PDA

View Full Version : Sexual harrassment allegations against Ferrante



03-13-2009, 04:20 PM
Fox News reports....

There's also a lawsuit. A former female employee of the Sheriff's Office named Ferrante in it. The Sheriff's Office says the suit has nothing to do with the current investigation. Court documents say Ferrante approached a female co-worker at a party and "propositioned plaintiff for sex asking her if she wanted to be one of his playmates." Just one month later, the female says Ferrante launched an internal affairs investigation against her. A judge dismissed the case but the former female employee is appealing.

.

03-13-2009, 04:27 PM
there are 2 actually but this was brought out already unless there is an update, where'd you see that

03-13-2009, 04:34 PM
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2007/nov/21/2_former_lee_deputies_file_separate_suits_against_/
2 former Lee deputies file separate suits against Sheriff Scott

By KATHLEEN CULLINAN
8:38 p.m., Wednesday, November 21, 2007

An ousted Lee County Sheriff’s Office deputy has filed a retaliation lawsuit in federal court against Sheriff Mike Scott, claiming Scott fired him for speaking out against a superior officer. In his lawsuit, Ford claims he was tossed out of the agency because he spoke against Chief Deputy Charles Ferrante, Scott’s second-in-command. Ford’s allegations date back to a May 2006 retirement party for another deputy, where Ford claims he watched Ferrante hit on a subordinate officer.

In a separate filing earlier this month —a former deputy, Jessica Rademakers, who resigned that summer — has also sued the sheriff. She claims she was a victim of gender discrimination after she said Ferrante propositioned her for sex the night of the retirement party, and launched an internal affairs investigation against her after she turned him down. In Rademakers’ suit, she claims Ferrante planted himself next to her at the retirement party and began chatting about his sexual exploits and inquiring as to her preferences. She says she moved away, but he later showed up again “asking her if she wanted to be one of his playmates.” ? Rademakers, who was formerly known as Jessica Schipansky and is suing for future lost wages and damages, says she declined.

“Scott informed (Ford) that he was investigating a complaint that Ferrante sexually harassed a subordinate employee while at the retirement party,” the lawsuit states. “(Ford) confirmed to Scott that Ferrante made inappropriate sexual comments and advances toward the female subordinate.”

Ford claims his words to Scott were “substantial motivating factors” in the decision to fire him.

The sheriff, in the filed response, denied such a phone call ever took place. He countered that Ford would have lost his job anyway, and denied that Ford saw Ferrante make a pass at a subordinate worker.

03-13-2009, 05:58 PM
What ever happened to the 9 people that had a class action lawsuit against LCSO since 1998? I heard the sheriffs office settled with the ones that got rehired by Scott?

03-13-2009, 06:12 PM
(Scott) unaware of all this?!!!!On the contrary!!!! From start to finish Scott was very aware of it.....and there are documents to prove that too.....patience....

fifedom
03-13-2009, 07:50 PM
If you really want to know, Shoap isn't soooo innocent either with the swinging parties-just so you know and
have your FACTS straight!

03-13-2009, 11:23 PM
What ever happened to the 9 people that had a class action lawsuit against LCSO since 1998? I heard the sheriffs office settled with the ones that got rehired by Scott?

Only Leclair got a cut of the lawsuit to keep his mouth shut

03-15-2009, 12:40 PM
Ahahahahahahahaha, Charlie, I know you were pissed if you were turned down by her!!!! She NEVER turned anyone down!!!! Ahahahahahaha Her nickname was the doorknob 'cause everybody got a turn!!!! hahahahaha

What I find funny was Charlie was shot down but whats just as funny is that Charlie listened to gossip of what she was, just like you apparently did...you were probably shot down too...The last I checked this website LEOaffairs.com was for mature people asking questions and divulging information for others to be aware of.

There is a dom website for f--king idiots as yourself. For those that are putting out credible information - please continue.

03-15-2009, 01:41 PM
What a D**k "shotdown" is... I'm sure Charlie was shotdown and thats what pissed him off! If he wasnt shotdown she would still be working here but I think she thinks more of herself then to stoop that low I mean that is pretty low,no pun intended. Others reported seeing him talking to her and being improper to her but then they try to report it and thats not allowed???????? Maybe shotdown was shotdown himself.

Thats the problem w/people that dont sleep their way to the top,they always get accused of it!!! :x

03-15-2009, 01:43 PM
The last I checked this website LEOaffairs.com was for mature people asking questions and divulging information for others to be aware of.

There is a dom website for f--king idiots as yourself. For those that are putting out credible information - please continue.

The last i checked there's a lot of crooked cops on here who think your a f--king rat if you arrest another officer for DUI and should be ostracized for betraying the brotherhood. They defend their criminal activity under the guise of "professional courtesy" or some such nonsense that doesn't absolve them of their legal duty to effect an arrest.

Meanwhile i ask when does an officers discretion cross over to a failure to act, a question that falls right in with your "mature people asking questions and divulging information for others to be aware of" theory of LEOAffairs and nary a peep in reply. You'all stay away from discussing that topic like it's infected with the plague.

Back the truck up Louie!

03-15-2009, 02:48 PM
"Back the truck up Louie!"

WTH does that mean?

03-15-2009, 05:55 PM
Ahahhahahahahah, Yep, I've been called a D**k before. It's usually because I call them as I see them. I did know her and worked around her but I was never turned down! Ahahahaha. Hell, she was a good officer other than having a nasty little attitude most of the time. She was a worker. I'm sure you're right, if she wouldn't have turned him down, she would still be there. As it is, I hear she has totally switched teams now...... Maybe she got tired of guys like Chaalie hittin up on her. I imagine she knew he wasn't packing enough firepower to take care of the situation..... ahahahahahahaha. Well, maybe I'm a ****, but I do believe her, if she had done Chaalie she could have gotten away with just about anything like some others, ....shy of hitting golfballs thru the walls of MCU. Hahahahahahaha. :devil: :snicker: :cop:

03-16-2009, 03:52 AM
"Back the truck up Louie!"

WTH does that mean?

It means if your using your discretion to drive drunk off their ass cops, or their family, home instead of busting them for DUI...then your no better then a crooked cop who responds to a smash and grab and tells his partner to "back the truck up Louie!"

03-16-2009, 03:58 AM
oh, and if you do cover their ass for DUI i can only hope that one of those nights when you don't rescue their ass they end up killing another cop or their family, not mine. Karma and all that, you know?

03-16-2009, 07:24 PM
"Back the truck up Louie!"

WTH does that mean?

It means if your using your discretion to drive drunk off their ass cops, or their family, home instead of busting them for DUI...then your no better then a crooked cop who responds to a smash and grab and tells his partner to "back the truck up Louie!"


oh, and if you do cover their ass for DUI i can only hope that one of those nights when you don't rescue their ass they end up killing another cop or their family, not mine. Karma and all that, you know?

You're an idiot. One thing is a theft that is a crime with a victim. The other is a DUI that is a victimless crime unless there is a crash. Stop him before anything happens and it is no harm no foul. Most of us would do the same for a civilian, right? Let him call someone to come pick him up instead of wasting hours at the jail that you could be using to patrol your zone and catch real criminals like burglars and robbers. If we can't count on each other we have lost the battle against the criminal element.

I bet your the kind of deputy who just lets a scumbag go because you can't find pc to stop and check out with him, right? Do you go to Pine Manor and ask permission to search the local dopers and robery guys? When the scumbag flips you off and tells you to go F yourself you probably just shrug and advise 10-08. Go grab your balls out of your shift commanders desk drawer and try to remember what you were hired to do.

03-16-2009, 08:33 PM
"Back the truck up Louie!"

WTH does that mean?

It means if your using your discretion to drive drunk off their ass cops, or their family, home instead of busting them for DUI...then your no better then a crooked cop who responds to a smash and grab and tells his partner to "back the truck up Louie!"


oh, and if you do cover their ass for DUI i can only hope that one of those nights when you don't rescue their ass they end up killing another cop or their family, not mine. Karma and all that, you know?

You're an idiot. One thing is a theft that is a crime with a victim. The other is a DUI that is a victimless crime unless there is a crash. Stop him before anything happens and it is no harm no foul. Most of us would do the same for a civilian, right? Let him call someone to come pick him up instead of wasting hours at the jail that you could be using to patrol your zone and catch real criminals like burglars and robbers. If we can't count on each other we have lost the battle against the criminal element.

I bet your the kind of deputy who just lets a scumbag go because you can't find pc to stop and check out with him, right? Do you go to Pine Manor and ask permission to search the local dopers and robery guys? When the scumbag flips you off and tells you to go F yourself you probably just shrug and advise 10-08. Go grab your balls out of your shift commanders desk drawer and try to remember what you were hired to do.

FRUSTRATED your post really concerns me. You need to check your ethics. Your post makes you sound like a truely dirty cop. How can you say DUI is victimless crime. Karma - I would hate to be one of your family members. After reading your post it is obvious your a dirty as the day is long....

03-16-2009, 10:37 PM
Ford was fired for the right reasons. Read for yourself.

Former lieutenant says firing result of inner politics
By Melissa Cassutt
Tuesday, February 6, 2007

The firing of a Lee County Sheriff's lieutenant last week resurrected a racy retirement party and reaffirmed that some political wars in the Sheriff's Office continue to rage.

Former Lt. Stephen Ford said he was fired Jan. 29 because of inner politics. Ford says his termination was the result of his wife's allegations against Chief Deputy Charles Ferrante, the agency's second-in-command. Kathleen Ford said she complained about Ferrante's behavior and comments at a May 2006 retirement party for a coworker.

The Sheriff's Office launched an internal audit after Capt. Dennis Brooks' retirement party at a North Fort Myers Beef 'O' Brady's, following claims of sexual impropriety. The audit, begun largely in part by Ford, resulted in the resignation of Capt. Jeffery Hollan and Detective Jessica Schipansky. A third officer, Lt. Kimberly Falk, was also called into question and was terminated around the same time on unrelated charges.

Hollan and Schipansky resigned Aug. 10 and Aug. 9 respectively; Falk was fired for unrelated conduct charges on Aug. 1. The internal audit does not contain accusations against Ferrante; Ford's wife, though, said she had complained to investigators about his actions but that those accusations were edited out of the report.

Four months after the hammer fell on Hollan, Schipansky and Falk, the results of a separate and unrelated internal investigation on Ford concluded. The investigation ruled as substantiated four accusations against Ford: untruthfulness in court proceedings, improper use of communications facilities, insubordination of a direct order and insubordination of chain of command.

The heavily redacted internal report — which removed personal information about a juvenile involved in a civil lawsuit — concludes that Ford used the Sheriff's Office Driver and Vehicle Information Database to research his wife's ex-husband, Marcus Jansen.

Jansen and his wife, Kristina, filed the complaint about Ford with Internal Affairs in April 2006.

"I understand Kathleen Ford is trying to make it out into an investigation into a chief," Jansen said. "But that didn't start until August."

Jansen said he went to Internal Investigations after discovering Ford misused Sheriff's Office equipment to gather information on him and his wife to use in a civil case. Jansen and Kathleen Ford share a child together, and custody is still being worked out in courts, he said.

A civil suit normally wouldn't come into the realm of internal investigations, but because Ford was alleged to have used Sheriff's Office equipment for information used in the lawsuit, the case became fair game, said Sheriff Mike Scott.

The investigation concluded Ford lied in a few of the legal documents by stating he "resided" with Kathleen's daughter since the child was 2. Kathleen Ford said that was a typo in the document, and her husband had resided with her daughter for two years or since she was 4.

"They called my husband untruthful because of one word — 'resided,' " she said. "If they investigate a complaint from your spouse's disgruntled ex, they will always find something. They will always find a word, a mistake."

During the course of Ford's internal investigation, Ford was also polygraphed. Ferrante said Ford was asked to take the test twice because the first time he was "trying to control his breathing." Ford failed both tests, Ferrante said.

The recommended action against Ford — termination —was released Nov. 13. Ford was on medical leave at the time, which delayed scheduling a formal meeting that would hand down the ruling, according to sheriff's office documents.

Ford, his wife, Kathleen, and Schipansky filed an information report with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement two weeks later, on Nov. 27. In the report, they said the internal audit into Stephen Ford was the result of Kathleen Ford's attempt to testify against Ferrante.

"They were looking for a reason," Kathleen Ford said. "Anybody reading (Ford's internal audit) would see that they were looking for a reason. And it's because we spoke out against the chief deputy at the Brooks' party."

Kathleen Ford said she attempted to tell internal investigators about inappropriate behavior between Ferrante and Schipansky, but the auditor urged her not to speak out against the second-in-command. She said her statement was manipulated to delete the allegations she made against Ferrante.

Ferrante said Monday the sheriff's office uses digital recording devices and an investigator can't stop and start tapes without the pause being obvious.

"The reason why you use digital is you can't doctor the tape," Ferrante said. "You can tell if it's turned off."

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which oversees all sheriff's offices in the state, concluded there was "no appearance of criminal violations," according to FDLE spokesman Larry Long. The report was released to the sheriff's office to deal with as the agency saw fit.

"This just stinks. It just stinks," Ferrante said. "(The Fords) were fine up until he knew he was facing discipline."

Scott and Ferrante said Monday that another internal investigation wasn't launched because the party had already been investigated. Out of 44 witnesses interviewed, none accused Ferrante of inappropriate behavior, Scott said.

"I think you have to look at the motivation for giving the information," Scott said. "Why didn't they bring it up then?"

The couple said they haven't decided what action to take, but Scott said the internal ruling and subsequent firing can be contested to the Civil Service Board.

03-18-2009, 12:36 AM
Keep making us proud...."Lee County's Finest".

03-18-2009, 02:44 AM
"Back the truck up Louie!"

WTH does that mean?

It means if your using your discretion to drive drunk off their ass cops, or their family, home instead of busting them for DUI...then your no better then a crooked cop who responds to a smash and grab and tells his partner to "back the truck up Louie!"


oh, and if you do cover their ass for DUI i can only hope that one of those nights when you don't rescue their ass they end up killing another cop or their family, not mine. Karma and all that, you know?

You're an idiot. One thing is a theft that is a crime with a victim. The other is a DUI that is a victimless crime unless there is a crash. Stop him before anything happens and it is no harm no foul. Most of us would do the same for a civilian, right?

First i'm not a cop, second...YOUR A LYING SACK OF .... ABOUT JUST CALLING SOMEONE TO COME PICK A CIVVY UP IN THAT SITUATION. Well maybe if it he interrupted you coffee and donut run you might just because your a self serving ass. I hope the karma gets you good.

03-18-2009, 11:55 AM
Talk about idiots. "victimless crime" is a political term that has no meaning under the law. Victimless crime...yeah tell that to those who have been injured, or the families of those killed by a drunk driver. Once one of them is your kid, or father, or a sister you'll figure that out. Dunk driving certainly has it's victims. You know anyone who's driving drunk has done it many times before and if you call "no harm no foul" and let them go nothings going to change until they end up hurting someone. But what do you care, granting "professional courtesy" for your crooked ass cop buddies is more important to you then any of that, or so it seems.

Back the truck up Louie! Hell, what's the harm? Some insurance company is going to foot the bill anyway, it's not like there's a real victim! :roll:

08-29-2009, 01:39 AM
the accussed were not laid off d/t an affair perhaps, or a private investigation on behalf of a wife could it? Coworkers and SPOUSES alike should think twice before acting like teenagers. CONDUCT PROBLEMS SEEM TO BE RAMPENT @LCSO.

08-30-2009, 09:43 PM
Talk about idiots. "victimless crime" is a political term that has no meaning under the law. Victimless crime...yeah tell that to those who have been injured, or the families of those killed by a drunk driver. Once one of them is your kid, or father, or a sister you'll figure that out. Dunk driving certainly has it's victims. You know anyone who's driving drunk has done it many times before and if you call "no harm no foul" and let them go nothings going to change until they end up hurting someone. But what do you care, granting "professional courtesy" for your crooked ass cop buddies is more important to you then any of that, or so it seems.

Back the truck up Louie! Hell, what's the harm? Some insurance company is going to foot the bill anyway, it's not like there's a real victim! :roll:

Any night shift patrol deputy who willingly takes the three to four hours it takes to process arrest, transport, and process a DUI should be ashamed of themselves unless there was a crash or someone was injured. Lock up the shitheads car and call someone to pick him up. When you willingly take yourself out of your patrol zone for that long, you are asking for burglars and car thieves to tear your zone up. Now you have actual victims who have suffered a loss. A patrol deputy's focus needs to be in aggressively creeping through his or her zone seeking out actual bad guys. The DUIs, the drug arrests, and the suspended DL arrests are all the products of numbers driven cops who want to impress the brass more than they want to protect their constituents.

08-31-2009, 12:12 AM
Talk about idiots. "victimless crime" is a political term that has no meaning under the law. Victimless crime...yeah tell that to those who have been injured, or the families of those killed by a drunk driver. Once one of them is your kid, or father, or a sister you'll figure that out. Dunk driving certainly has it's victims. You know anyone who's driving drunk has done it many times before and if you call "no harm no foul" and let them go nothings going to change until they end up hurting someone. But what do you care, granting "professional courtesy" for your crooked ass cop buddies is more important to you then any of that, or so it seems.

Back the truck up Louie! Hell, what's the harm? Some insurance company is going to foot the bill anyway, it's not like there's a real victim! :roll:

Any night shift patrol deputy who willingly takes the three to four hours it takes to process arrest, transport, and process a DUI should be ashamed of themselves unless there was a crash or someone was injured. Lock up the shitheads car and call someone to pick him up. When you willingly take yourself out of your patrol zone for that long, you are asking for burglars and car thieves to tear your zone up. Now you have actual victims who have suffered a loss. A patrol deputy's focus needs to be in aggressively creeping through his or her zone seeking out actual bad guys. The DUIs, the drug arrests, and the suspended DL arrests are all the products of numbers driven cops who want to impress the brass more than they want to protect their constituents.

Spoken like a true outsider!

09-01-2009, 12:38 AM
Talk about idiots. "victimless crime" is a political term that has no meaning under the law. Victimless crime...yeah tell that to those who have been injured, or the families of those killed by a drunk driver. Once one of them is your kid, or father, or a sister you'll figure that out. Dunk driving certainly has it's victims. You know anyone who's driving drunk has done it many times before and if you call "no harm no foul" and let them go nothings going to change until they end up hurting someone. But what do you care, granting "professional courtesy" for your crooked ass cop buddies is more important to you then any of that, or so it seems.

Back the truck up Louie! Hell, what's the harm? Some insurance company is going to foot the bill anyway, it's not like there's a real victim! :roll:

Any night shift patrol deputy who willingly takes the three to four hours it takes to process arrest, transport, and process a DUI should be ashamed of themselves unless there was a crash or someone was injured. Lock up the shitheads car and call someone to pick him up. When you willingly take yourself out of your patrol zone for that long, you are asking for burglars and car thieves to tear your zone up. Now you have actual victims who have suffered a loss. A patrol deputy's focus needs to be in aggressively creeping through his or her zone seeking out actual bad guys. The DUIs, the drug arrests, and the suspended DL arrests are all the products of numbers driven cops who want to impress the brass more than they want to protect their constituents.

Spoken like a true outsider!

An outsider from where? Mayberry? Sorry, pal, I work night shift patrol and I'm tired of punk ass deputies who wouldn't recognize a burglar if they tripped over one spending all their time chasing nonsense DUIs and drug arrests. Do some police works for God's sake. These deputies around here could catch the guy inside the Best Buy at 4 a.m. with the front windows smashed out and his car and pockets full of stolen merch. Know what? If the perp has a valid DL and is 54 local, they'd write him a ticket for something and send him on his way. Its pathetic. They can't find criminals because they never stop driving. They zoom back and forth across their zone looking for speeders, brake lights out, tag lights out, etc. Do they ever stop the car in a neighborhood and turn off the engine? Sit for 30 or 40 minutes to hear what's happening around them? Do they ever see a 13P and NOT stop him immediately? Don't bother to hang back for 20 minutes and see what he does or where he goes. Why make a 21 in progress 10-15 when you can write an FIC and be off the the next traffic stop, right?

It's sad and it's pathetic and it wastes everybody's time.

09-01-2009, 01:49 AM
Sounds like your average night for CCPD. Those numbnuts couldn't catch a thief if he was stealing the laptop out of their cruiser.

But weave a little in your lane and they'll follow you for the next two miles and pull you over for it and start with the crap. License, registration, mind if i search your vehicle tonight?, have you been drinking? will you take an FSE?, etc. Unless of course they discover they've pulled over one of their own. That changes everything and they bend over backwards to give his drunken ass a ride home.

Then they come on here and whine about not being paid as well as some Tampa cop that got shot at last night!

And they call themselves cops... keep on dreaming boys! :snicker:

09-01-2009, 02:48 AM
[quote=Guest]Talk about idiots. "victimless crime" is a political term that has no meaning under the law. Victimless crime...yeah tell that to those who have been injured, or the families of those killed by a drunk driver. Once one of them is your kid, or father, or a sister you'll figure that out. Dunk driving certainly has it's victims. You know anyone who's driving drunk has done it many times before and if you call "no harm no foul" and let them go nothings going to change until they end up hurting someone. But what do you care, granting "professional courtesy" for your crooked ass cop buddies is more important to you then any of that, or so it seems.

Back the truck up Louie! Hell, what's the harm? Some insurance company is going to foot the bill anyway, it's not like there's a real victim! :roll:

Any night shift patrol deputy who willingly takes the three to four hours it takes to process arrest, transport, and process a DUI should be ashamed of themselves unless there was a crash or someone was injured. Lock up the shitheads car and call someone to pick him up. When you willingly take yourself out of your patrol zone for that long, you are asking for burglars and car thieves to tear your zone up. Now you have actual victims who have suffered a loss. A patrol deputy's focus needs to be in aggressively creeping through his or her zone seeking out actual bad guys. The DUIs, the drug arrests, and the suspended DL arrests are all the products of numbers driven cops who want to impress the brass more than they want to protect their constituents.

Spoken like a true outsider!

An outsider from where? Mayberry? Sorry, pal, I work night shift patrol and I'm tired of punk ass deputies who wouldn't recognize a burglar if they tripped over one spending all their time chasing nonsense DUIs and drug arrests. Do some police works for God's sake. These deputies around here could catch the guy inside the Best Buy at 4 a.m. with the front windows smashed out and his car and pockets full of stolen merch. Know what? If the perp has a valid DL and is 54 local, they'd write him a ticket for something and send him on his way. Its pathetic. They can't find criminals because they never stop driving. They zoom back and forth across their zone looking for speeders, brake lights out, tag lights out, etc. Do they ever stop the car in a neighborhood and turn off the engine? Sit for 30 or 40 minutes to hear what's happening around them? Do they ever see a 13P and NOT stop him immediately? Don't bother to hang back for 20 minutes and see what he does or where he goes. Why make a 21 in progress 10-15 when you can write an FIC and be off the the next traffic stop, right?

It's sad and it's pathetic and it wastes everybody's time.[/quote:2lsj0axk]

All good poinst but I agree with the last guy. New guys training new guys. But drunks need to get locked up too.

09-01-2009, 04:39 PM
SF screwed a fellow deputy's wife. And you guys want him back? I don't think so. Not on my watch.