. It appears that you have taken extreme liberty in describing what has led to my request for a special prosecutor,” Stammitti wrote in response to Tomlinson’s letter Nov. 9.
“Your solution that the lawsuits currently in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio will assure a proper investigation through the litigation process is puzzling,” Stammitti wrote. “Civil litigation is not a substitute for a law enforcement investigation. Should evidence proving the allegations be found, witnesses including an investigating officer would need to testify.
Tomlinson fired back.
“When I learned from you that you wished to investigate Commissioner Moore’s complaint regarding Commissioner (Michelle) Hung and her approval of the above contracts, I advised you that this complaint had been referred to the office of State Auditor Keith Faber, that his agents were investigating the matter, and that any prosecution arising from Commissioner Moore’s complaint would be pursued by Auditor (Keith) Faber’s attorneys,” he wrote. “Because the investigation was already in capable hands, I wrote to you, advising you not to duplicate the state auditor’s effort on the county level and that I could not oblige your request for a special prosecutor to assist in a parallel investigation.”
In the letter, Tomlinson details a phone call from Stammitti who “left a desperate-sounding voicemail message, insisting that you needed a special prosecutor, notwithstanding your knowledge that the above investigation of Commissioner Hung was being conducted by the state auditor.”
“In subsequent correspondence, I pointed out to you that a review of the county jail visitor’s log revealed that Commissioner Hung, the party who was allegedly the target of your investigation had personally visited your office nearly a dozen times after the vote by Commissioners Moore and Riddell to rescind the CCI contracts,” Tomlinson wrote. “Because I concluded that Commissioner Hung would not have been assisting you in your investigation of her, I concluded your claim to have been investigating her was untruthful.”
The sheriff responds
Stammitti wrote in response that “I am further puzzled by your assertion that because Commissioner Hung came to the Sheriff’s Office, that I am not a law enforcement officer that a prosecutor should trust! Poor logic aside, Commissioner Hung was the person being accused of steering the CCI contract. Interviewing her and getting documentation from her was integral to the process.”
“When the allegations were levied against her, Commissioner Hung requested that an investigation be done on the issue and indicated she would fully cooperate,” Stammitti wrote, adding that his office appreciated Hung’s cooperation.
Tomlinson wrote that “Based upon the way you have conducted yourself in this matter and others, I have concluded that you are not a law enforcement officer a prosecutor should trust.”
Tomlinson also pointed out that in the past, “three elected county prosecutors and the Ohio Attorney General have balked at getting involved in these contract disputes, i.e. what they believe is a political battle and not a criminal investigation.”
The prosecutor also informed the sheriff that the state auditor will not get involved, either, according to the letter.
“Lastly, I realize that you have not prosecuted for very long, but you have claimed a conflict, so sharing evidence with you is not advisable,” Stammitti wrote countering Tomlinson’s decision.
