You get what you pay for, Jerry
Schofield prosecutor Jerry Hill is receiving free legal defense for his Bar complaint from Arthur "Buddy" Jacobs, the general counsel for the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association.
Full background on the injustice of the Leo Schofield case, which is the main event to this interesting sideshow, can be found at this link. The latest update can be found here.
It took four months, a blizzard of emails, and a formal public records request, but somebody has finally assured Florida’s taxpayers we are not directly funding long-time former 10th Circuit State’s Attorney Jerry Hill’s legal defense against my Florida Bar complaint.
I received this note on October 17 from Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association (FPAA) Executive Director Garrett Berman:
Mr. Townsend:
Regarding your e-mail “Public Records request for FPAA/Jerry Hill” sent October 17, 2023, this is in response to your “alternative” request. Please note that Mr. Arthur Jacobs is representing Mr. Hill pro bono. Having complied with your “alternative” request, we now consider this request closed.
If you have any further questions regarding this representation, please contact Mr. Jacobs directly.
Arthur “Buddy” Jacobs is general counsel for the FPAA, although he is not an FPAA employee. Jacobs has never answered any inquiry I’ve made of him, despite Berman repeatedly directing me to Jacobs, which was like directing me to the void.
A comedy of emails — and an assist from the Florida Center for Government Accountability
Indeed, Berman’s clarification came roughly four months after I first started asking who is paying for Jerry Hill’s defense against my Bar complaint. It followed at least 13 failed efforts via email to determine with the FPAA and the 10th Circuit SAO if taxpayers are defending Jerry Hill from the consequences of his behavior as a private lawyer.
But it came just eight hours after I sent this formal public records request to the FPAA on October 17:
Pursuant to Florida Statute 119, I am requesting any public records of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association related to Jerry Hill's defense against the Florida Bar complaint filed by this writer (Billy Townsend).
These records include, but are not limited to:
Minutes or other record reflecting any governing board vote approving FPAA financial support of Hill's defense
Any records of payment made to Hill's lawyers
Any bills submitted to FPAA by Hill's lawyers
Any reimbursement to Hill by FPAA for personal funds spent on his personal defense.
Florida Statute 119.01 (3) speaks to the public nature of the FPAA and its records, based on the assessment/dues it collects from state's attorneys offices. See relevant passage below:
(3) If public funds are expended by an agency in payment of dues or membership contributions for any person, corporation, foundation, trust, association, group, or other organization, all the financial, business, and membership records of that person, corporation, foundation, trust, association, group, or other organization which pertain to the public agency are public records and subject to the provisions of s. 119.07.
Alternatively, the FPAA and 10th Circuit could just tell me and the public who is paying for Jerry Hill's defense against a Bar complaint related to his behavior as a private lawyer.
In addition to that text, I copied Barbara Peterson, executive director of the Florida Center for Government Accountability (FCGA), on the email. The FCGA is fresh off a big legal win for Florida government transparency concerning COVID records that state government long sought to conceal.
That combination of sticks, attached to an easier carrot, finally got the result I was looking for from FPAA, which Berman could easily have provided four months ago.
Why make everything so hard?
After all this resistance, Berman still had to cough up my answer — while letting me make fun publicly of everyone involved for four months. I don’t understand that instinct to institutional masochism. But it’s real.
The final crying of uncle here is pretty funny.
But the demonstrated instinct of power to hide and obstruct and dodge and just generally treat responsible members of the public as an annoyance for as long as it can shows why the public needs sticks.
Power will hoard its carrots just because it can, even on something as petty as Jerry Hill’s out-of-pocket legal spending.
Is Jerry Hill indigent?
You may ask: Billy, how do you know that the FPAA never intended to — or never actually did — pay Arthur Jacobs tax money to defend Jerry Hill?
My answer: I don’t.
For me, it’s enough to get the FPAA to state its official position on this. I doubt anyone cares enough to do any additional forensics. And I won’t be doing them myself.
I’m more interested now in determining if any record exists of Jerry Hill’s work product performed in 2023 in exchange for the $5,833 monthly payment he receives from the 10th Circuit. Full detail in the linked article below.
Hill is supposed to be managing the SAO’s parole review work and attending parole hearings on behalf of the SAO. Hill’s performance of that work in 2020 led to my complaint. But Hill did not attend or participate in Leo Schofield’s May 2023 parole hearing — arguably the highest profile parole case in 10th Circuit history.
I have another public record request currently sitting with 10th SAO asking for documentation of any work performed by Jerry Hill in 2023. That request is now two weeks old. It also includes an easy suggestion for complying:
It would probably be easier for everyone if SAO leadership would just tell me if any such records exist -- and what form they exist in. I could then shape my request in a way that would be the least burdensome for everyone.
Nothing yet.
In any event, since his 2016 retirement as 10th Circuit State’s Attorney, Jerry Hill has made roughly $376,000 as a private lawyer from the SAO and taxpayers. That’s on top of whatever pension he receives for his decades-long career as an elected, highly-paid state government executive.
Why he would settle for charity representation in a complaint that’s getting pretty serious is … none of my business, I guess.
I’m happy for Jacobs to continue his legal aid services to Hill
For the record, as I’ve already written, I think Jerry Hill is getting what he’s paying for.
Hill’s lawyer’s response to my Bar complaint was very helpful to my arguments about his behavior. I’ve referred to it as “a confession.” See below:
Now that I know — or at least I’ve been told — that I’m not paying for the defense against the complaint I filed, I’m happy for Buddy Jacobs to keep doing what he’s doing.
I think Hill’s charity arrangement has thus far worked out better for my goals — and Leo Schofield’s future — than it has for Jerry Hill’s interests.