CLEARFIELD – President Judge Fredric J. Ammerman has plans to continue cracking down on people who are skipping out on jury duty in Clearfield County.
On Jan. 15 Ammerman presided over hearings for Cindy Bogacki and Melissa Toman, both of Clearfield, and John D. Fontenoy of Woodland for their failure to appear for jury duty.
According to court paperwork provided by the judge to the media this week, Bogacki failed to appear for jury duty on two, separate occasions, being Sept. 8 and Dec. 3 in 2015.
Toman was scheduled for jury selection Oct. 8, 2015. She was then excused by a representative of the court prior to and advised she would be rescheduled.
Toman was rescheduled for jury duty for Dec. 3, 2015. However, she did not respond, did not appear and was not excused by a representative of the court.
Fontenoy did not appear for jury duty on Oct. 8, 2015; the court noted he was excused, at his request, on Oct 7, 2015. He was then rescheduled for Dec. 3, 2015 but failed to appear.
According to the transcript of the proceeding for Bogacki, she returned the required questionnaire to the jury coordinator on the same day as jury selection, Sept. 8, 2015. She advised she didn’t have a vehicle, was working and going to school.
Bogacki said she wasn’t aware of being rescheduled for Dec. 3, 2015. “… I just didn’t even realize about it … but I don’t have a vehicle, and it’s hard for me to afford to take off work,” she added. “And, I have only missed one day in a year at my work. And, I just can’t afford to do it.”
When asked how she got to her court proceeding Jan. 15, Bogacki said a friend gave her a ride “down the hill.” Ammerman responded, telling Bogacki she could have walked from her current address to appear at jury duty back in September.
Bogacki again told the court she was working when she was first scheduled to appear, Sept. 8, 2015. She also said again she didn’t even realize she had been rescheduled the second time that she didn’t appear for jury duty.
According to the transcript of the proceeding for Toman, the court noted Toman had apparently talked to the jury coordinator and was excused Oct. 6, 2015 from the jury selection Oct. 8, 2015. The court also noted Toman was advised she would be rescheduled and was for Dec. 3, 2015 but did not respond and did not show up.
Toman told the court she was the only one who is able to care for a family member. She said this family member has numerous appointments that she has to go to, and she is the only caregiver she has to take her back and forth.
The jury coordinator told the court she had spoken with Toman and given her the privilege of being excused for Oct. 8, 2015. However, she also told Toman she would be rescheduled and would have to come for jury duty.
Toman told the court when Dec. 3, 2015 arrived, there were appointments, and jury duty slipped her mind. “I’m not going to lie, it slipped my mind, because I have so much to deal with by myself,” she said.
According to the transcript of the proceeding for Fontenoy, on Oct. 7, 2015 Fontenoy called and talked to the jury coordinator and related a plethora of excuses. He was told he would be excused for October, but he would be rescheduled and was for Dec. 3, 2015.
It was noted for the court that Fontenoy returned the required questionnaire Dec. 2, 2015 and then failed to appear for jury selection the next day.
Also, a letter from Fontenoy from September of 2015 was read to the court. In the letter, he asked to be excused from jury selection Oct. 8, 2015 while he and his wife only have one vehicle, and he didn’t have any transportation to Clearfield. He noted his wife is a caregiver for Ray Walker, her hours vary and she is on call every day, and he has no one else to depend on for transportation.
Ammerman asked for the litany of excuses given by Fontenoy, and the jury coordinator indicated he didn’t have a vehicle, and his wife wouldn’t permit him to borrow hers to come in. The second time, she said he told her the same reasons, and also mentioned his wife was on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week and there wasn’t insurance on he and his wife’s only vehicle that allowed him to drive it.
At the proceeding, the court was also presented with a letter on stationary of Ray S. Walker, dated Jan. 5. It stated that Fontenoy’s wife was employed as an on-call caregiver for Walker and must be available. It also stated she only has one vehicle in her household, and any questions should be directed to Walker’s executive assistant.
Fontenoy’s wife said the only vehicle in the household was insured and it was all in her name. Ammerman told Fontenoy that any automobile policy provides that any other person can drive the vehicle with the permission of the insured. “…So I don’t understand this ‘I don’t have a car to drive’ [argument],” he said.
Fontenoy argued that if he would have been at jury selection and his wife would have been called to work, it would leave her without transportation. “She has to have this car,” he said. “It’s a means of transportation.” Ammerman told Fontenoy his wife could have dropped him off for jury selection to which he argued he’d have no idea how long he’d be there or if his wife would get called to work and unable to leave.
“I don’t care if she’s the caregiver for the Queen of Sheba,” Ammerman told Fontenoy. “When you’re scheduled for jury duty, you’re going to be here, and you’re going to make the arrangements to be here. You’re going to do it however you need to do it [and] not just blow me off. I am sick and tired of people scheduled for jury selection blowing me off, and it isn’t going to happen anymore.”
Ammerman said all three were held in contempt for their failure to appear for jury duty. All three were ordered by the court to pay a fine of $250 within 60 days.
“Any failure to pay the fine in the time period as required may result in automatic issuance of a bench warrant without further notice being provided,” wrote Ammerman in the court orders.
