No complaint filed!!! This is the question Jason has had from the beginning. According the US & Ohio Constitutions, a defendant has the right to confront his accusers. Now in the case of DV, murders, or child victims, someone justifiably has to speak for them. But this is theft. In this case, the PHCA and its representatives made the complaint, right? Nope. Nobody from the PHCA.
Pg. 801 Defense attorney Smith “Did you ever request minutes directly from PHCA?” Kinder “Yes, I did, actually.” Smith “Okay.” Kinder “I talked to Mr. Belazis when I got this investigation in 2016. Mr. Belazis, I believe, at the time was President. And Mr. Belazis told me he would check and see if those records were available. He doubted it. And then he said he would get back to me. And I never heard back from Mr. Belazis.” Pg. 802 Kinder “Sir, I just stated. I contacted Mr. Belazis, who was the president at the time in 2016. I requested additional records from him. Mr. Belazis told me he did not believe those existed, he would check and get back to me. As I testified, he never got back to me.”
Why wouldn’t you follow up with him as part of your exhaustive investigation?
So, Mr. Kinder, if the business you are saying was stolen from does not cooperate with you, testify at trial, or sign a legal complaint, why are you proceeding with a case? If the business doesn’t say they were stolen from, how do you proceed with a theft case against someone? Who does Mr. Craig hold responsible for this corrupt trial? You seem to be the guy.
Pg. 803 Smith “In your review did you find any attempt from Mr. Craig to hide that he is the one that signed the checks?” Kinder “No.”
Pg. 809 Smith “Okay, and in your review of the minutes did you come across — particularly your review of September 2012 or October 2012 — did you come across any mention of potentially PHCA investing in real estate?” Kinder “I remember someone talking about that. But I am sorry I don’t remember seeing that in those minutes. I don’t know from my investigation from some of the sources I don’t believe that was ever adopted. There may have been discussion, but I don’t know if that was ever adopted.”
That discussion must have been in the part of the minutes he conveniently just glanced at and didn’t read thoroughly. You’d think if you were sending someone away to prison for a potential 23 years, you would refresh your memory. Seems the ethical thing to do.
Here is one example of discussion from Sep. 2012 where Lupe (not Jason) brings up investing in real estate. The most significant discussion was in Oct. 2012 when the yearly withdrawal was approved from the Toledo Community Foundation. From the transcript: “Dr. Paat asks what the funds will be spent on. Only money making investments (discussed in Financing Committee) or money saving purchases.”
Pg. 813 Smith “Okay. And in the course of your investigation, did you find that Stephanie Serda was involved with Visalus sales and purchases?” Kinder “I believe she testified she was asked to be signed up under Mr. Craig for I can’t remember her exact reasoning, but I believe she said so, I believe Spencer Moody said so.”
Jury questions, Judge “…Why were Anita Serda, Stephanie Serda, PR Jesse Spier’s personal accounts determined to not be relevant to the investigation?” Kinder “The easiest way to explain it is we’re not seeing unexplained cash transactions going into any of their accounts…”
Read this answer several times. How did you know there were unexplained cash transactions going into Kristie’s account without first looking into it? And how do you know there are no unexplained cash transactions in the others if you did not check? For the record, it is not a rumor we want to start. We are not accusing any of the others. But how would the state know without looking?