A Fort Myers attorney has petitioned the Charlotte County Court to have sealed grand jury proceedings opened in a case involving the 2014 death of an inmate at the Charlotte County Correctional Institute.
Attorney Chris Crowley, currently on active duty with the U.S. Army, filed the petition in Charlotte County Court on Saturday and the case was recorded by the court Monday.
"All we want is a record of the Matthew Walker Grand Jury transcript made public," Crowley told WGCU. " All we need is an official record to confirm what the Charlotte Sun newspaper already reported, that Amira Fox performed improperly and inappropriately before a Grand Jury in a murder case. The Florida Bar has taken an issue with free speech, so now we need the official record to clear this matter up."
Crowley, who ran unsuccessfully for the state attorney post against the then 20th Judicial Circuit Chief Assistant State Attorney Amira Fox in 2018, said the issue involves claims brought against him by the Florida Bar.
Fox is the current state attorney of the 20th Judicial District.
The Florida Bar filed a complaint against attorney Christopher Crowley in April 2020 before the Florida Supreme Court alleging he violated Bar rules. Four judges acting as referees in the case have recused themselves for conflicts of interest, with a fifth judge now presiding.
Crowley's motion to reopen evidence includes an affidavit claiming evidence of corruption by Amira Fox.
The Florida Bar's complaint alleges Crowley "publicly disparaged his opponent through various political campaign materials, advertisements, and social media postings" among other rules violations, during the 2018 political campaign for state attorney.
Release of the grand jury proceedings in the Walker case, Crowley said, would help identify what happened in that case. Crowley added that, if the entire proceedings can't be released, at least the identity of who instructed the grand jury should be released.
Roger D. Eaton, Clerk and Comptroller of Charlotte County, is listed as the defendant in the case since court clerks are legally the keepers of such proceedings.
"He is sued in his official capacity as custodian of the 2015 grand jury materials that are subject to this action," the suit stipulates.
In the petition, filed June 17, Crowley also asks " in the furtherance of justice, to order the Charlatte County Clerk of Court to Produce, and the Court to order, disclosure of copies of the testimony, minutes, transcripts of instructions and legal advice from prosecutors and other evidence presented to the 2015 Grand Jury investigating the death of Matthew J. Walker while in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections at the Charlotte County Correctional Institute."
A summary of the case claims:
"In 2014, a Charlotte County Corrections Officer, or Officers, murdered inmate Matthew Walker while he was in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections at the Charlotte County Correctional Institution. In 2015, the murder case was presented to a grand jury for investigation and the panel failed to indict anyone for the murder. After seeing the community outrage over the failure, a grand jury panel member revealed to the Charlotte Sun newspaper that a prosecutor, or prosecutors, improperly and inappropriately discouraged the panel members from indicting the perpetrator or perpetrators of the murder.
"In 2018, Christopher Crowley, a candidate for the office of State Attorney in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, politically attacked his opponent, Amira D. Fox, Chief Assistant State Attorney and one of the prosecutors who presented the Matthew Walker case. as “corrupt” for improper conduct before the grand jury. The charge was based on public disclosures by the panel member. The Florida Bar later took issue with Mr. Crowley's political comments about Ms. Fox's conduct before the grand jury as objectively unreasonable. When Mr. Crowley requested a copy of the grand jury proceedings, he was told the Charlotte Count Clerk of Court did not have the record.
"While the Charlotte Sun reported the improper conduct by the prosecutors believe the grand jury based on the disclosures of the panel member, the exact record of the grand jury proceeding is currently sealed. Mr. Crowley petitions the Court to exercise its statutory authority under Florida law and inherent its authority and first, order the Charlotte County Clerk of Court to produce and file the records of the 2015 grand jury proceedings to the Court and, in the name of furthering justice, grant Mr. Crowley access to the Matthew Walker grand jury proceedings to show the claim made by the panel member of prosecutorial misconduct, and relied on by Mr. Crowley, was truthful."
Fox did not respond to a request for comment from WGCU.
The Charlotte Sun newspaper covered the Walker case and was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Writing in its coverage of the state prison system and the aftermath of guards killing in Walker at the Charlotte Correctional Institution.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CHRISTOPHER W. CROWLEY,
Petitioner,
V.
ROGER D. EATON, as Clerk and Comptroller of Charlotte County, Florida
Respondent.
CASE NO:
PETITION FOR PRODUCTION AND DISCLOSURE OF GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS
Christopher W. Crowley, by and through the undersigned attorney, and pursuant to See. 905.27, Fla. Stat. and the Court's Inherent Authority, files this Petition asking the Court, in the furtherance of justice, to order the Charloae County Clerk of Court to Produce, and the Court to order, disclosure of copies of the testimony, minutes, transcripts of instructions and legal advice from prosecutors and other evidence presented to the 2015 Grand Jury investigating the death of Matthew J. Walker while in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections at the Charlotte County Correctional Institute. In support thereof, Petitioner alleges:
JURISDICTION
1. This is an action with exclusive jurisdiction of the Circuit Court pursuant to Fla. Stat. Sec. 26.021(2)(a).
PARTIES
2. Petitioner, Christopher W. Crowley, is a resident of Lee County Florida, a licensed
member in good standing of the Florida Bar and is currently serving on active duty with the United States Army.
3. Respondent, Roger D. Eaton, is the elected Clerk and Comptroller of” Charlotte County.
Florida. He is sued in his official capacity as custodian of the 2015 grand jury maierials that are subject to this action, pursuant to Sec. 905.17(1), Fla. Stat. (2022).
SUMMARY
4. In 2014, a Charloae County Corrections Officer, or Officers, murdered inmate Matthew Walker while he was in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections at the Charlotte County Correctional Institution. [Exh A, AutopsyJ. In 2015, the murder case was presented to a grand jury for investigation and the panel failed to indict anyone for the murder. After seeing the community outrage over the failure, a grand jury panel member revealed to the Charlotte Sun newspaper that a prosecutor, or prosecutors, improperly and inappropriately discouraged the panel members from indicting the perpetrator or perpetrators of the murder.
5. In 2018, Christopher Crowley, a candidate for the office of State Attorney in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, politically attacked his opponent, Amira D. Fox, Chief Assistant State Attorney and one of the prosecutors who presented the Matthew Walker case. as “corrupt” for improper conduct before the grand jury. The charge was based on public disclosures by the panel member. The Florida Bar later took issue with Mr. Crowley's political comments about Ms. Fox's conduct before the grand jury as objectively unreasonable. When Mr. Crowley requested a copy of the grand jury proceedings, he was told the Charlotte Count Clerk of Court did not have the record.
6. While the Charlolle Sun reported the improper conduct by the prosecutors be1é›re the
grand jury based on the disclosures of the panel member, the exact record of the grand jury proceeding is currently sealed. Mr. Crowley petitions the Court to exercise its statutory authority under Florida law and inherent its authority and first, order the Charlotte County Clerk of Court to produce and file the records of the 2015 grand jury proceedings to the Court and, in the name of furthering justice, grant Mr. Crowley access to the Matthew Walker grand jury proceedings to show the claim made by the panel member of prosecutorial misconduct, and relied on by Mr. Crowley, was truthful.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
7. On April 11, 2014, during a clash with Charloae County Correctional offlcers. inmate Mañhew Walker was murdered when a correctional officer used his boot to crush Walker's larynx, causing Walker's throat to become swollen shut. [Exhibit A, Autopsy; Exhibit B, Dept. of Corrections Report].
8. On May 27, 2015, a grand jury was convened to investigate the death of Matthew Walker while in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections at the Charlotte Correctional Institution. [Exhibit C, Presentment].
9. On June 16, 2015, the “Presentment of the Charlotte County Grand Jury,” regarding the death of Matthew Walker was filed and made public. The first page o2” the report announced the Legal Advisors to the Grand Jwy on behalf of Stephen B. Russell, State Attorney, Twentieth Judicial Circuit, in and for Charlore County, as: Amira D. Fox, Chief Assistant State Attorney: Richard J. Montecalvo, Assistant State Attorney and Shannon L. Doolity, Assistant State Atorney. The Grand Jury Report made several findings and recommendations, but concluded with a no true bill or indictment. [Exhibit C, Presentment].
10. In what has been alleged as a colossal miscarriage ofjustiee despite the fact that Matthew Walker's throat was crushed until he could not breathe and subsequently died, not one person has ever been indicted or criminally charged in the matter of his death.
PREVIOUS PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF THE GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS
August 16, 2015, Charlotte Sun: “Grand Juror Breaks Silence”
11. On August 16, 2015, the Clar/ofic Sun reported:
Area prosecutors, according to a member of the grand jury, sabotaged a decision whether or not to indict corrections officers in the death of Matthew Walker at the Charlotte Correctional Institution. We find that reprehensible. Louise Salcedo, 85, and a panel member, contacted the Sun because:
“We all knew the guards were guilty and should have been prosecuted, but we were talked out of indicting them...This man was beaten to death."
Ms. Salcedo said representatives of the 20th Judicial Circuit Prosecutors' ofiace, “told us the chances of convictions were very slim.” She said members of the jury were persuaded the case could not be successfully prosecuted in court. Ms. Salcedo said, “legal advisors told the grand jury a conviction was unlikely because it is difficult to determine which guards delivered the strikes to tlae inmate.” [Exhibit D, Charlotte Sun, August 16, 2015].
August 16, 2015, Charlone Sun: “Prosecutors Torpedo the Grand Jury”
12. Responding to community outrage over the murder of Matthew Walker, the .Soo published an Op-Ed that denounced the improper conduct of prosecutors before the Matthew Walker grand jury:
Matthew Walker died a horrible death. According to the Charlotte County medical examiner, “in an altercation with prison officials” Walker was beaten so badly that his larynx was crushed, his head bashed to the point where there were imprints in his skull from coaections officers* radios and, according to a medical assistant, Walker's head “felt like Jell-O.’”
The confrontation happened in April 2014 during a bed check that was against sute prison policy. Corections officers decided to punish Walker, who was serving a sentence for burglary, for not putting away a cup and/or a magazine and tidying up his cell.
According to a Florida Department of Law Enforcement report, 19 inmates, and some prison guards, heard Lt. Tyler Triplett threaten to kill Walker. A dozen witnesses said they saw Triples slam his radio against Walker's head. And, according to the report, a higher-ranking officer had to restrain Triplett to keep him from going aßer Walker, who was face down on the sidewalk, possibly already dead.
Prosecutors for the State Attorney*s Office presented this and more to a grand jury. The grand jury, however, failed to return any indictments in the case. No indictment means no case against the guards.
The grand jury said they could get no answers from witnesses as to who administered the beating on Walker. They said evidence was tampered with. They said they were frustrated they could not seek justice for a lack of evidence. The ensuing publicity about the case moved one grand jury member to break her
silence - even at the threat of prison.
Instead of seeking an indictment and forcing corrections officers to prove their innocence in court, the legal advisers decided to let it go. We find this action, if true, to be a pathetic negligence of their duties to seek justice for all.
Stephen Russells State AComey for the circuit, defended his employees. He said he could not comment on a specific case, but said he has all the confidence his delegates did their job. When told of Salcedo's accusations, however, one of Russell's attorneys told Sun staff writer Adam Kreger to read Florida Statute 905.10 — which says a member of a grand jury takes an oath to not reveal anphing that goes on during deliberations upon penalty of committing a felony. It was a shot across the bow that the juror, an 85-year-old woman, could be prosecuted if her stoiy was published.
Statute 905.395, however, lists information that is confidential and it does not include instructions from legal advisers.
We believe state prosecutors made a terible mistake by leading this grand jury. We believe they tried to hide behind the grand jury, and any action taken against Salcedo would be in retribution for her brave decision to reveal why Matthew Walker's killers remain free today.
Salcedo's heroic decision to come forward paints a scary picture of how state prosecutors can control who is punished and who goes free.” [Exhibit E, Charlotte Sun, August 16, 2015].
August 17, 2015, Miami HeralJ
“Charlotte County grand juror: We knew guard were guilty of killing inmate”
(Update from Charlotte Sun, August 17, 2015)
13. For Charlore County grand juries, like the one that heard testimony for the Walker case, the state attorney's office for the 20th Judicial Circuit is in charge of examining witnesses, presenting potential evidence and legal advice to grand jurors. There were three legal advisors from the state attorney's office assigned to ie Walker case...
“They told us the chances of convictions were very slim,” Salcedo said. 'I find it baffling...very confusing...”
The names of grand jurors are not released. The Sun was able to reach the grand jury foreman in the Walker case only because his signature is legible on the grand jury's report of finding, or presentment - a rare public record available in the case. Contacted by the Sun, the foreman said he didn't want to talk without first checking with the state attorney's office. He later declined comment citing the oath that swore him to secrecy.
Salcedo swore the same oath, but the 85-year-old Port Charlotte woman has been second- guessing the decision she helped the grand jwy make, and says others might be, too.
Salcedo risked a felony charge by contacting the Sun after no other grand jurors came forward to talk about what happened for those eight days they met this summer.
“After reading everything in the paper, I feel guilty that I maybe could have done something better,” Salcedo said.
The grand juror believes all the guards present during the fatal beating “were guilty of watching this and not stopping this.”
“You couldn't get anybody to admit anything (on the witness stand],
which makes sense because they all cover each other's butts.* Salcedo said. [Exhibit F, Miami Herald, August 17, 2015].
August 29, 2015, Charlotte Sun: “Grand Juries Should Bow Out of Police Cases”
14. On August 29, 2015, the Charlotte Sun reposed further regarding the Matthew Walker grand jury:
Criticism of a local grand jury for failing to move to indict any of 10 Charlotte County Correctional Institution conections officers in the 2014 death of‘ Matthew Walker has swelled since more details in a Florida Law Department of” Law Enforcement report were published in the Sun.
A member of the grand jury seated to review evidence in the murder ot” Walker came forward recently, at the threat of being charged with a f”elony, and said she regretted no indictments were tendered. She told the newspaper she believes someone should pay for what was an obvious homicide of the CCI inmate.
Her criticism of legal advisers from ie 20'h Circuit State Attorney's office
for telling members of the grand jwy there was not enough evidence to get a conviction has ruffled some feathers. State Attorney Steve Russell wrote a guest column in the Sun that was critical of the juror and said the newspaper's editorial undermined the grand jury system where jurors are sworn to secrecy...
The Matthew Walker case is getting national attention. The revelations by Salcedo of the overwhelming evidence that Walker was murdered and the lack of indictments that would give prosecutors an opportunity to prove a case against any of the 10 corrections officers involved are strong evidence that changes need
to be made.
State attorney staffs have too much control and influence in these secret deliberations... [Exhibit G, Charlotte Sun, August 29, 2015].
April 19, 2016, Charlotte San: “Sun Wins PuliGer Prize”
15. On April 19, 2016, the Charlotte Sun was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in journalism for its investigative reporting and editorial coverage regarding the death and grand jury actions involving Matthew Walker. A Juror on the Pulitzer Commiaee said, the series fanned the Pames with locals who were stunned by the apparent lack of concern by authorities over this brutal death." The lead Sun staff writer on the award-winning series was quoted as saying he couldn't go on without thanking Louise Salcedo, a grand juror on the case, who spoke to the .Sur afler following the paper's aggressive coverage of the prison. “She broke her silence and said the secret grand jury was convinced by authorities not to pursue charges against the guards who killed Walker.” [Exhibit H, Charlotte Sun, April 19, 2016].
Candidate Christopher Crowley AmiclesAebates
April 26, 2017, Ft. Myers News-Press:
“Calling for Change at the State AHorney's Omce”
16. On April 26, 2017, Christopher Crowley, a candidate for State Attorney for the 20'h Judicial Circuit of Florida, published an op-eds “Calling f‘oi Change at the State Attorney 's
The State Attorney's Office for the 20th Circuit, the lead criminal prosecution ot‘tice for Lee, Charlotte, Hendry, Collier and Glades Counties, currently faces a disastrous level of” misplaced priorities and overall mismanagement. We must identify the problems and issues with the current State Attorney's office and work to make positive and constructive changes to
fight crime and create safer communities. [Exhibit I, Ft. Myer.s Neues-Press, April 26, 2017].
April 26, 2017, Ft. Myers News-Press:
Guest Op-Ed by Christopher Crowley
17. ...In 2015, the Charlotte Sun >on the Pulitzer Prize for journalism tiir uncovering improper conduct by prosecutors before a grand jury. A series of Charlolfe Sun articles and editorials revealed local prosecutors actively discouraged grand jurors from indicting the murderer of Matthew Walker... [Exhibit I, Ft. Myers News-Press, April 26, 2017].
August 11, 2018, N R!BS Daily News:
“Chris Crowley Brings Conservative, ‘Tough on Crime' Platform”
18. In August of 2018, shoJly before the primaiy election, Mr. Crowley, again cited serious comiption issues with how the State A£omey’s office mishandled the Matthew Walker grand
“...There is the case of 46-year-old Mathew Walker, a Charlotte County inmate who died aßer an altercation with prison guards in 2014. His death was ruled a homicide, but one juror told the Sun newspapers that jurors were ‘talked out oP indicting the guards accused of beating Walker.” Russell defended his employees. [Exhibit J, Naples Daily News, August 11, 2018].
19. At many joint campaign appearances and candidate forums, Mr. Crowley raised the Matthew Walker grand jury as an issue of “comiption” with the State Attorney's Ot”fiee and with Ms. Fox. Mr. Crowley appeared in radio interviews, campaign appearances, and a televised debate discussing “corruption” at the State Attorney's office with Amira Fox. On at least one occasion at a candidate forum, Ms. Fox responded to issues regarding the Matthew Walker grand jury scandal. In particular, Ms. Fox stated she could not discuss the secretive and/or sealed
Matthew Walker grand jury proceedings, even though Ms. Fox was the lead attorney for the Mathew Walker Grand Jury.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FLORIDA BAR
20. On August 31, 2018, Twentieth Judicial Circuit State Atiorney, Stephen B. Russell, filed a lengthy Bar complaint against Christopher Crowley, alleging violation of the Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct. Mr. Russell- specifically cited Mr. Crowley's allegations of “comiption” by the State Attorney's Office and Amira Fox as viOlatiOnS Of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct.
21. A formal Complaint was filed against Mr. Crowley by the Flo#da Bar, and on February 8 and 9, 2021, the Honorable Maria D. Ruh1, acting as the official referee for the Florida Bar, held an initial fact-finding hearing.
22. On March 19, 2021, the referee issued formal Findings of Fact and Guilt. taking issue with Mr. Crowley's use of the tems “comipt” and “misconduct” in referring to Amira Fox and citing the Matthew Walker case. [Exhibit K, Findings].
23. Concerning Mr. Crowley's testimony about the Ma£hew Walker case, the Referee found Mr. Crowley had to admit he had no direct knowledge of whether Ms. Fox was the prosecutor who advised the grand jury in the Matthew Walker case. Rather, the extent of* Respondent's knowledge was that Ms. Fox was “in the room” during the grand jury proceedings. [Exhibit K, Findings].
24. The Referee found Mr. Crowley in violation of Florida Bar Rules for making statements alleging coruption and misconduct that were not objectively reasonable, citing Amira Fox's involvement with the Matthew Walker case. [Exhibit K, Findings].
25. On March 31, 2021, Mr. Crowley moved to disqualify the Referee from the proceedings due to the discovery of an ethical conflict. [Exhibit L, Motion].
26. On April 16, 2021, Chief Judge Kimberly C. Bonner formally reassigned the case to another Judge in the Circuit to serve as the Referee, effectively granting the Motion to Disqualify the original appointed referee. On June 9s 2021, the Honorable Gilbefl Smith was appointed to serve as Referee in the bar complaint matters filed against Christopher Crowley.
27. As of the filing of this Petition, no Referee has formally recommended any sentence or sanction and the matter of the bar complaint remains unresolved.
28. On July 2, 2021, Mr. Crowley moved to continue all bar proceedings until he completes active-duty mobilization with the United States Army. The Court granted this motion and all bar proceedings have been continued. As the filing of this Motion. Christopher Crowley is still serving as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Amy. [Exhibit M, Order].
RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR DISCLOSURE
29. The grand jury is designed as a means of bringing to trial persons accused of public offenses on just grounds... In re Grand Jury Invesfigation, 287 So.2d 43, 46 (Fla. 1973).
30. The Supreme Coun has insisted that the grand jury remain “free to pursue its investigations unhindered by external influence or supervision so long as it does not trench upon the legitimate rights of any witness called before it.” United States v. iFi//inm.i, 112 S. Ct. 1735 (1992), citing Uniled States v Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 17-18 (1973). Recognizing the tradition ot” independence, the Court has held that the Fifth Amendment's “constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge’...” Id. at 16.
31. In Williams, the Supreme Court found it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution to permit an indictment to be challenged on the ground there was inadequate or incompetent evidence before the grand jwy. Id. 54. A grand jury proceeding is an ex parte investigatory proceeding to determine whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of the criminal laws has occurred; it is not a trial. Id. at 69. {emphasis added)
32. “The mere fact that evidence itself is unreliable is not sufficient to require a dismissal of the indictment;” a “challenge to the reliability or competence of the evidence presented to the grand jury” will not be heard. ld.
33. Before a grand jury, the prosecutor has a dual role of pressing for an indictment and of being the grand jury advisor. Where there is conflict between duties, the latter duty must take precedence. United S/o/es v. Remington, 208 F.2d 567, 573-74 (2d Cir. 1953). {emphu,vi.s added)
34. Generally, the proceedings of a grand jwy are to be kept secret. C/ein v. State, 52 So.2d 117, 120 (Fla. 1950). Access to grand jwy proceedings is limited in order to: 1) prevent the flight of lose whose indictment may be contemplated and their ability to conceal evidence; 2) to ensure a juror's candor in deliberations; and 3) to protect an accused who is later exonerated. let. These factors are not applicable here.
35. Controlling authority in Florida circuit courts, district courts and the Supreme Court all
hold that Florida law expressly authorizes the disclosure of grand jury proceedings under the “furthering of justice” provision of Sec. 905.27(1)(c). See, e.g., Barber v. Interim Rep. Of lhe Grand Jury Spring Term 1995, 689 So.2d 1182, 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Minton v. Stute, 113
So.2d 361, 363 (Fla. 1959); Keen v. State, 639 So.2d 597, 600 (Fla. 1994); .State v. trifle.epic,
227 So.2d 550, 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969).
36. Given the disclosures by grand jwy panel member Louise Salcedo as highlighted herein, and the extensive reporting on the grand juiy proceedings in the Gharlotie Sun, it can no longer be credibly mainuined that continued blanket secrecy over the proceedings is warranted under the law. To the contrary, discloswe of the actual proceedings is required atier former State Aaorrley, Stephen B. Russell, chose to use Christopher Crowley's political speech based on Louise Salcedo's disclosures about the Matthew Walker grand jury proceedings, to request the Florida Bar open disciplinary proceedings against Mr. Crowley.
Disclosure Under Florida Statute § 905.27
37. Florida StaNte Sec. 905.27 created a system to “peer into the secret proceedings of a grand jury” when certain conditions are met. Minton, ! 13 So.2d at 363. It specifically authorizes the disclosure of the Matthew Walker grand jury testimony to “further justice.” The statute's pertinent subsections listing exceptions to the prohibition against disclosure provide:
(1) A grand juror, state attorney, assistant sute attorney, reporter, stenographer, interpreter, or any other person appearing before the grand jury shall not disclose the testimony of a witness examined before the grand jury or other evidence received by it except when required by a court to disclose the testimony for the purpose of:
(a) Ascertaining whether it is consistent with the testimony given by the
witness before the court;
{b) Detemining whether the witness is guilty of pe¡jury; or
(c) Furthering justice.
(2) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to publish, broadcast, disclose, divulge or communicate to any other person, or knowingly cause or permit to be published, broadcast, disclosed, divulged or communicated to any other person, in
any manner whatsoever, any testimony of a witness examined before the grand juv or the content, gist, or import thereof except when such testimony is or has been disclosed in a court proceeding. When a court orders the disclosure of such testimony pursuant to subsection (I) for use in a criminal case, it may be disclosed to the prosecution attorney of the court in which the criminal ease is pending, and by the prosecuting attorney to his or her assistants, legal associates, and employees, and to the defendant and the defendant’s attorney, and by the latter to his or her legal associates and employees. When such disclosure is ordered by a court pursuant to subsection (1) for use in a civil ease, it may be disclosed to all pmies to the case and to their employees. However, the grand jwy testimony afforded such persons by the court can only be used in the defense or prosecution of the case and for no other purpose.
Sec. 905.27, Fla. Stat. (2022).
Sec. 905.27(1)
38. Subsection (1) specifically articulates three exceptions to grand jury secrecy, including fuflhering justice. lts very language contemplates the trial court's ability to order disclosure when it says: “except when required by a court to disclose...” Sec. 905.27(l), Fla. Stat. (2022).
39. The trial court must determine whether discloswe will, in fact, further justice under section 905.27(1) in this case. Courts have the inherent authority to *do all things that are reasonably necessary for the administration ofjustice within the scope of its jurisdiction, subject to existing laws and constitutional provisions,” Rose v. Palm Beach Court, 361 So.2d 135, 137 (Fla. 1978). Section 905.27(1) contemplates the court's inherent stautory authority io order disclosure to further justice and, on the facts in this case, disclosure will furiher justice. /d.
Sec. 905.27(2)
40. Section 905.27(2) accomplishes two goals: first, it prohibits disclosure by others than those listed in subsection (l) unless disclosure h< been ordered; and second, it directs to whom disclosure can be made in pending criminal and civil cases.
41. Mr. Crowley is currently defending against Findings of Fact and Guilt before the Florida
Bar. Bar disciplinary proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature. The Florida Bar v. Tohkin, 944 So.2d 219, 224 (Fla. 2006); The Florida Bar v. Walters, 260 So.3d 72, 79 (Fla. 2018). The party challenging the referee's Findings of Fact and Guilt has the burden to demonstrate that the record is devoid of evidence supporting, or clearly contradicts, the recommendations. Id.
42. A court's disciplinary bar proceedings have been characterized as judicial inquiries
because judicial inquiries investigate, declare, and enforce liabilities as they stand on present or past facts and under laws supposed to already exist. That is the purpose and en4 In re Petilion to Inspect and Copy Grand Jury Maierials, 735 F.2d 1261, 1271 (1 l'h Cir. 1984) citing, Prenli.s
v. Atlantic Coast Line Co., 211 U.S. 210, 226 (1908) and Erdmann v. Stevens, 458 F.2d 1205,
1208-9 (2d. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 889 (1972)(disciplinary proceeding cigainst attorney after publi.thing an article critical of the New York Appellule Division is a judiciccl proceeding).
43. /o re Petition concerned a judicial investigation into Judge Alcee Hasiings and the court found that given what was at stake, namely the independence and reputation of Mr. Hastings, the federal rule must be read as providing the authority to look into whatever is material to a detemination of the truth or falsity of the charges. Id. at 1270. The Court cited Doe v. Rosenberry, a case where attorney “John Doe” moved the court to recover the transcript of testimony he had provided to a Special Grand Jury which had been convened to investigate charges of comiption in government. Doe v. Rosenberry, 152 F.Supp. 403, 405 (S.D.N.Y. 1957). The Court found a disciplinary proceeding against member of the bar is a judicial proceeding and under Rule 6(e) a court has the discretionary authority to disclose matters
occurring before a grand jury where the interesis ofjustice will be served Id. 1.44. On the facts in this case, and in the absence of any case law to the contrary, Sec. 905.27(2) provides a basis té›r disclosure of the grand jury proceedings because a bar complaini is a judicial proceeding.
The Court's Inherent Authority to Order Disclosure
45. There is a tradition in the United States that is “older than our Nation itself,” that proceedings before a grand jury generally remain secret. In re Petition of Crvig, 131 F.3d 99, 101 (2d Cir. 1997). However, when the purposes of the secrecy rule are accomplished (to prevent the flight of those whose indictment may be contemplated and their ability to conceal evidence; to ensure juror's candor in deliberations; and to protect an accused who is later exonerated) and disclosure becomes essential to the attainment of”justice and the vindication ol” the truth, the rule of secrecy may be relaxed pursuant to the Court's inherent authority over grand jury proceedings. Minton, 113 So.2d at 365, citing Jenkins v. Stale, 18 So.2d 182 (1895);
Keen v. State, 639 So. 2d 597, 600 (Fla. 1994); Dennis v. United:I States, 384 U.S. 855, 870
(1966).
46. In Dennis, the Supreme Court recognized disclosure, rather than suppression of relevant materials, ordinarily promotes the proper administration of justice and “the inherent power and
' There is a split among the federal circuits on the question of whether a court's inherent aulority under Rule 6(e), Fed. R. Crim. P., authorizes disclosure of grand jury records outside the Rule's enumerated exceptions. The 1 l'h Circuit recently overruled In re Peiifinn to In.spect and Gopy Grand Jury Proceedings in Pilch v. United States, 53 F.3d 1226 (l l'h Cir. 2020). The case dealt with the release of grand jury proceedings considered to be of historical significance. The Court noted that Rule 6(e) only provides deviation from the general rule of secrecy where the rules provide otherwise. That is in contrast to Florida's Sec. 905.27 where it ls the court that can provide otherwise. It should also be noted that Florida courts continue to cite In re Pelilion and In re Petition of Craig most recently in CA Florida Holdings. LLC v. Dave Aronberg rind Joseph Abruzzo, So.3d (Fla. 4'h DCA 2023)(2023 WL3327281, May 10, 2023).
inescapable duty of the trial court” was to liñ the lid of secrecy on grand jury proceedings in aid of the search for truth. Id. at 868.
47. Courts have identified nine “non-exhaustive” factors, known as the “Dennis filctors,” that may be considered in determining whether their inherent authority should be exercised to order the release of grand jury documents. These factors include:
(i) the identity of the party seeking disclosure; (ii) whether the defendant to the grand jury proceeding or the government opposes the disclosure; (iii) why disclosure is being sought in the particular case; (iv) what specific information is being sought for disclosure; (v) how long ago the grand jury proceedings took place; (vi) the current status of the principals of the grand jury proceedings and thelr families; (vii) the extent to which the desired material - either permissibly or impermissibly - has been previously made public; (viii) whether witnesses to the grand jwy who might be affected by the disclosures are still alive; and (ix) the need for maintaining secrecy in the particular ease in question.
Id., In re Pc•tition of Craig, 131 F.3d at 105. 2
48. The Florida Supreme Court has found error where the court did not consider the Dennis factors to justify the release of grand jury testimony. Minton, 113 So.2d at 367. The vast majority of these factors support disclosure in this case.
49. To obtain grand jury testimony, a party must show a particularized need sufficient to justi9 the revelation of generally secret grand jury proceedings. Dennis, 384 U.S. at 870.’ Kc•en, 639 So.2d at 600; State v. Reese, 670 So.2d 174s175 (Fla• 4th DCA 1996).
50. To determine whether a defendant has shown the required particularized need. the trial
2 While it is largely federal courts that have applied these nine factors when the enumerated exceptions to Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(E) do not appear to apply to the question of disclosure, Florida courts have also applied them when considering disclosure. Most recently, on remand, the Fourth DCA ordered the trial court to “conduct an in-camera inspection of the material's sought using the guidance provided by Craig and Dennis to decide whether disclosure of the materials would furthers justice. CA Florida Holdings v. Aronberg and Ahruzo , So.3d (Fla. 4'h DCA 2023)(2023 WL3327281, May 10, 2023).
court has the discretion to conduct an in-camera inspection of the grand jury testimony. Dennis, 384 U.S. at 870, citing Miller v. Wainwright, 798 F.2d 426 (1 l'h Cir. 1986). The Keen court held that where there is a contradiction in testimony, it is error for a court to fail to conduct an in- camera inspection, at a minimum, to determine whether there is a particularized need for the grand jury testimony, stating, “it is precisely because of this contradiction in the testimony that someone should look at the grand jury testimony to determine its usefulness to the defendants.” Keen at 639.
51. In Minton, the Supreme Cowt said that when the circumstances are appropriate, a Judge may make such an inspection without requiring a prior showing of inconsistency. Minton, 113 So.2d at 367. The threshold standard for an in-camera inspection is lower that the showing needed to obtain a release of the grand jury testimony. Keen, 639 So.2d at 600. Here, there is both contradiction and a particularized need for disclosure.
COUNT I
Order to Produce and File the Records of the Grand Jury Investigation
Into the Death of Matthew Walker with the Court
52. The allegations set forth in paragraphs l- 51 are incorporated by reference as if lully set
forth herein.
53. Respondent, Roger D. Eaton, is the Clerk and CompSoller of Charlotte County, Florida.
54. Sec. 905.17(1), Fla. Stat. (2022), is unambiguous that grand jury records are to be maintained with the Clerk and can only be released with a court order. To wit:
The stenographic records, notes and transcriptions made by the court reporter or stenographer during a grand jury proceeding, shall be filed with the clerk who shall keep them in a sealed container not subject to public inspection. The notes, records and transcriptions are confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(l) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution and shall be released by the clerk only on request by a grand jury for use by the grand jury or on order of the
court pursuant to Sec. 905.27, Fla. Stat. Sec. 905.17(1) Fla. Stat. (2022).
55. When the grand jury materials were requested by Mr. Crowely to aid in his defense before the Florida Bar, the Charlotte County Clerk, as the statutory custodian of the records, stated they were not in his possession. The Clerk's Administrative Office similarly denied having the records. The State Attorney's office would neither confirm nor deny having the records. If the records are in the custody of the State Attorney's Office, it has no legal authority under Florida staNte to have custody of the grand jury materials.
56. The plain language of Sec. 905.17 is clear and unambiguous, and, therefore, controls.
57. It is the Clerk's duty to recover and produce the records per the Court's Order.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Christopher W. Crowley, respectfully requests that this Court, pwsuant to Florida Statute Section 905.17, order the Charlotte County Clerk of Court to produce and file with the Court copies of the testimony, minutes, transcripts of instructions and legal advice fom prosecutors and other evidence presented in the 2015 Charlotte County Grand Jury Investigation into the death of Ma3hew Walker, so that, following an in-camera inspection and determination by the Court that the materials are relevant, they can be made available to Mr. Crowley for his defense before the Florida Bar and grant any other and further relief the Court
deems just.
COUNT II
(Disclosure Pursuant to Fla. Stat. 905.27)
58. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1- 51 are incorporated by reference as if set forth herein.
59. Based on information in a series of articles published in the Charlollc• Sun, Mr. Crowley
learned about the murder of Matthew Walker on April 11, 2014, while Mr. Walker was incarcerated in the Charlotte Correctional Institute. He also learned that a grand jury was convened on May 27, 2015, to investigate the death of Matthew Walker; and after eight days of hearing testimony and considering evidence, the grand jury returned a finding of no true bill, or indictment for the murder.
60. Mr. Crowley learned from the discloswes of panel member Louise Salcedo, that the panel was told by the prosecutors and legal advisors to the panel from the Office ot‘ the State Aaorney, including Amira D. Fox, that “the chances of convictions were very slim..." and members of the jury were persuaded the case could not be successfully prosecuted in court, because it was “difficult to determine which guards delivered the strikes to the inmate" that killed Mr. Walker. He learned that, to dates no one has been charged for any crime related to the murder.
61. Mr. Crowley, an experienced criminal prosecutor, knew that such comments, if true, violated the foundational principals of grand jury proceedings. He had no reason to doubt Louise Salcedo's admission that she came forward in violation of her oath of secrecy because the “grand jwy was convinced by authorities not to pwsue charges against the guards who killed Walker.”
62. Mr. Crowley has now been charged by the Florida Bar, in a quasi-judicial proceeding, with misconduct for accusations he made dufing a hotly-contested State Attorney race against candidate Amira Fox; accusations that were based on panel member Louise Salcedo's disclosures.
63. Ms. Fox, and the other prosecutors from the Lee County State Attorney's office, already
know exactly what was argued to the Marhew Walker Grand Jury and who made the argument and already know whether Mr. Crowley's charge of prosecutorial misconduct is truthful and accurate. It is only Mr. Crowley and the Florida Bar that do not know.
64. To show there is no longer a need for secrecy, the Petition traces the disgraceful and controversial facts and investigation related to the mwder of Matthew Walker that have already been publically disclosed and the ultimate results of the grand jury proceedings. The Petition also includes some of the considerable published public record of the Grand Jury proceedings and disclosures made by Ms. Salcedo, and the national aaention the news articles garnered.
65. The need for secrecy has been further lessened by disclosure of the Presentment published by the Grand Juiy on June 16, 2015, the Autopsy Report of Matthew Walker and the Department of Corrections Criminal Investigation Report, all attached as exhibits.
66. This maaer concluded with no indictment in 2015. There are no defendants that have faced or are facing criminal prosecution, the accused is dead and his Estate has stated they do not oppose disclosure. Mr. Walker's Estate sued eighteen persons and parties and the Department of‘ Corrections in both state and federal court and filed lengthy and detailed complaints in each forum that are part of the public record. All civil actions have been settled and been dismissed. The passage of time and the need for grand jury secrecy is no more. United States v. Sucony- Vacuum, Oil Co., 310 U.S.150, 234 (1940) A]fter the grand jury’s function.s are c•nded, disclosure is ii•holly proper where the ends of justice require it.”).
67. The Florida Bar has determined that the burden is on Mr. Crowley to produce evidence to suppo< the statement that Ms. Fox was comipt for improperly interfering with a grand jury proceeding and to show that Mr. Crowley's actions were objectively reasonable. [Exhibit L,
Findings].
68. Disclosure of the grand jury proceedings will provide Mr. Crowley with objectively reasonable and factual evidence to contradict the referee's findings. If an in-camera review shows the truthfulness of Ms. Salcedo's statements about the proceedings, then the Court must authorize disclosure as provided under Sections 905.27(1),(2), Fla. Stat. in furtherance of” justice.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Christopher W. Crowley, respectfully requests that this Court find that under Sections 905.27(1),(2), Fla. Stat., to further justice, the proceedings of the 2015 Grand Jury Investigation into the death of Matthew Walker be made available to Petitioner, Christopher W. Crowley, for use before the Florida Bar and grant any other and further relief the
Cowt deems just.
Count III
(Court's Inherent Authority)
69. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1- 51 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
70. “Grand jury testimony is ordinarily confidential, but añer the grand jury's functions are ended, disclosure is wholly proper where the ends ofjustice require it.” United States v. Socony- Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150 at 234 (1940).
71. There is substantial force to Mr. Crowley's claim that the interest in secrecy is minimal in light of the oñ-repeated disclosures of panel member Louise Salcedo. It can no longer be maintained that continued blanket secrecy over the proceedings of the Matthew Walker Grand Jury is warranted under the law.
72. The sole pwpose of this Petition is to obtain the record evidence necessay' to determine
whether Mr. Crowley correctly alleged, based on the testimony of grand juror Louise Salcedo. comiption or prosecutorial misconduct against Ms. Fox in the Matthew Walker case.
73. No reasonable explanation has been provided by Ms. Fox publically or to the Florida Bar, as to why any of the prosecutors, as reported in the Charlotte Sun, improperly directed and persuaded a Charlotte County Grand Jwy not to indict the killers of Matthew Walker.
74. Louise Salcedo provided the only reasonable explanation; the prosecutors did not want to lose at trial. The Supreme Coun has repeatedly cautioned prosecutors that, in grand jury proceedings, the interest of the State ‘in criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case but that justice shall be done. Berger v. Unites States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935).
75. As recounted herein, there has been enormous public outrage over the fact that a man, asleep in his cell in the middle of the night, was murdered by one or more corrections officers and no one has been held to account for the murder. Losing was not nearly as important as charging.
76. The Petition is not improperly based on surmise or speculation but seeks confirmation in records that have already been publically disclosed and used by the State Acorney's office to punish Christopher Crowley before the Florida Bar.
77. A reasonable corrective measure in the Matthew Walker case, where there is clear
evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, directly related to a matter now at issue in a pending bar complaint against Crowley, is for the Court to release any and all records of statements made by prosecutors before the Matthew Walker grand jury.
78. The Supreme Court of the United States has clearly established the circumstances where the release of sealed grand jury proceedings are proper: a party seeking a grand jury transcripts
must show that the material it seeks is needed to avoid possible injustice in another judicial proceeding; fat the need for disclosure is greater than the needs for continued secrecy; and that their request is structured to cover only material so needed. Douglas Gil Company of €“alift›i-nia
v. Pelrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 21 l, 222 (1979). This Petition satisfies all three circumstances.
79. Mr. Crowley has been a member of the Florida Bar for over twenty years, having been sworn into the Florida Bar in 1998. He served as a prosecutor for fiheen years. He is a commissioned Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army JAG Corps. His bar license has never been challenged until 2018, where bar complaints were filed for his constitutionally- protected First Amendment political speech.
80. Mr. Crowley is properly seeking further evidence, beyond the Charlotte Finn’s Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper reports, to show his allegations of “corruption” and ‘misconduct” by Amira Fox and other prosecutors before the Matthew Walker grand jury, are in fact true.
81. The court does not protect the integrity and independence of the grand jury by closing its eyes to the countless forms of” prosecutorial misconduct that may occur inside the secrecy of the grand jury room. Unites States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974).
82. The actual Court record of the Mañhew Walker grand jury will serve as direct evidence
in the cwent bar complaint process against Mr. Crowley. To deny this motion in et”fect will deny key discovery in a heavily litigated bar complaint fact-finding process, resulting is a denial ofjustice.
83. Mr. Crowley seeks the production, unsealing and disclosure of all statements, comments,
and counsel atg•menææd iastrucüons made to &e Mattkew Walker Graod Jwy by any repmenative of the Lee County State Attoniey's Office during the pmcwdings. In mcogniiion of the potential sensitivi9 of the mateńals bein$ sought and in me interest of protecting any testifying wilnesses, Mr. Crowley does aoi objœt to the Cou<’s in-camen review of Łe testimony, minuteş æd «her evidsnw pæmt@ a tha Chadoxe Counç Gæd Juy a anything ouside the sæpe and purpose of tllis Petiäon may be mdacted, as appropriate, to proect those that the Court deems deserve such proiecčons.
THEREFORE, Petitioner, Christopher W. Crowley, respecAlly mquests that this Court, pumiani tø ik inhemit œŁoń9, onler the Cliarloae Comç Cleù of Coufl to produce and He wit kis Coux copiœ of&s testńaony, mžauteA instructioæ æd lagá advie ńom prosscutox and oŁer evidence presenl& in the 2015 Charloße Coun9 glwid jury investigation into the dpk of Matthew Walker,p tłBt, followinga in-camera iaspatioy thœe maCeńab can & æsealed œd made avålableto Mr. Cpwley for Ks defense before die Florida Bar.
DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER CROWLEY
I, CHRISTOPHER W. CROWLN, declare, under penalty of peȘuiy, Łat the foregoing
facß in &is Peötion are tæe and arracc
2d
Respectfully submitted this 17'h day of June, 2023,by:
Ask Colleen I MacAlister, Esq
COLLEEN J. MaeALISTER
Florida Bar No. 0804711
LAW OFFICES OF
COLLEEN J. MacALISTER, P.A.
5061 Napoli Drive
Naples, Florida 34103
(239) 262-3760 telephone
(239) 790-5779 facsimile colleen@cjmaclaw.com Añorney for Petitioner
27
