VANDERBURGH COUNTY FELONY CHARGES

This feature is sponsored by Chris Walsh For Vanderburgh County Clerk. Chris Walsh is a veteran county administrator that strongly supports our local law enforcement professionals . Chris Walsh is a candidate that possess a non-partisan attitude with a consumer friendly demeanor. Chris also stands against unification of city and county governments.

This ad paid for by the committiee to elect Walsh Clerk.

VANDERBURGH COUNTY FELONY CHARGES

Evansville, IN – Below is a list of felony cases that were filed by the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s Office on Tuesday, September 18, 2012.

Jordan Anglin Dealing in Cocaine – Class B Felony

Kimball Armstead Dealing in Cocaine – Class B Felony

Devin Brittain Battery Resulting in Bodily Injury to a Pregnant Woman – Class C Felony
Strangulation – Class D Felony
Criminal Confinement – Class D Felony
Intimidation – Class D Felony
Interference with the Reporting of a Crime – Class A Misdemeanor

Dorian Givens Possession of a Controlled Substance – Class D Felony (Two Counts)

Johnny Givens Operating a Vehicle with a BAC of .15 or More – Class A Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)
Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated – Class C Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)

Trey Happoldt Dealing in Cocaine – Class B Felony

Jayson Hayes Operating a Motor Vehicle as an Habitual Traffic Violator – Class C
Felony (Two Counts)
Possession of Marijuana – Class A Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)

Jeremiah Hinsey Resisting Law Enforcement – Class D Felony
Resisting Law Enforcement – Class A Misdemeanor
Dealing in Marijuana – Class A Misdemeanor
Failure to Stop After an Accident Resulting in Damage to an Unattended
Vehicle – Class B Misdemeanor
Nicholas Logsdon Possession of a Controlled Substance – Class D Felony (Three Counts)
Possession of Marijuana – Class A Misdemeanor

Marc Madole Dealing in Cocaine – Class B Felony
Possession of Marijuana – Class A Misdemeanor

Benjamin Payne-Neuffer Burglary – Class C Felony
Attempted Theft – Class D Felony

Joshua Peter Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated – Class C Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)

Jeffrey Ralstons Operating a Motor Vehicle as an Habitual Traffic Violator – Class D
Felony

Clinton Rumble Dealing in Marijuana – Class A Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)
Possession of Paraphernalia – Class A Misdemeanor

Anthony Scroggins Theft – Class D Felony

Terry Wells Child Molesting – Class A Felony
Child Molesting – Class C Felony (Two Counts)

Dalton Wilson Operating a Vehicle with a BAC of .08 or More – Class C Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)
Possession of a Controlled Substance – Class D Felony (Two Counts)
Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated – Class C Misdemeanor
(Enhanced to a Class D Felony due to Prior Convictions)

Tommie Wilson Criminal Confinement –Class D Felony
Battery Resulting in Bodily Injury – Class D Felony
Resisting Law Enforcement – Class A Misdemeanor

For further information on the cases listed above, or any pending case, please contact Carly Settles at 812.435.5688 or via e-mail at csettles@vanderburghgov.org.

Under Indiana law, all criminal defendants are considered to be innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.
SENTENCE CHART

Class Range
Murder 45-65 Years
Class A Felony 20-50 Years
Class B Felony 6-20 Years
Class C Felony 2-8 Years
Class D Felony ½ – 3 Years

Dear Fellow EBA Member,

It is truly a sad day when a judge is falsely attacked by his opponent in search of a favorable rating from the Bar and to try to win an election. If Mr. Blackard`s allegations were not so serious, his letter would have been humorous. Let me explain why:

Mr. Blackard has NEVER handled an estate, guardianship, trust, adoption, child in need of service, parental termination, or paternity case in my Court, but yet he makes bold allegations against me, my staff, and my Court. According to computer records, Mr. Blackard has actually only been involved in 68 misdemeanor cases in my Court, when he was being trained as a public defender. That was approximately four years ago. Now he claims he knows how to run my Court.

I hate to bore you with the facts, but I feel compelled, since Mr. Blackard cannot justify his false assertions. First, he claims, “Since taking office in 2001, Mr. Niemeier has had an opportunity to address the longtime inefficiencies of this Court, but has chosen to do nothing.” That quote is preposterous. Prior to Mr. Blackard attending law school, I spearheaded an effort in adding another courtroom to handle the ever increasing caseload of the Court. Our Court sessions literally doubled over the next 6 years to accommodate this explosion of cases. I added court sessions in every area of the law that my Court handles. My clerical staff, which hasn`t had a new employee added in my 11 years on the bench, has been crossed trained to do almost every job within the Court for better efficiency and service to the public. We are now open at lunch and I personally sit on the bench more than any other judge in the area. The Supreme Court “caseload measures” make it clear that I could be cloned and that the caseload would still be more than recommended.

Mr. Blackard also claims that if elected, delinquencies and CHINS will no longer be preferred over probate and he would eliminate “threatening mail correspondence” from the Clerk and Court. The only mail correspondence which goes out to attorneys is standard form letters informing attorneys when they miss a deadline in probate and guardianship cases. These letters are polite. The first letter simply says, “I would appreciate your attention to this matter as soon as possible.” When the Court does not receive feedback, a second letter is sent which states “Your immediate attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated.” In cases when an attorney still does not correspond, in any fashion, the Court sets the matter for hearing with a standard order to appear. The letters are courteous and straight forward; no threats are made.

Probate has always been an important part of my Court. Mr. Blackard claims that I have not worked with the Bar to improve probate, but nothing could be further from the truth. As an example, to eliminate inconsistencies, I stopped having magistrates rotate through this Court. This was a suggestion of the probate bar. I also added two additional sessions a month for probate matters. Several years ago I met with the members of the probate bar to rewrite the probate rules and the probate bar committee was put in charge of proposing all new rules and a new fee schedule. Proudly, their new rules were enacted and are still used to this day. Earlier this year I appeared before the probate committee and gave a status report and took questions concerning probate matters. Recently, after hearing that members of the probate bar wanted to allow their runners to file guardianships, I implemented a pilot program for this change. I have also met with the family law bar committee to improve the Court. Several suggestions were implemented, prior to the paternities being transferred to Division IV. The truth of the matter is that I have had an open door policy for ANY attorney to make suggestions on how to improve my Court and we have enacted almost all of these suggestions. Of course, recently the Superior Court Judges created a new family division. I take pride in assisting with this restructuring.

Lastly, Mr. Blackard also makes an extremely serious charge that he will “Restore Due Process in CHINS cases.” To claim that I do not follow Due Process law and for him to boldly assert that an attorney can`t “argue the case on the merits” is simply a lie. I challenge Mr. Blackard to come up with even one case where I did not allow an attorney to fairly argue their case. To claim that I simply follow all DCS/CASA recommendations is laughable. Quite frankly, the public defenders and DCS attorneys who handle these cases grow tired of my patience when allowing the parents or opposing counsel to be heard. I treat everybody in my court with the utmost respect and never prejudge a case.

What is truly disturbing about these allegations are that they are being made with a total disregard to the truth. Unsubstantiated and false allegations hurt the Court`s reputation and I fear that the Bar who doesn`t practice in my Court might wonder whether they contain some truth. I assure you they do not and if you would like to contact the attorneys who regularly practice in my Court please do. I have already heard from numerous attorneys who are appalled by these assertions. I close by restating how I began, it is a sad day when a young attorney makes false allegations against a judge. I take great pride in my Court, my staff, my fairness, my integrity, and my work ethic. In 2008, I was honored with the Kinsey award, the highest honor that a Juvenile Judge can receive in the State of Indiana. I think that speaks volumes to the dedication that I have to the public and my Court.

Sincerely,

Brett J. Niemeier

Superior Court Judge –Juvenile/Probate Division

A Policy of Over-Spending: Are Civil Engineers’ Donations Dictating Policy?
By Brad Linzy

Over the last couple days, partly spurred by curiosity, partly by a suspicion that there is more going on with the Roberts Stadium demolition deal than meets the eye, I sat about the task of pouring over then-candidate for Mayor Lloyd Winneke’s donor reports. In the course of this research one thing has become apparent – by far the most generous donors to now-Mayor Winnecke’s campaign tended to be from people who sit at the helms of civil engineering firms.

I want to say up front and in all fairness, I see no problem with individuals donating to a cause or campaign for honest reasons and without any expectation of quid pro quo, but it seems to me the sheer number and sizes of the donations given to this Mayor by people in the field of civil engineering – i.e. people who work at firms that deal directly with municipalities building bridges, roads, levees, managing waste water, building parks, bike trails, etc. – is telling of at least a hope these engineering executives have of ingratiating themselves to someone in a position to direct civic policy.

Of course, the Mayor is not in a position to hand out a contract directly to a crony, but he is certainly in a position to set policy that will lead to opportunities for contracts where they otherwise might not exist, e.g. Robert’s Stadium, its demolition, and the creation of a park and pedestrian bridge. In this policy decision alone there exists the opportunity to take bids on multiple contracts for different stages of the project.

First, as we have seen, the contents needed to be auctioned off, so a contract was needed for that. Next, the demolition of the building will require a contract and bids have already ballooned to 4x their initial estimates for that. Next, the parking lot will need to be demolished, and it’s possible that could get done under a separate contract. Then the park will need to be built…another contract. And let’s not forget that pedestrian bridge; that should be a nice, juicy contract for some lucky firm.

So we see that in this one policy decision alone, there could be at least FIVE different contracts with potentially FIVE different firms who may or may not have contributed to the campaign of this Mayor. We know already that Andrew Wilson of Wilson’s Auction, which got the contract for 10% of the auctioned contents, was a donor. Let’s take a look at some of the civil engineering firms that gave large sums to this Mayor’s campaign and guess at who might end up in the cat bird’s seat to receive some of these remaining contracts. Keep in mind, a donation does not necessarily equate to impropriety.

I will be using information from the following link for my data, which I don’t believe is comprehensive: https://city-countyobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Winnecke-Campaign-Pre-Election-Report-Oct-14-2011.pdf

Phil Kuntz is Executive Vice President at Janssen & Spaans Engineering, Inc. Based in Indianapolis, this firm specializes in bridges, but also does everything from sewers to subdivision designs. Kuntz gave $2500 to the Winnecke campaign. http://www.jsengr.com/

Keith Lochmueller is a partner at Bernardin, Lochmueller & Associates, Inc. (BLA). Based in Evansville, this is the firm that built the Evansville Riverfront Plaza and designed the Aztar Hotel complex. They seem to specialize in wastewater management and sewer systems, but they do about everything else too. Lochmueller gave $10,500 cumulative to the Winnecke campaign. http://www.blainc.com/index.html

Ed Jolliffe is the President of Hannum, Wagle and Cline Engineering. They too specialize in wastewater and stormwater drainage, but they do other things as well like a new Aquatic Center in Newcastle and the city center of French Lick. They have four offices, two of which are in Terre Haute and Indianapolis. Jolliffe gave $2500 to Winnecke. His partner David Hannum of the same firm gave $1000. http://www.hwcengineering.com/index.html

Willis (Rick) Conner is President, COO and Co-owner American Structurepoint Inc. This firm is based in Indianapolis with an office in Evansville and they build everything from Interstate exchanges to IMAX theatres. They also do sewers, site planning for parks, you name it. Conner gave a cumulative $8000 to Winnecke. http://www.structurepoint.com/

Martin Wessler is Chairman and CEO of Wessler Engineering. They are based in Indianapolis, but also have an office on Vogel Rd. in Evansville. They do everything pertaining to water, electrical, bridge construction and urban planning. Wessler and his firm gave $2500 to Winnecke. http://www.wesslerengineering.com/

John Brand is an Executive at Butler, Fairman, & Seufert. Here is yet another Indy-based company that does it all, including bridges, parks and sewer. Brand gave $2350 to Winnecke. http://www.bfsengr.com/

David Hynes is an engineer at Commonwealth Engineers. This company seems to specialize in sewers and recently put in a bid for an Evansville Westside community project. Hynes gave $1600 to Winnecke. http://www.commonwealth-engineers.com/

Jorge Lanz is President of Jacobi, Toombs & Lanz, Inc. (JTL) out of Louisville. They have their hands in many pies as well, including completion of a softball complex in Clarksville. Lanz gave $1000 to Winnecke. http://www.jtleng.com/staff.htm

Powers Engineering is an Evansville firm. They seem to specialize in water and sewer. They gave $1000 to Winnecke. http://www.powersengineeringinc.com/

Adam Westermann is an engineer at Black & Veatch, who has an office in Indy. They do everything from water to energy to telecom. Westermann gave $1500 to Winnecke. http://bv.com/

Steven Fehribach works for A&F Engineering out of Indy. They specialize in traffic control and road building. Fehribach gave $2000 to Winnecke. http://www.af-eng.com/

All told in the records I’ve seen, Winnecke received nearly $40,000 from individuals whose occupation was in civil engineering. As I said before, a political donation does not necessarily equate to impropriety or quid pro quo. It is possible that some of these people are just honest businessmen trying to put their company on equal footing with other firms. They could just really like Lloyd Winnecke. However, when a President or CEO of an Indianapolis-based firm takes such a keen interest in the politics of a town in which he does not reside, it is clear his gift is a calculated business decision, and when a local civil engineering executive gives in excess of $10,000 to a Mayoral campaign, a reasonable man can only conclude he believes his money will come back to him in kind.

The question is what effect, if any, have all these gifts had on Mayor Winnecke’s policy decisions? The question should be asked, if the Mayor had received none of these large gifts from civil engineering firms, would he have advocated a sale of the Roberts Stadium property? Such a move would have still resulted in an auctioneer contract, but no others.

Is it possible that what we are seeing here is the normal modus operandi for politicians and their donors? Do donors support politicians only insofar as their support is rewarded with a slice of some future pie? And do politicians avoid making policy decisions that would save the taxpayers he represents money in favor of policies which spend the maximum amount he can get away with politically? In the case of Lloyd Winnecke, the answer to these questions appears to be a resounding “yes”.