John Haas: Portsmouth's Untenable City Solicitor

  

The central problem with city government in Portsmouth is not the form of government it has, namely the mayoral or city manager variety. The central problem is the kind of men who run for and get elected to city government. The men who occupy public office  are for the most part failures. They are men, usually,  who have failed in business, in a profession, or in a trade, or who are not now or perhaps have not for a long time  been  gainfully employed and want the benefits and the prestige of holding  public office. No form of city government is going to work with incompetent city officials, whether they are elected or appointed, and whether the form of government is mayoral or city manager. 

As an example of an incompetent city official, take city solicitor John Haas. According to the Portsmouth Daily Times (29 April 2014), “Portsmouth City Solicitor John Haas says he cannot represent Portsmouth City Council when it comes to public records requests in the future.” Why not? Because, Haas told the PDT, the city council “has placed my office in an untenable position.” What does “untenable” mean? A tenant is “Someone  who pays rent to use or occupy land, a building, or other property owned by another.” The original and strict meaning of untenable is that an apartment or a house  or an office for some reason cannot be occupied, cannot be tenanted.

That is not the meaning of untenable that Haas has in mind, (if you will allow me the liberty of using “mind” in connection with him). Another meaning of untenable, and the one Haas apparently has in what passes for a mind is a place or a position or an office, such as the office of  city solicitor, that cannot be defended. But no one is attacking Haas or the office of city solicitor. They are rather proposing to change the office of city solicitor from an elective to an appointed office.  John Haas is obstructing city government by refusing to carry out one of his responsibilities as city solicitor because he doesn’t approve of the proposal of several councilmen to change the city solicitor position from an elective to an appointed position. It is hard to believe  that a lawyer would think he has the right to refuse to perform a duty of the  city solicitor because he doesn’t think it’s a good idea to change the office from elective to appointed. Changing any public office from elective to appointed or appointed to elective is a long, complicated, democratic  process, as is spelled out in the city charter.

      But it is Haas himself who is untenable, who is indefensible, who is not qualified to hold the office of city solicitor. He is not qualified  because he is in terms of his understanding of the law, incompetent. He doesn’t understand that by refusing to handle public records requests he is not fulfilling one of the duties of his office that he swore to perform. He cannot choose which of his duties he is going to perform and which he isn’t. The issue of whether the city solicitor should be elected, or whether it is a bad or good proposal,  is not the issue. At no level, local, state, or federal, does government work that way. But Portsmouth apparently is an exception and a public official is going to be allowed to choose which of his duties he performs and which he will not. Fire fighters are not allowed to choose which fires they are going to put out; police officers which laws they are going to enforce; sanitation workers which trash they are going to pick up;  and deadbeat dads are not allowed to decide which of their children they are going to pay child support for. But Haas is going to decide he is not going to handle public records requests and the Portsmouth Daily Times is not going to point this flagrant dereliction of duty out to its readers? That’s not just untenable, it’s intolerable. Oh, and two more things. Haas like two other council members, Kalb and Malone, have declared bankruptcy. And didn’t Haas first get his foot in the door of the city solicitor's office by being appointed? Isn't that how many of these untenable, bankrupt characters start their political careers, by being appointed? As Snuffy Smith would say, “Isn’t that a crock?”

* * *

When you consider the council members who began their careers as appointees, the list is not encouraging. Baughman was originally an appointee, when his friend and his next-door neighbor John Thatcher, conveniently resigned as Fifth Ward councilman. And then Baughman himself resigned before he could be recalled, making the appointment of John Haas possible in the endless appointee game of musical chairs that is orchestrated by Portsmouth’s powerful, unelected clique. Jerrold Albrecht first got on the council by appointment, and so did the notorious shyster Mike Mearan. James R. Saddler is the most recent appointment. Saddler had not shown any interest in city government previously, except when he had to appear in court for numerous speeding violations, including a DUI for which his license was suspended. For all those who prefer to begin their political careers by applying to the council for a vacated position rather than run in an election, we should have buttons that say not “I Voted,” but rather “I Applied.” 
                 from “City Council Appointees: Portsmouth's Perennial Problem” 

City Council Appointees: Portsmouth’s Perennial Problem

Mark Twain showed river towns have more than their share of vices. RIVER VICES shows Portsmouth, located at the confluence of the Ohio and Scioto Rivers, is no exception.

Mike Mearan: the Most Notorious Appointee

The Portsmouth  Daily Times reported (18 May 2013) that a second candidate, Lance L. Richardson,  is going to throw his hat in the ring for the Third Ward council seat being vacated by Nick Basham. Does that mean he wants to be appointed by the council or that he wants to be a write-in candidate in the regular election? As far as I know, Richardson has previously shown no interest in becoming a member of city government the old-fashioned way, by running for office. That is often the case with appointees. They run for office the way Rosie Ruiz ran the 1980 Boston Marathon, by skipping the grueling race but showing up at the finish line. The “ring” Richardson threw his hat into consists not of Portsmouth voters but the remaining five Portsmouth city council members whom the city charter authorizes to appoint replacements to the city council. Back on 26 June 2006, Richard Noel, president of the Concerned Citizens Group, wrote a letter to the Portsmouth City Council requesting that a measure be placed on the ballot calling for the term for city council members be reduced from four to two years. Up until 1985, Portsmouth City Council members served two-year terms, but then that provision was changed in that year by charter amendment. The council rejected Noel's proposal and declined to allow the voters decide whether to go back to two-year terms. 

       City Council = House of Representatives

The Founding Fathers intended that the U.S. House of Representatives be “the people’s house,” the body of the federal government that would be directly elected by, and therefore most accountable to, the people. It was to be the most representative and the most held-accountable body of the federal government. In the Federalist Papers, Hamilton and Madison wrote, “As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration [the House of Representatives] should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people.” The best way they could think of to insure that the House of Representatives would remain “the people’s house,” was frequent elections. “Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured” [emphasis added], they wrote in number 52 of the Federalist Papers. In regard to frequent elections, they quoted, in number 53, the proverb “that where annual elections end, tyranny begins.” But that proverb was an old one, and conditions had changed since ancient Greece. Elections every year were impractical when many voters were spread over large areas. Somewhat reluctantly, because they preferred annual elections, the Founding Fathers decided that the maximum term for a representative should be biennial, that is, two years.

                               Local Government in Ohio

When Ohio designed its state government, it closely followed the federal model, with a General Assembly that consisted of a House of Representatives and a Senate. Following the federal model, terms for the Ohio House, the “people’s house,” were two years. Most local governments in Ohio usually followed the state model. In local governments, the legislative body, the counterpart to a House of Representatives, is the city council. Following the example of the House of Representatives, two-year terms were the general rule for city councils. But a number of cities and towns have shifted to a mixture of two-year terms for ward representatives and four-year terms for at-large council members; other communities have shifted to a four-year term for all council members. The Columbus City Council has four-year terms, but the city councils of Cleveland and Cincinnati retain two-year terms. While there are exceptions, generally smaller communities are more likely to have four-year terms for city council, the larger ones two-year terms. Why the difference?

Possibly because larger urban areas with a history of municipal corruption and machine politics see two-year terms as a way of removing those council members who turn out to be bad apples before they spoil all the apples in the barrel. Cities and towns that have been plagued by corruption and that distrust politicians as a class want city councils to be on the short leash that two-year terms represent. A political machine or, in the case of Portsmouth, a clique, would more likely arise and persist in a city where members of city council had four rather than two years in which to scheme, collude, and corrupt. Communities that don’t have a history of crooked politics don’t want to go through the trouble and expense of having elections every two years. But large cities like Cleveland and Cincinnati may have learned that biennial elections are worth the trouble because they make the city council more accountable. They learned from experience, as we have bitterly in Portsmouth, that at least some politicians are not to be trusted. The same thing that makes four-year terms seem sensible in some communities makes them seem unwise in others. The Concerned Citizens believed four-year city council terms is asking for trouble, which is what Portsmouth got when it changed to four-year terms in  1985.

                                     Checks and Balances

The late Howard Baughman entering Marting Building
during an open-house for the public

The three branches of government that the Founding Fathers established—the legislative, the executive, and the judicial—were intended  to serve as checks and balances on each other. The counterparts of those three branches of government are discernible in local government in the mayor or city manager (executive), the city council (legislative), and the city solicitor and city courts (judiciary). Unfortunately, too often at the local level, the three branches of government, rather than checking and balancing each other, are in cahoots, forming a tyranny that, with the connivance of the local media, represses and exploits the public they are supposed to be serving. If you want to see a cornpone version of the kind of tyranny our Founding Fathers were concerned about, Portsmouth provides a textbook example.  The Portsmouth city council, the mayor, the city solicitor, the auditor, with the collusion of long-time city clerk Jo Ann Aeh,  would regularly meet illegally in her office just before council meetings like a gang of safe-crackers planning a job. It was at one of these illegal backroom meetings that Marty Mohr orchestrated the appointment of Jerrold Albrecht to the city council as Austin Leedom reported online  in The Sentinel, dated 6 May 2007 (click here).  (For other Mohr antics, clear here.) While attending one of these closed-door illegal meetings, then councilman Marty Mohr was photographed through the city clerk's open door Joe Ferguson. The mugging Mohr responded defiantly by clenching his teeth for the camera. 

Marty Mohr mugging for camera

Just as Mayor Bauer predicted chaos would reign if he was recalled from office, and just as council president Carol Caudill said, “God help the city of Portsmouth” after she was recalled, the president of the city council in 2006, Howard Baughman, who was facing a recall, warned of the consequences if the  city council returned to two-year terms. Baughman remarked at the 25 June 2006  city council meeting, “There’s a learning curve when you become a city councilman.”  He did not think council members could possibly come to understand budgets in only two years. The real reason Baughman and others opposed two-year terms was not learning curves. Two-year terms were unacceptable because they might have  helped loosen the grip of the clique of lawyers and developers who controlled  the city through their puppets on the city council.  

The only other defense beside “learning curves” Baughman offered against two-year terms was that, “It would just be constant turmoil and turnover every two years.” Though all council members would run for election at the same time, it is unlikely that they would all be defeated. And if they were, that might be the best thing for the city. If biennial elections bring constant turmoil, how have the U.S. House of Representatives, the Ohio House of Representatives, and the city councils of many cities in Ohio managed to survive for as long as they have with two-year terms? Where is the turmoil in the following two-year term Ohio cities: Alliance, Amherst, Athens, Blue Ash, Chillicothe, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Cuyahoga Falls, Lorrain, North Royalton, Norwood, Parma, Silverton, Warren, Wilmington, Wyoming, etc? There has been a lot of turmoil in the Portsmouth City Council since 1985  and much of it has been the result, directly and indirectly, of four-year terms and the recalls that would not likely have taken place if council members had faced the electorate every two years.     

Honest capable people in public office have no reason to object to two-year terms, because they can be assured of reelection if they do a good job. It’s the dishonest council members, and especially those who began their careers by being appointed rather than elected, who want the four-year terms to continue. Four-year terms for city council members helped perpetuate the political clique that controlled Portsmouth on behalf of the now discredited Southern Ohio Growth Partnership (SOGP).  I don’t know whether  Lance  Richardson  would turn out to be a good or bad councilman, but why did  he throw his hat in the ring only now, as a potential appointee, rather than run in a regular election, as I would think anyone not trying to cut corners  and short-change democracy would prefer to do? Let us hope Richardson, a self-proclaimed tax expert, is not another of those shipwrecked characters who save themselves from drowning in a sea of insignificance by clambering aboard the raft of city government that is already crowded with other failures, dreaming no doubt that the game of musical chairs might result someday in their becoming mayor, as Malone did when he won the booby prize as a result of Mayor Murray’s recall.

When you consider the council members who began their careers as appointees, the list is not encouraging.  Baughman was originally an appointee, when his friend and his next-door neighbor John Thatcher, conveniently resigned as Fifth Ward councilman. And then Baughman himself resigned before he could be recalled, making the appointment of John Haas possible in the endless appointee game of musical chairs that is orchestrated by Portsmouth’s powerful, unelected clique. Jerrold Albrecht first got on the council by appointment, and so did the notorious shyster Mike Mearan. James R. Saddler is the most recent appointment. Saddler had not shown any interest in city government previously, except when he had to appear in court for numerous speeding violations, including a DUI for which his license was suspended. For all those who prefer to begin their political careers by applying to the council for a vacated position rather than run in an election, we should have buttons that say not “I Voted,” but rather “I Applied.” But in any campaign to reduce the terms on city council to two years, Mearan should be the poster boy and he should be proudly wearing an “I Applied” button. 

Current First Ward councilman Kevin W. Johnson tried to begin his political career in Portsmouth when he applied to council to replace Tim Loper after Loper was forced to resign his seat when it was proved he was not living in the First Ward, the ward he represented, in violation of the city charter. To replace Loper, the city council appointed Mearan, arguably the most scandalous appointee in the history of the city,  rather than Kevin W. Johnson. 

I find the political jockeying to become council president that takes place among those council members, some of  whom were originally appointees, unseemly. When Jane Murray was recalled, David Malone, as president of the council, replaced her in spite of the fact he had finished fourth behind her in the previous mayoral election. Malone had been elected to the presidency and next in line to be mayor, by appointees such as the lawyer John Haas, his fellow bankrupt, who is yet another council member who was appointed  after  failing to succeed in his chosen field. It is almost as if there is an unwritten requirement that candidates must be failures, if not bankrupts,  before they will be considered as appointees. Who with any self respect would want to owe their presence on the council to an appointment by such a council? To revise the famous quote by Groucho Marx, “I don't want to belong to any city council  that would accept me as a member.”

"Portsmouth Boy": James R. Saddler, II [reposted]

[In January 13, 2011, I posted the following opinion piece on Richard R. Saddler, II, following his appointment as the council member for Ward Two. The doubts I expressed about Saddler’s appointment then have been confirmed in the two years since. Austin Leedom tells me that our “Portsmouth Boy” outdid himself in assininity at tonight’s council meeting. The record of those who first got on the council by being appointed is a sorry one, but what else can we expect when drug-dealing pimps, drunken drivers, deadbeat dads, and bankrupt failures are shown preference as appointees?]

. . . . . . . . . .

 “There are some issues with some of our local roads and infrastructure, things like that that might be easily fixed.” Richard R. Saddler, II, Portsmouth’s new city councilman (shown above taking oath of office), as quoted in the 11 January 2011 Portsmouth Daily Times story headed “Council gives Saddler 2nd Ward seat.”

“Give” is the right verb to describe the city council’s action in regard to Richard R. Saddler, II. When a member vacates a seat on the city council for any reason, the other members give the seat to the applicant of their choice. One of the last persons to be given a council seat, prior to Saddler,  was the notorious Mike Mearan. The list of of council members who were first given rather than elected to council seats is long and reflects a serious problem in Portsmouth’s city charter. The four-year terms for all elected officials invites recalls and political shenanigans.

Like Mearan before him, Saddler has never run for city council or attended city council meetings or shown much interest in city government. This is often the case with those who are given seats on city council. Unwilling or too lazy or too chicken to run for a seat,  they are only too happy to be given it, usually with the blessing of the unelected crooks who control the city.  Having been given the seat, they have an advantage in future elections because they are  the incumbent, which helps them remain in office, though in Mearan’s case incumbency was not enough to get him elected. Portsmouth has sunk very low but not that low.

When Saddler told the Daily Times, “There are some issues with some of our local roads,” what was he referring to? Was he referring to the issues of traffic lights and vehicular safety, which Mayor Murray had given a high priority to but which Police Chief Horner had spitefully opposed. (Horner’s ideal would be a Portsmouth that is completely free of traffic lights and farting.) Traffic lights were probably not one of the issues Saddler referred to when he spoke of “local roads,” because the traffic lights issue will not be  “easily fixed,” to quote his words. You don’t have to be a member of the traffic committee to know that. In mentioning “local roads,” Saddler might have been referring to  potholes, or something like that. [I feel fairly sure one of the issues he is not concerned with is drunken drivers.]

The Son of Hell-on-Wheels Bihl

But since he mentioned roads,  rather than the deficits, drugs, or traffic safety,  I would say that if Saddler  is no better as a councilman than he is as a driver, then we’re in for a hell of a ride. From 1992 to 2008, Saddler  had twenty-one traffic violations, many of them  for  speeding and not using a seat-belt. (See his rap sheet below.)  In not wearing a seatbelt, he was not only breaking the law; he was  endangering his own life. In  speeding, he was not only breaking the law, he was also endangering the lives of others. If Saddler had  twenty-one moving violations in sixteen years, how many times was he not caught speeding and driving without a seat belt? Is Saddler “The Son of Hell-on-Wheels Bihl”? Saddler is just the kind of driver who is all the more dangerous the fewer traffic lights there are in the city. And he would be even more dangerous if he was driving while under the influence. But in  none of Saddler’s  twenty-one traffic violations is there any mention of alcohol. It’s hard  to believe that someone would  drive above the speed limit without a seatbelt as many times as Saddler has, and in every one of those instances be cold sober. It’s possible he never drinks and drives, and it’s possible he doesn’t drink at all. It’s possible, also,  that former Police Chief Tom Bihl, when he totaled  two parked cars on Offnere Street back in 1998  was cold sober,  as he later claimed he was. But how  can we be sure since he was  not given a breathalyzer test, which Saddler apparently wasn’t given either in   any  one of his  twenty-one moving violations.

I have been driving for twenty two years in Portsmouth and have never received so much as parking  ticket, but that’s probably because I  drive much less than Saddler. The only driving I do is the couple of miles of day on round trips to the Life Center.  But you don’t need to drive much to be at risk on “local roads,” especially since the number of traffic lights has been reduced. On my way to the Life Center one day  several years ago I was slammed into by a young woman racing through a stop sign at an otherwise  quiet intersection on Findlay Street, not far from the notorious pain clinic.

Since city  traffic lights were unwisely covered up during Kalb’s incompetent and corrupt administration, driving has become even more nerve wracking. Crossing Route 52 in particular has became a heart stopper, and about six months ago I saw a very serious accident at a Route 52 intersection where the light was covered.  One night just several months ago driving south on Chillicothe Street I was sideswiped by a car going over the speed limit. I tried following  the compact white sports car to get the  license plate, but the young male driver sped away. I had to replace the driver’s side rear view mirror. Since I didn’t get the license number, I  didn’t report it to the police.  I also didn’t report to the police another time when my car was broken into and some personal belongings were stolen. I am told that Horner’s officers discourage those involved in  traffic accidents or a petty theft reporting, unless they file a claim with their  insurance company. I am told that is how Horner is reducing Portsmouth crime and accident rate is being reduced: by discouraging victims from formally reporting them unless they are filing a claim with their insurance company. As long as Horner is chief, the real crime and accident rate may not see the light of day.

Troubling Questions

I will conclude with some  troubling questions about Saddler and offer some troubling answers. What will happen when and if Saddler gets another moving violation? Will he go to court to appeal it, now that as a councilman he has more political influence? And suppose, if he appeals the violation, that Steve Mowery is the judge presiding at the municipal court. Prior to being elected municipal judge, Mowery was the lawyer who represented Saddler in his divorce,  and Mowery is also one of the “friends” on Saddler’s Facebook site. There is even a photo of Mowery in shades (shown at left). Mowery is the one who when campaigning for municipal judge said that the Municipal Building should be torn down and the city government, including the municipal court, should be moved to a renovated Marting building. Mowery’s opponent in the contest for municipal judge correctly pointed out that whether the Municipal Building should be torn down and whether the city government should move to the Marting building is something the voters, not a municipal judge,  should decide. The  decision not to renovate the Marting building has already been rendered, twice, by the voters of Portsmouth. But the recall of Mayor Murray and the installation of David Malone as her replacement, and the “giving” of the Ward Two council seat to Saddler is probably the prelude to completing the Marting Scam, and the voters be damned. Malone, the Uncle Tom of Portsmouth, has already indicated he is in favor of spending the millions of dollars that the city doesn’t have to renovate the Marting building, and there is  no question how Hassle’em and  Bash’em will vote. In Saddler we already know we have one for the road, and it may not be long before we have another for the Marting building. 

Just the good ol’ boys,

Never meanin’ no harm.

Beats all you ever saw,

Getting in trouble with the law

Since the day they was born.

* * *

Traffic Violations of James R. Saddler, II

1

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 02/24/1992

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 9201332

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

2

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 01/06/1997

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 9700112

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 64/45 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

           

3

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 09/19/1997

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 9705887

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 67/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

4

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 06/15/2000

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0004500

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 70/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

5

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 06/15/2000

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0004500

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

6

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 04/17/2001

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0102442

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: FOLLOW TOO CLOS

Case Type: Traffic

7

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 04/17/2001

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0102442

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

8

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 10/12/2001

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0107630

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 66/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

9

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 10/12/2001

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0107630

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

10

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 05/17/2002

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0202903

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 65/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

11

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 05/17/2002

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0202903

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

12

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Case #: 9705887

Docket Entry: Click

Filed: 09/19/1997

Arr. Agency: OSP

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

13

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 09/19/1997

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 9705900

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 67/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

14

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 07/09/2002

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0204754

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 50/40 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

15

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 07/09/2002

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0204754

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

16

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 10/18/2006

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0606781

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 75/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

17

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 05/08/2007

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0702581

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 58/35 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

18

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 05/08/2007

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0702581

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: SEAT BELT-DRIV

Case Type: Traffic

19

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 01/04/2008

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0800067

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: 70/55 SPEED

Case Type: Traffic

20

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 12/01/2008

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0808118

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: PHYSICAL CONTRO

Case Type: Traffic

21

Concerning: Saddler, James R II

D.B.A./A.K.A.:

Filed: 12/01/2008

Arr. Agency: OSP

Case #: 0808118

Docket Entry: Click

Charge: MARKED LANES

Case Type: Traffic