Curtis to Lloyd re: Sidaway trial

From Tom Curtis, February 11, 2006

Re: Sidaway trial

Hello Ralph,

You always have the right to make a response, but it is my understanding they are not looking for comment and do not really need to be bothered by such.

This trial is only about one thing. The prosecution has to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the people indicted for the violation of ethics, in fact did so with knowledge that it was not legal to do what they did. If the prosecution can prove such then charges will be levied, if not, a slap on the hand will be levied and these people will walk away with little consequence. Do we feel they are guilty, Yes! Can she prove they were guilty, time will tell?

I hope this information has proved to be of some insight to you, but again, you have the freedom to write what you want.

If you have some proof of illegal activity then I am sure the prosecution would be interested, otherwise, comment only requires a response that they do not need to be bothered with. Columbus attorneys and courts have their hands so full of the Thomas Noe situation that they do not need anything more to deal with.

The prosecution already understand that these STRS people made many very poor business decisions, but as one very high dollar attorney told me in 2003, that is not against the law, it only shows that these individuals were not worthy of our faith and trust.

This advice may sound contradictory from someone who is always putting out his comments and opinions. I have written Lara Baker, (the prosecuting attorney for the Sidaway case) and expressed my concerns. She has responded with the information I stated above. That is sufficient for me, as I do understand her position and will allow her to make her case. We will someday see how successful she is in obtaining a conviction. Please remember she is up against a pay-to-play system of government and has to deal with that reality every time she enters the courtroom. Politics is such a huge part of all business in Ohio. Unfortunately, Ohio government is now known as being extremely corrupt throughout the USA.

I am trying to focus on the problem at the STRS. Thus far, that has been pretty elusive, but I will keep asking questions and searching for the missing pieces to the puzzle. I for one need to have some closure to the reason for our current financial situation. From what I can determine to date, as many as 10,000 retirees lost the health care subsidy they were provided for their spouse and/or dependent child at retirement. Why must we suffer the most, because we believed what has now become known as a myth? We placed our faith and trust in the individuals that spoke of such, the OEA and in STRS documentation. We must be a bunch of gullible old farts, huh? Since we only represent a minority of the retiree pool, whom really cares? Obviously, it is not the STRS fiduciaries, or those of us in this situation would have been provided a grandfathering clause when the new rules were established. The lack of compassion for the retiree is ever growing in what appears to be every industry, with the exception of government and business leadership. They historically do very well concerning their own retirement. Go figure how that could happen!

Take care,

Tom Curtis

CORE Advisory Committee Member

_______________

From: Ralph Lloyd To: Thomas Curtis Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 Subject: Re: 021006 Curtis To All, RE Sidaway Trial

Can I write a response and send it to the prosecution as a friend of the court?

Ralph L Lloyd