“Unfortunately, the recent indictment of Roger Reynolds threatens to obscure the truth — that there was no bribery or collusion amongst Farrell and Reynolds — by creating a cloud of silence over the discovery process,” the motion reads.
“If Reynolds takes the Fifth Amendment throughout discovery in this case, as is expected if no stay is granted, then Reynolds likely must face the accompanying negative inference. However, if that negative inference is then imposed upon Trustee Farrell, it places him in an inequitable and unreasonable position: to have another party’s exercise of his constitutional rights transformed into ‘substantive’ evidence against him.”
Reynolds filed a motion to stay the civil case filed by Gerald Parks two days after he was indicted, saying he can’t defend the civil suit properly — that is intertwined with the criminal investigation — without jeopardizing his criminal defense.
“The criminal proceeding arises from the same underlying facts as this civil action,” that motion reads. “Mr. Reynolds and Liberty Way Farms should not be saddled with the impossible burden of attempting to present their civil defense in a manner that protects Mr. Reynolds Fifth Amendment rights.”
The case was filed by 88-year-old Gerald Parks in September, who claims Reynolds interfered with several offers he had for his land near property owned by Reynolds’ dad, for a competing development. It alleges Reynolds donated $500 to Farrell’s re-election campaign in exchange for the trustee voting against the development proposed for Parks’ land.
The criminal case does not mention the campaign donation to Farrell.
“I have said all along that I did nothing improper with regard to the Hamilton Mason Road development. Yesterday’s filing by the Ohio Attorney General makes it clear that I’ve been telling the truth,” Farrell told the Journal-News after Attorney General Dave Yost released details about the indictments. “I hope the public hears this message as clearly — and as loudly — as they heard the unsubstantiated allegations.”
The civil lawsuit also accused Reynolds of taking agricultural tax breaks off Parks’ properties and a number of other allegations. Parks doesn’t want his case stalled.
“While the umbrella of Fifth Amendment guarantees is broad, the prohibition against compulsory testimony does not relieve Mr. Reynolds from appearing or answering questions in this civil action,” Parks’ attorney Milton S. Goff III wrote.
Visiting Judge Dennis J. Langer hasn’t ruled on the motions but the day after Goff filed his motion he did set a pre-trial/settlement conference for May 12.
The county paid about $15,000 from October through December defending Reynolds’ civil case — the deductible is $100,000 before the insurance picks up the tab — but the auditor is on the hook for his criminal defense.
Meanwhile, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor will very soon convene a panel of three retired judges to decide whether Reynolds should be suspended while his criminal case is pending. He is also campaigning to keep his job as the county’s top fiscal officer.
Reynolds’ attorney Chad Ziepfel told the Journal-News they will fight this all the way.
“We will be contesting the suspension,” Ziepfel said. “Not only are the allegations false, but they do not involve the Auditor’s Office or Mr. Reynolds’ work as the auditor. We hope that the community will not rush to judgment in this matter, and will wait for the full story to come out at trial.”
About the Author
