Motions ahead in Rossy cases

inyocourthouseIn the case of Dawndee and Kenneth Rossy, accused of embezzling $1.5 million in welfare funds, motions are pending, a change of venue motion is anticipated to be filed and a trial date has been requested by the District Attorney.

A settlement conference on December 19th was mostly uneventful. However, District Attorney Tom Hardy did say that counsel for the Rossys announced that they will be filing a motion to “suppress certain statements alleged to have been made by Ms. Rossy to investigators.” That motion is set for February 3rd.

Gerard Harvey, who represents Kenneth Rossy, and Michael Berger, who represents Dawndee Rossy, according to the DA, will renew the motion to return money confiscated from the Rossy’s bank account. These lawyers, the DA said, also indicated that they intend to bring a motion to change venue. That motion was set for hearing on March 13th and 14th.

A trial date has not yet been set, but the DA has requested a trial date in May. The Rossys face allegations of embezzlement of public funds, identity theft, conspiracy, filing false or no tax returns and forgery. They remain out of jail on GPS monitoring.


, , , ,

14 Responses to Motions ahead in Rossy cases

  1. Just a local January 3, 2014 at 5:21 pm #

    Hey Bennett, What’s the word on the fair grounds?

    • Benett Kessler January 3, 2014 at 5:27 pm #

      The last time I spoke with the CHP Investigative Services, they had not yet filed a report with the DA. Will check further now.

  2. Big Rick OBrien January 4, 2014 at 8:45 pm #

    Unless these people have (had) MORE in the bank than they’re accused of stealing, why would a judge even CONSIDER returning any funds ? They should consider themselves lucky to be breathing ” free” air while their attorney’s defend them, (at the counties expense) with delay after delay, more than likely, just putting off the inevitable.

    • Mark January 6, 2014 at 9:11 am #

      Why return anything until they are convicted? After conviction I’ve seen some judges allow for rediculous payment plans that would never ever get the debt repaid.

  3. Presto January 5, 2014 at 9:40 am #

    It’s not at the county’s expense. These folks have hired private counsel. UNINFORMED people shouldn’t make comments. Last but not least you are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!!

    • Benett Kessler January 5, 2014 at 1:31 pm #

      Good point, and we have not checked to see if the Rossys qualify for public defenders. In that case, the County would pay. We’ll check it out.
      Benett Kessler

  4. Presto January 5, 2014 at 3:29 pm #

    There’s nothing to check out. Both attorney’s are not public defenders. Even if they were these folks have the right to take this as far they want. There are rights all of us have under the constitution and they have the right to be heard. Once again INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!!
    It shouldn’t be that difficult to understand people.

    • Benett Kessler January 5, 2014 at 4:41 pm #

      We like to check out facts for ourselves, and you are right. According to our source, neither of the Rossys’ attorneys are paid as public defenders.
      Benett Kessler

    • JeremiahJoseph January 6, 2014 at 8:40 am #

      HA! Yes, there is rights granted thorough the constitution, if you haven’t noticed those rights have been slowly but surely dismantled, especially in the last ten years, that shouldn’t be to hard to figure out people! (right back atcha Presto)…
      Innocent until proven guilty? shoot that’s a good debate whether that statement is really taken into practice, I say that now because the law enforcement and police tactics show how aggressive and abusive they can be when one is supposed to be presumed innocent, and find every reason to not be held accountable and justify stepping all over human rights granted by our creator.

      Oh wait, but the rich and powerful are definitely innocent until proven guilty, right? Justice? Ha!

  5. Get Real January 6, 2014 at 8:29 am #

    Seriously???? Don’t you people realize that even if they don’t have public defenders all these delays are costing the taxpayers??? Think about all the court time, judges’ time and all the other expenses that are involved like scheduling and notifying all parties involved etc,, Then there is the DA’s time and expense for every time they have to go to court and keep delaying things. Much less that they are being monitored while they are wearing their ankle bracelets and guess who is paying for that? The taxpayers.

  6. Bewildered March 13, 2014 at 8:40 pm #

    Benett: Can you tell us what happened in the last court date.

    • Benett Kessler March 13, 2014 at 10:03 pm #

      I have a request in on that. It was a hearing to consider suppression of some evidence in the case. Will stay on it.

  7. kate April 15, 2014 at 8:21 pm #

    Has anything happened on this case ? Thanks

    • Benett Kessler April 15, 2014 at 8:40 pm #

      A motion to suppress evidence is with the judge to issue a decision.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.