Jerry Tommy Bell Case Posts:
Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Janetsky victim blaming in the domestic violence case against Warren activist Jerry T Bell:
“There are only two people who have the ability to change the pattern that is happening in this relationship,” Janetsky said. “One is Ms. Nard..."
INTRODUCING:
Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Janetsky Of The Michigan Community Corrections Board
(Appointed in April 2021 by Governor Whitmer)
On October 01, 2021, Jerry Tommy Bell was charged with charged with one count of misdemeanor domestic violence two counts of criminal sexual conduct; extortion; assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder or by strangulation; felonious assault; and kidnapping. Additionally, Bell was charged as a habitual offender, third offense for 1997 charges of breaking and entering and auto theft.
Bell was facing the possibility of LIFE IN PRISON.
This was not a case of 'he said, she said' because the victim had been able to record on her cell phone the second rape. The police turned the cell phone recording evidence over to Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Janetsky.
In a plea agreement, Prosecuting Attorney Janetsky dropped the charges of criminal sexual conduct, extortion, assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder or by strangulation, felonious assault and kidnapping against Bell.
In exchange, Jerry Bell pled guilty to misdemeanor charges of stalking and domestic violence. Bell's sentence: five years of reporting probation and is required to complete 52 weeks of batterers intervention counseling
At Jerry Bell's sentencing, Prosecuting attorney Janetsky stated: "There are only two people who have the ability to change the pattern that is happening in this relationship,” Janetsky said. “One is Ms. Nard..."
Yes, Janetsky of the Michigan Community Corrections Board, blamed the victim of Jerry Bell's vicious attack.
Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Janetsky - Michigan Community Corrections Board
Governor Whitmer makes appointments to boards and commissions
Mining Gazette
April 09, 2021
LANSING — Governor Gretchen Whitmer announced the following appointments to the Michigan Community Corrections Board, Propane Commission, Correctional Officers’ Training Council, and the School Safety Commission.
Michigan Community Corrections Board
Martha D. Anderson, of Troy, is a judge for the 6th Circuit Court of Oakland County. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in English from Wayne State University and a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Detroit Law School. Judge Anderson is reappointed to represent a judge of the circuit court for a term commencing Apr. 9, and expiring March 31, 2025.
Brandon D. Davis, of Muskegon, is the director of oversight and public accountability for the City of Grand Rapids. He holds a Bachelor of Applied Arts from Central Michigan University and a Juris Doctor degree from Wayne State University Law School. Mr. Davis is appointed to represent a member of city government for a term commencing Apr. 9, and expiring March 31, 2025. He succeeds Bobby Hopewell whose term expired March 31.
Jennifer C. Janetsky, of Flushing, is an assistant prosecuting attorney for Genesee County. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and German Language and a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Michigan. Ms. Janetsky is reappointed to represent a county prosecutor for a term commencing Apr. 9, and expiring March 31, 2025.
Bradley S. Knoll, of Holland, is the chief judge of the 58th District Court of Ottawa County. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the University of Michigan and a Juris Doctor degree from the Detroit College of Law. Judge Knoll is reappointed to represent a judge of the district court for a term commencing Apr. 9, and expiring March 31, 2025.
Kevin R. Krieg, of Saline, is the business representative for the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Communications and Construction Technology from Eastern Michigan University. Mr. Krieg is appointed to represent the general public for a term commencing Apr. 9, and expiring March 31, 2025. He succeeds Deborah Smith-Olson whose term expired March 31.
The Michigan Community Corrections Board serves in an advisory capacity to the Director of the Michigan Department of Corrections and is charged with approving many components of community corrections programs including: goals, eligibility criteria, program guidelines, program standards and policies, the application process, procedures for funding, and criteria for evaluation.
These appointments are subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.
Michigan Community Corrections Board
The Michigan Community Corrections Board serves in an advisory capacity to the Director for the Michigan Department of Corrections and is charged with approving many components of community corrections programs including: goals, eligibility criteria, program guidelines, program standards and policies, the application process, procedures for funding, and criteria for evaluation.
The Board consists of 13 members, each representing a certain entity related to corrections. Board members serve 4-year terms. The appointments of this board are subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.
CURRENT MEMBERS
Heidi Washington
Director of Department of Corrections
Anna R. Kohn, Detroit
Represents the general public, term expires 3/31/2023
L. Paul Bailey, Berrien Center
Represents county sheriffs, term expires 3/31/2023
Jake W. Smith, Battle Creek
Represents county commissioners, term expires 3/31/2023
Marilena David-Martin, Detroit
Represents criminal defense attorneys, term expires 3/31/24
Marlene Davis, Ph.D., Southfield - Chairperson
Represents the general public, term expires 3/31/24
William DeBoer, Byron Center
Represents existing community alternatives program, term expires 3/31/24
Natalie Thompson, South Haven
Represents city police departments, term expires 3/31/24
The Honorable Bradley Knoll, Holland
Represents district court judges, term expires 3/31/25
The Honorable Martha Anderson, Troy
Represents circuit court judges, term expires 3/31/25
Kevin Krieg, Saline
Represents the general public, term expires 3/31/25
Jennifer C. Janetsky, Flushing
Represents county prosecuting attorneys, term expires 3/31/25
Brandon Davis, Muskegon
Represents members of city government, term expires 3/31/25
2015: Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Janetsky's "intentional tort and vicarious liability claims against Boyd and the (Saginaw) County" (State Of Michigan Court Of Appeals. 04232020 Opinion)
On-leave Saginaw County assistant prosecutor sues, alleging 'hostile work environment'
MLive
Dec. 02, 2015
SAGINAW, MI -- A Saginaw County assistant prosecutor on leave since June has filed a lawsuit against Prosecutor John McColgan Jr., his chief assistant, and the county.
Jennifer Janetsky on Nov. 19 filed a five-count lawsuit alleging Chief Assistant Prosecutor Christopher Boyd created a "hostile work environment" after she spoke to McColgan about a plea deal Boyd entered into on a sexual assault case.
Janetsky, through her Royal Oak attorney Cary S. McGehee, filed the lawsuit in Saginaw County Circuit Court. It alleges violations of the Whistleblower Protection Act and of Michigan public policy, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false arrest and/or imprisonment. Janetsky is seeking more than $75,000 in damages.
Court officials appointed Saginaw County Presiding Probate Judge Patrick J. McGraw, who handles some Circuit Court cases, to preside over the case. A next court date was pending.
In early June, four days after a confrontation between Boyd and Janetsky in Boyd's office, McColgan placed Janetsky on administrative leave, her lawsuit states. She now is on psychiatric leave, the lawsuit states.
Janetsky sought "psychiatric treatment as a result of the retaliation, harassment and hostile work environment to which she had been subjected," the lawsuit states. "She remains in regular treatment with both her psychologist and her medical doctor as a result of the harm she suffered in the hostile work environment."
Janetsky's doctors, the lawsuit states, "have diagnosed her as psychiatrically disabled from working due to the hostile work environment created by Boyd and allowed to continue by McColgan."
In a statement provided to The Saginaw News, McColgan said Janetsky's claims "are not factually accurate." He said the county hired an independent investigator at his request.
"The investigator found no merit to her claim of [a] hostile work environment," McColgan said. "The bulk of her remaining contentions were also found to be without merit."
McColgan added he has "requested that (Janetsky) return to work in accordance with the recommendations of the independent investigator's report, but she has declined to do so."
County attorneys will represent McColgan, Boyd and the county in the lawsuit and have yet to respond to it. Saginaw attorney Victor Mastromarco Jr. also represents Boyd and characterized the lawsuit as "an attempt to defame the chief assistant prosecutor."
"I believe that it is going to be found that her claims are meritless," Mastromarco told The News.
Mastromarco added he believes the lawsuit attempts to "create an impression" of Boyd "so as to spin a story."
"It is, what appears to me, to be (the product) of a political agenda," he said. "It appears to be malicious."
Plea deal
McColgan's predecessor, Prosecutor Michael Thomas, hired Janetsky in January 2011 after she served as a Bay County District Court judge for about six months. Then-Gov. Jennifer Granholm appointed Janetsky, then Jennifer Barnes, to the position, which Janetsky lost in the November 2010 election to Mark Janer.
The lawsuit states the conflict between Janetsky and Boyd, her direct supervisor, started in June 2014 regarding two cases against a man, listed as "John Doe," whose cases included one of the victims facing a perjury charge and recently concluded with him pleading guilty to one misdemeanor count of domestic violence.
"Contrary to (Janetsky's lawsuit), she did in fact offer a plea to (a five-year) felony of gross indecency on the John Doe case and ultimately recommended dismissing it in its entirety," McColgan said. "There certainly were disagreements between Mrs. Janetsky and Mr. Boyd in their respective assessments of the merits of this case. As it turned out, Mr. Boyd's analysis of the John Doe case proved to be more accurate than hers."
The prosecutor's office in 2013 charged the man with first-degree criminal sexual conduct, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of life in prison with the possibility of parole. Prosecutors also issued a second case with lesser sexual assault charges.
The man's arrest warrant alleged he sexually assaulted a teen girl in September 2011 in Carrollton Township. His second warrant alleged he committed three counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct against a different victim from June 2010 to June 2011 in Saginaw.
Janetsky's lawsuit states Janetsky, who handled most of the office's sexual assault cases, refused to "reconsider the hard line she had taken on the case," the lawsuit states, and did so again after Boyd "attempted to improperly persuade Janetsky to drop or substantially reduce the charges against (the defendant)."
Mastromarco said Boyd did not act improperly in telling Janetsky to reduce the charges.
"That's done every day," he said.
In declining to reduce the charges, Janetsky cited "the fact that (the defendant) had confessed to raping three different women, including the two for which Janetsky had filed charges," the lawsuit states.
Janetsky on May 30, 2014, went on her honeymoon with her new husband knowing the defendant had a pending motion to remand his case back to District Court for a preliminary hearing. Rather than have his cases remanded, the defendant on June 2 pleaded guilty to one third-degree charge, and in exchange, the prosecutor's office agreed to drop the remainder of his charges, including the first-degree charge. Prosecutors also would recommend Boes sentence the man to jail and probation.
Boyd at the time told The Saginaw News that "after a thorough review, we decided that because of delays in the investigation and some evidentiary issues, it was the best interest of all people involved would be to (come to) a compromised resolution."
One of the victims called Janetsky on her cellphone while she was on her honeymoon and told her of the plea agreement, the lawsuit states.
"The victim was very upset and shaken that this plea offer had been made without her being informed of the plea deal or being given notice that the plea would be entered on the date of the (motion)," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit cites a Michigan law that states prosecutors "shall" offer victims "the opportunity to consult" with the prosecutors regarding the victim's views on the disposition of a case, including views about plea agreements. Janetsky "assured (the victims) that it 'wasn't possible' that a plea could have been entered," the lawsuit states.
"Chris Boyd made a plea deal with (the defendant) and his attorney without Janetsky's knowledge and without providing legally required notice and consultation to the victims," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit also cites a Michigan law that prohibits probation for a defendant who either pleads to or is convicted of the third-degree charge. As a result, Janetsky believed Boyd violated that statute by offering a plea agreement involving the third-degree charge that came with a sentencing agreement of jail and probation, the lawsuit states.
Janetsky met with McColgan and Assistant Prosecutor Patrick Duggan, her union representative, the lawsuit states. Janetsky "sought and received (McColgan's) guarantee that she would not be subject to retaliation at the hands of Chris Boyd or the administration for reporting and correcting the illegal actions of Chris Boyd," the lawsuit states. "McColgan assured Janetsky that he would protect her against retaliation and gave her full authority to correct the problem," the lawsuit states.
Boyd "was extremely angry" and "repeatedly told her that she should 'not have gone behind his back' and reported him to McColgan," the lawsuit states. "Janetsky told him she had not gone behind his back but had used the proper chain of command to fix the problem Boyd created before it became a media frenzy. Still, Boyd remained resentful and harbored anger towards Janetsky from that point forward."
Boyd filed a motion to have the plea agreement withdrawn, according to court records, and Boes granted the request.
Meanwhile, the lawsuit states, Boyd "created a hostile environment" by, among other things, over-scrutinizing Janetsky's work, giving her a heavier caseload than other assistant prosecutors, "ignoring her when she sought input from management," "yelling at her in front of colleagues for following specific directives issued to her," and verbally abusing her.
'Still upset'
The lawsuit jumps forward to June 1, 2015, or about a year after the plea deal was offered. The lawsuit states that on that day, Boyd "ordered" Janetsky into his office and "severely berated and demeaned her, raising his voice to a level where others in the office could clearly hear him, and ordering her to 'sit down.'"
"When Janetsky," the lawsuit states, "told him that his behavior was out of control and she did not want to sit down and wanted her union representative to be present, Boyd crossed the room (and) physically blocked her exit from his office by placing his arm on the closed door of the office and blocking her exit with his body. After blocking the exit, Boyd then screamed in Janetsky's face two more times, 'Sit down.'"
The lawsuit states Boyd allowed Assistant Prosecutor Nathan Collison, the vice president of Janetsky's union, into his office. Boyd then accused her of insubordination for refusing to sit down, the lawsuit states.
Janetsky said she felt Boyd was treating her in a "hostile manner" because of the "John Doe" case, the lawsuit states. Boyd responded, "You're damn right I'm still upset about (the case). You embarrassed me," the lawsuit states.
Janetsky, the lawsuit states, "emotionally and physically shaken by Boyd's treatment and feared that he would physically harm her when he blocked her path from the office."
Mastromarco, Boyd's attorney, said the version of events outlined by the lawsuit is "a misstatement of what happened."
One day later, the prosecutor's office assigned a different assistant prosecutor to preside over the "John Doe" case, the lawsuit states. Two days after that, Janetsky delivered a letter to McColgan "complaining that Boyd was harassing her and had created a severe and pervasive hostile environment for her because she reported a violation of law to the prosecutor's office and because she refused to violate the law," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit states Janetsky received "no communication" from McColgan and "was not given the opportunity to discuss her letter despite specifically handing it to McColgan with the words, 'I have a letter for you. Please read it and discuss it with me once you've had the chance to think about what it says.'"
On that same day, Janetsky left work "due to work-related stress," the lawsuit states. One day later, McColgan placed her on paid administrative leave, and on June 22, he placed her on unpaid administrative leave, the lawsuit states.
The prosecutor's office on June 8 dropped the four felonies "John Doe" faced in his first-degree case. Prosecutors did not notify the victim of the dismissal, Janetsky's lawsuit states.
Boyd told The News at the time that his office dropped the case because the victim lied multiple times, including under oath, about emails she said the defendant sent around the time he was charged with sexually assaulting her.
"We did not believe we could prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt based on the issues regarding the credibility of the evidence," Boyd said.
Prosecutors subsequently charged the woman with perjury. She is awaiting trial.
After the dismissal, the defendant still faced the three third-degree counts from his other case. He had his case remanded back to District Court for a preliminary hearing, and prosecutors added three additional such charges.
The man on Nov. 6 appeared before Boes and pleaded no contest to domestic violence. His plea agreement calls for prosecutors to drop the six third-degree charges and for Boes to sentence him to a deferred sentence under a Michigan law that allows for such sentences for defendants who are convicted of similar offense and do not have any previous assault convictions.
Boes is scheduled to sentence the man on Dec. 22.
State Of Michigan Court Of Appeals - Opinion
JENNIFER JANETSKY,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
COUNTY OF SAGINAW, CHRISTOPHER
BOYD, SAGINAW COUNTY PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
and JOHN McCOLGAN,
Defendants-Appellants
April 23, 2020
No comments:
Post a Comment