Mr. David R.

Slanton
BAR Counsel
The Florida Bar
Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-2300

RE: Complaint by James McLynas against Robert Gualtieri

Florida BAR FILE No. 2020-10, 720 (6A)

Dear Mr. Slanton,

I have received the response from Robert Gualtieri and my rebuttal is as follows.

ADDITIONAL BAR COMPLAINT 1: I would first like to lodge a new and parallel complaint that Robert
Gualtieri is once again misusing and abusing his position as Sheriff of Pinellas County by answering this
complaint on Sheriff’s letterhead as this is a PERSONAL complaint against Robert Gualtieri the LAWYER,
and not the office of Sheriff as a Sheriff is not beholden to BAR rules or regulations. This exemplifies yet
another attempt of Gualtieri to seek favoritism, relief and to muddy the waters of this complaint. The
fact that he mentions my candidacy as an opponent is also irrelevant to this matter, and once again
another attempt of a corrupt attorney to obfuscate the matter at hand with extraneous statements
meant to distract this body from the issues within the four corners of the complaint.

Mr. Gualtieri responds initially by stating “at all times relevant to the complaint, I acted in my capacity as
the Pinellas County Sheriff, not as a lawyer.” Obtaining elected office does not preclude or exclude
Gualtieri from his duties, obligations or responsibilities as a current BAR licensed attorney. His BAR
license and obligation to the Rules Regulating the Florida BAR are not somehow suspended by his
winning an election. In fact, contemplating this exact scenario, the Florida BAR enacted EC 8-8, which
says in part, that “A lawyer who is a public officer should not engage in activities in which his personal
and professional interests are or foreseeably may be in conflict with his official duties.”

Mr. Gualtieri has always had the ability to relinquish his BAR license at any time if he felt he would be
unable to abide by the rules that his BAR license subjected him to as Sheriff. Gualtieri’s “official duties”
were to follow the law, abide by the Constitution and follow all rules and regulations handed down by
the court, including Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR, or the “Uniform Bond Schedule”. When
“Sheriff” Gualtieri deviated from Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR, he can no longer claim he was
“at all times relevant to the complaint acting in his capacity as Sheriff”. That is where he began acting
under BAR authority as a licensed attorney for his own personal and professional interests.

Personal and Professional Motivation

This is an election year for Florida Sheriffs. It is also a year with unprecedented animosity towards the
police industry as a whole and a demand and call for all manner of police reforms. There are cities
burning in protest against tyrannical Sheriff’s with draconian unconstitutional policies and practices that
Gualtieri himself has been guilty of for the entire span of his time as elected Sheriff of Pinellas County.
Since Sheriff Gualtieri has been in office, he has been involved in numerous national scandals relating to
his racist policies and the deadly and racist actions of both himself and his deputies. These include but
are not limited to;

1. He made national news by refusing to arrest a White Michael Drejke for murdering a Black Markeis
McGlockton over a handicapped parking spot. Drejke was eventually found guilty and sentenced to 20
years.
2. In 2014, Gualtieri himself pulled the hair out of a Black woman’s head trying to pull her out of her car
by her hair.
3. Pinellas Sheriff’s deputy Howard Skaggs chased three Black 15-16 year old teens into a pond where he
then took no action and watched their car sink for over five minutes drowning them. Gualtieri declared
there would be no investigation because “his deputies didn’t do anything wrong”, even though Deputy
Skaggs had previously chased a Black 18 year old male teen into a pond and drowned him a few years
earlier.
4. There are dozens of other specific racist and deadly actions by Sheriff Gualtieri detailed at the
following link.

https://www.scribd.com/document/468831679/Racist-Sheriff-Named-Sheriff-of-the-Year-and-
President-of-the-Florida-Sheriff-s-Association

The point is not to convict Gualtieri for these crimes before the Florida BAR, but to illustrate that
“Sheriff” Bob Gualtieri is the exact type of law enforcement officer that all of these National protests are
about. These National protests are impacting Gualtieri’s ability to win reelection and local protests are a
direct threat to his retaining the office of Sheriff. Gualtieri has his eye on higher office and a defeat in the
upcoming Sheriff’s election could destroy those goals. The LOCAL protests are directly impacting Pinellas
County and every single protest and protester is an indictment of Gualtieri’s policies and practices and a
threat to his election in November. THAT is why Gualtieri the lawyer took the unethical actions he did.

Even the Tampa Bay Times recognizes this fact and this week’s paper states “The political landscape is
more divisive than ever in a presidential election year during a pandemic and nationwide Black Lives
Matter protests. Even the usually uncompetitive race for Pinellas sheriff is getting interesting.”

Based on these obvious correlations, Sheriff Gualtieri has a direct and PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL
interest in quashing any local protests. These arrests were political for him and his exparte’ contact with
Sixth Circuit Chief Justice Rondalino to deny these protesters their due process legal right to bond was a
retaliatory action to extra judiciously punish these protesters and scare them into coming back to
protest again. He needed to end these protests any way he could to save his career.

The arrest of these NON-VIOLENT protesters was a clear violation of their First Amendment rights, the
right to redress their government, the right to protest, the right to assemble, the right to travel and the
right to pursue happiness. All so Gualtieri could remain in office and win the election for Sheriff in
November. Gualtieri’s vilifying these peaceful protesters as “violent” also fit into his agenda to look like
the “hero” to the local voters, again for personal and professional gain.
ADDITIONAL BAR COMPLAINT 2: At this time I would also like to expand my complaint to an additional
formal complaint that Robert Gualtieri intentionally misrepresented facts and LIED to a judge as a lawyer
in order to sway the judges opinion and position against multiple persons and to take their freedom
away, their right to due process and incarcerate them. There is no greater lie than one that takes
another man’s freedom. If there is any honor or enforcement power within the Florida BAR, then it
should be used to censure and suspend any lawyer like Gualtieri that lies to a judge to take another
person’s freedom, much less just to win an election.

ADDITIONAL BAR COMPLAINT 3: Robert Gualtieri has now LIED and intentionally misrepresented
numerous facts to the BAR in his July 1, 2020 response.

GUALTIERI LIE #1: “On May 31, 2020, civil unrest occurred in St. Petersburg and the PCSO and the St.
Petersburg Police Department (SPPD) arrested several violent protesters who threw rocks, bottles,
bricks, ground glass and other debris (projectiles) at law enforcement officers from the PCSO and SPPD.”

Lie #1 is that the Pinellas County Sheriff arrested ANY violent protesters on May 31, 2020. In fact, the
PCSO made ZERO protest related arrests on May 31, 2020 according to the PCSO Subject Charge Reports
listed on the PCSO’s own “Whose in Jail” website. According to the PCSO “Whose in Jail” website and
the Subject Charge Reports listed for all persons booked into the PCSO jail on that May 321, 2020 24
hour span, there were 58 total arrests, 22 misdemeanors and 36 felony arrests and NONE of those
arrests were by the PCSO or SPPD for ANY protest related activity. There were ZERO arrests by the PCSO
for ANY “Violent” acts by ANY protesters from that 24 hour time period. There also do not appear to be
ANY arrests of ANY protesters for ANY violent acts, period. Zero. Robert Gualtieri lied to the BAR in his
response. (each of these arrest EXHIBITS in the form of Subject Charge Reports are available upon
request).

GUALTIERI LIE #2: “After arrest (5-31-20) those violent protesters were released from the jail on little or
no bond”

Lie #2 is that there were ANY “violent protesters” arrested on May 31, 2020 that were then released.
Zero. Gualtieri’s claims are patently false and he as Sheriff knows this making these false statements to
the BAR intentional. If I, a regular citizen knows what arrests took place on May 31, 2020, so does
Gualtieri.

On June 1, 2020, for that 24 hour period, there were 16 protest related arrests made according to the
PCSO’s Subject Charge Reports for that day. There were five (5) Unlawful Assembly arrests by the SPPD,
and ten (10) Unlawful Assembly arrests by the PCSO. There was only ONE protester arrested by the
name of Alfred Nelson that had any violence related charge and even those two were “inciting a riot”
and “threatening an officer”, but the Subject Charge Report does not list any specific charge of a violent
act by Nelson. NELSON’S ARREST WAS CONDUCTED BY THE SPPD, AND NOT THE PCSO. Furthermore,
Mr. Nelson is also still in jail, therefore further proving Gualtieri’s false statement to the BAR that
“violent protesters were released”. From May 31, 2020, through June 1, 2020, there was not one single
arrest of ANY protester by the PCSO that included any charge, accusation or incident of violence. Robert
Gualtieri’s statement to the BAR in his response is an outright lie meant to justify his contact with Judge
Rondolino and his lies to judge Rondolino and the BAR.

So, now we have two total days where Robert Gualtieri is claiming that the PCSO arrested “violent
protesters” and no such arrests were made by the PCSO.

On June 2, 2020, for that entire 24 hour period, there were only five (5) protest related arrests and every
single one of them was made by the SPPD and NONE of them were by the PCSO according to the PCSO’s
own website.

On June 3, 2020, there were 16 PCSO arrests for Unlawful Assembly, but ZERO PCSO arrests for any
violent acts. There were two SPPD arrests for Unlawful Assembly and one arrest by the SPPD for an
allegedly violent protester and again, that protester was also never released, further making Lawyer
Robert Gualtieri’s intentional lies to both Rondolino and the Florida BAR even more egregious. ZERO
“violent protesters were released, so Gualtieri’s entire point that he had to contact Rondolino to prevent
“violent protesters” from being released to “ensure public safety had the violent protesters again
commenced pelting PCSO and SPPD with rocks, bottles and other dangerous debris”. YET NOT ONE
SINGLE PROTESTER THAT WAS ARRESTED BY PCSO HAD COMMITTED ANY VIOLENCE AND NOT ONE
“VIOLENT PROTESTER” WAS RELEASED, EVER.

The record is clear and can be fact checked on the PCSO’s own Subject Charge Reports listed right on the
PCSO’s “Whose in Jail” website, there were ZERO arrests by the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office for ANY
violent acts by ANY protesters for the full three days of May 31, 2020 through June 3, 2020, the exact
period that Gualtieri makes these multiple false statements to Rondolino

Lawyer Robert Gualtieri claims that on June 1, 2020 was the night he made his exparte’ communications
with Chief Justice Rondolino. The record is clear that on or before that night, there was not one single
protester arrested by the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office for any act of protest related violence. There
were no PCSO arrests of any violent protesters on June 2, 2020 either.

Lawyer Robert Gualtieri then cites Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR, or the “Uniform Bond
Schedule” as his authorization as both a lawyer and as the Sheriff for his exparte’ communication with
Chief Justice Rondolino to deny peaceful protesters their freedom.

Lawyer Gualtieri states “I was concerned that the recommended bond was insufficient under the
circumstances to ensure public safety had the protesters again commenced pelting PCSO and SPPD with
rocks”. In this sentence, lawyer Gualtieri clearly admits that his exparte’ and unethical call lying to Judge
Rondolino was made BEFORE there was any actual act of violence, before there was any specific subject
committing any violent acts and before there was any actual “arrest” that would have triggered the
authorization for the ARRESTING OFFICER to make personal contact with a judge to “set a bond outside
the provisions” of Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR. There was no legal or factual basis for any
exparte’ communications with ANY judge for ANY reason when there had not even been an arrest, an
arresting officer or any acts of violence or any “specific reasons” for contacting a judge to obtain a pre-
arranged denial of bond.
The clear facts proven by the PCSO’s own Subject Charge Reports listed right on the PCSO’s “Whose in
Jail” website show that at the time lawyer Gualtieri made his unethical call to Judge Rondolino, there
had only been one arrest made by the St. Pete Police department of one protester with no direct charge
of any violence himself, and that one protester is still in jail to this day and did not then or ever pose any
threat to any officer or person. The statements made to Judge Rondolino in order to induce him to take
action against peaceful protesters and deny them due process and bond in accordance with the Uniform
Bond Schedule for FUTURE arrests is as unethical as it gets. This proves that both lawyer Gualtieri and
Sheriff Gualtieri were conspiring to retaliate against peaceful protesters before any arrests had been
made to further his political career.

Lawyer Gualtieri specifically references “Section 4(A)(4) of the Administrative Order” as his justification
for the exparte’ communication to deny unnamed persons their freedom and due process rights through
his lies. However, that specific section states very clearly that section 4(A) applies to ARRESTING
OFFICERS ONLY. Both Lawyer Gualtieri and Sheriff Gualtieri were NOT an “arresting officer” at the time
Gualtieri made the exparte’ call to Rondolino. In fact not one single deputy under Sheriff Gualtieri had
made a single arrest of any protester that was accused or charged with any violent offense. Neither
Gualtieri the lawyer or Gualtieri the Sheriff had the legal right, or legal standing to contact Judge
Rondolino on behalf of the SPPD or seek any bond modification on behalf of any protester arrested by
SPPD. Gualtieri does not represent the City of St. Petersburg, its police department or any of its officers
as a lawyer or as sheriff.

Therefore, his contact with Judge Rondolino was clearly an exparte’ contact NOT in his official capacity
as Sheriff, because there is no basis in law, fact or Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR that grants him
as the sitting Sheriff the standing or authority to contact any judge to modify or deny anybody’s bond
that was arrested by the SPPD, much less seek a sweeping denial of bond for ANYONE and EVERYONE
arrested at these protests, whether they committed any acts of violence or not. But that is exactly what
he did.

Administrative Order Section 4(A)(1) (that Lawyer Gualtieri conveniently skipped right over) then clearly
states “The ARRESTING officer shall complete ALL information on the complaint affidavit, setting forth
the statute number and the degree of the crime for which the defendant is charged, together with a
short statement of the facts involved in the alleged crimes”. This is a requirement
to get to step 4(A)(4) that Gualtieri tries to use to justify his unethical actions. There was no such
information completed before lawyer Gualtieri called the judge, because Sheriff Gualtieri had no legal
basis to make such a call. Therefore, there was no “information” or “degree of crime” or “statement of
the facts” that could have been submitted to “a judge” for a bond increase or reduction by any
“arresting officer” based on any arrest of any “violent protester” or their potential release because
THERE WERE NO VIOLENT PROTESTERS ARRESTED BY GUALTIERI OR THE PCSO.

Administrative Order Section 4(A)(4) then goes into great detail stating;

“For an arrest which has been made based upon probable cause with no warrant involved and where
the arresting officer possesses specific reason(s) to believe that a bond, in an amount higher or lower
than the amount established pursuant to this Administrative Order should be set, the arresting officer
may personally contact a judge and said judge may set a bond outside the provisions of this
Administrative Order. The arresting officer shall then enter the amount of the bond, as set by the
judge, upon the complaint affidavit specifically annotating which judge approved the bond amount.”

There is absolutely no valid basis for either lawyer Gualtieri or Sheriff Gualtieri to justify his actions of
making an exparte’ contact with a judge or LIE the this judge that any of these people had “committed
acts of violence” to justify ANY bond deviation from Section 4(A)(4) or to deny multiple people their
freedom outside the due process of law, an actual bond hearing or the due process of this section of the
Administrative Order. The multitude of reasons why Gualtieri’s position is baseless and without merit
under Section 4(A)(4) include but are not limited to;

1. The rule states “for an arrest which has been made”, when at the time of the unethical contact, no
arrest had been made requiring a judge’s contact or an action by an “arresting officer” with a reason to
raise or lower anybody’s bond. This alone precluded Gualtieri the sheriff OR Gualtieri the lawyer from
making that contact with judge Rondolino.
2. That the “arresting officer possesses specific reason(s)”, when a) Gualtieri was not the arresting
officer and he had no “specific” reason or justification to make such a contact under this Order.
3. This rule is for raising or lowering bond, NOT denying bond for offenses that clearly have a bond set
within the existing Administrative Order. Experte’ contact with a judge to deny bond is an unethical
contact for any BAR licensed attorney and should never be done outside a due process bond hearing. An
action for denial of bond is an action within the purview of a prosecutor, NOT a Sheriff. Especially when
the lawyer LIES to the judge about the non-existent danger (protester violence of those arrested by the
PCSO) Gualtieri continues to claim was the justification and basis for the contact.
4. This rule then further states that “the arresting officer may personally contact a judge”. Gualtieri
was not the arresting officer in ANY protester arrest, therefore HE had no ethical or legal reason,
standing or justification to make such a contact as a lawyer OR a Sheriff to move for a bond reduction on
ANYONE, much less a denial of bond. If he was not authorized to contact the judge as Sheriff, then he
WAS contacting the judge as a lawyer for personal and professional gain.
5. Gualtieri claimed that his specific reason(s) for making the contact to the judge was based on “violent
acts” perpetrated by people HE claimed to have arrested. This is an outright LIE, as not one single person
that was arrested by the PCSO had been arrested or charged with ANY violent act before Gualtieri
contacted Rondolino, or even in the 48 hours AFTER Gualtieri contacted this judge.

Gualtieri’s only authority under Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR

The provisions of Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR under Section (4)(B)(6) are the ONLY language
that applies to Sheriff Gualtieri and these do not grant Sheriff Gualtieri OR lawyer Gualtieri the standing
or authority to contact ANY judge to modify or deny bond.

Section (4)(B)(6) states “With EVERY defendant, the booking officer SHALL follow the recommended
bond schedule, or..”. Section (4)(B)(6) then sets out a procedure to raise or lower bond by the booking
officer WITHIN the Uniform Bond Schedule. Only Section (4)(B)(6)(c) details that IF the “arresting officer
has contacted a judge pursuant to A.4 above and a judge has authorized a bond different from this
order. Therefore, “sheriff” Gualtieri and lawyer Gualtieri had ZERO standing or legal authority to contact
any judge to modify or deny the bond for ANY defendant when Section (4)(B)(6) very clearly details
exactly what must occur with “EVERY defendant” if there is any adjustment in bond for EVERY
defendant. The fact that Gualtieri IS a lawyer makes his obligation to read, understand and act within
the bounds of the law at all times a requirement of his holding a Florida BAR license and he cannot claim
that he did not know, understand or had misinterpreted this very clear language.

Additionally, Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR under Section (4)(B)(7) a “booking officer” may
consider “aggravating factors” when considering raising a bond (but never denial of bond) and those
specific “aggravating factors” (a.) through (g.) are enumerated within 2018-020 PI-CIR. Not one of those
aggravating factors includes subjugating the authority of the “arresting officer”, much less the arresting
officer from another agency (SPPD), and making an unauthorized, illegal and unethical contact with any
judge to deny any defendant the bond that the Uniform Bond Schedule permits. The ONLY authorization
that Gualtieri the “sheriff” MAY be able to claim is his role of the “booking agent” as Sheriff in charge of
the PCSO jail. In the role of “booking agent”, Gualtieri the Sheriff still has ZERO authority or standing to
contact any judge to increase bond, much less deny bond. Lawyer Gualtieri has ZERO standing or
authority to act as representative for the Sheriff or the booking agent, yet it was lawyer Gualtieri that
made the call to the judge because as the “booking agent” “sheriff” Gualtieri was barred from doing so.

ADDITIONAL BAR COMPLAINT #4: Lawyer Gualtieri LIED on the Booking affidavit(s) issued to over 111
peaceful protesters claiming that THEIR bond was denied based on the “order of Judge Rondolino”,
when no such order ever existed or was ever signed and certainly did not apply to any of these NON-
VIOLENT protesters that Gualtieri the lawyer denied bond to.

There were 15 arrests made on June 1, 2020 for “Unlawful Assembly”, zero arrests on June 2, 2020 for
“Unlawful Assembly” and 16 arrests for “Unlawful Assembly” on June 3, 2020. There were many
additional arrests made after that date for Unlawful Assembly, but for the purposes of this BAR
complaint we will focus on just these three days, the day before Gualtieri’s call to Judge Rondolino, the
day of the call and the day after the call.

Each of these Fl St 870.02 Unlawful Assembly arrests are strikingly similar in their nature, the
accusations and the charges as well as the circumstances that resulted in these 31 arrests from May 31,
2020 through June 3, 2020. For the purposes of this analysis, we will focus on one specific arrest, that of
Hailey Ostwalt from 6-3-2020 which mirrors the circumstances from virtually all of these 870.02 arrests.
(a copy of this actual complaint/arrest affidavit is available upon request as are many others)

As you can see on the Ostwalt “complaint/arrest affidavit” above, it clearly states that “NO BOND BY
ORDER OF JUDGE RONDOLINO”. However, NO SUCH ORDER EXISTS. Additionally, Judge Rondolino
himself clearly stated that his directive was NEVER meant to be applied to anyone other than those
protesters that committed specific violent acts and Rondolino’s statement in the 6-19-20 Tampa Bay
Times states as much; “This lead to the conclusion that the judge had intended to hold non-violent law
abiding demonstrators without bond, which was certainly not the case” said Rondolio’s released
statement.

In today’s day and age, there are cameras everywhere and it is second nature for many younger people
to instantly take out their camera and record any event taking place. In this case, the defendant Hailey
Ostwalt had videoed her entire arrest event and a person she was with (Kelsey Jagneaux) had also
videoed both of their arrests. ( a copy of this arrest video is available upon request)

The video begins with both defendants standing on the corner of Central avenue at the intersection of
Central and 13th Street south on the south side of Central avenue away from the SPPD which is one block
north of where the official order to “disperse” had been given. Seeing the turmoil, both Ostwalt and
Jagneaux tried to get into their car and leave. However, their car was being blocked by a line of PCSO
deputies in full riot gear that refused multiple requests to allow them to get to their car and leave. After
pleading with them multiple times, one of the deputies can clearly be heard telling these two young girls
that they could “come back and get your car when we are done”. You then hear Ostwalt ask them “well
when will you be done” and she gets no reply. The officers then yell at them a few times to “leave”,
which is not a lawful order to disperse.

The Florida statute that is being used to charge most of the Protesters is 870.02.
“870.02 Unlawful assemblies. —If three or more persons meet together to commit a breach of the
peace, or to do any other unlawful act, each of them shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083”

In the entire video that is well over five minutes long, the only two people in the video other than police
in the distance are PCSO and SPPD officers. There are only two young girls, not the “three or more”
required to issue such a citation. These girls are over 500 feet away from the SPPD where the official
“order to disperse” was given. They are not violating any law and are certainly not committing any
“breach of the peace” as required for them to be arrested and charged. In fact, it is the PCSO officers
that are refusing to allow them to get into their car and leave. (a video exhibit of this arrest can be
obtained if requested)

Diagram of the arrest scene of Ostwalt and Jagneaux

After being refused access to their car so they can leave, and being threatened with arrest if they don’t
“walk away”, the two girls start walking down Central avenue eastbound. Shortly thereafter the 20 or so
PCSO officers in full riot gear start to follow them. They walk an entire two blocks more, or an additional
1,500 feet clearly evidencing that they are “leaving” when they encounter a squad of SPPD officers at
the corner of Central and MLK Street and they ask the SPPD officers where they should go or what they
should do because the PCSO won’t allow them to get to their car. They SPPD tell then they don’t know
and they are then rushed by the PCSO and arrested for violating Florida Statute 870.02
The above diagram shows that both Ostwalt and Jagneaux were over 500 feet from the SPPD station
when they were tying to get to their car and walked another 1500 feet “leaving” before they were
arrested for “not leaving”. They were not violating the law, committing any unlawful act and were over
2,000 feet and three blocks away from the St Pete Police headquarters. There were only two of them,
making it impossible for them to have violated 870.02, the offense that they were charged with.

All of that aside, both Sheriff Gualtieri and lawyer Gualtieri had called Judge Rondolino and told the
judge that both Ostwalt and Jagneaux had committed violence, were a danger to the SPPD and PCSO
and others if they were released on the bond amount prescribed by the Uniform Bond Order contained
within Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR.

Neither lawyer Gualtieri or Sheriff Gualtieri had right to contact Judge Rondolino to seek ANY bond
modification because a) he was NOT the arresting officer, b) he had NOT completed “ALL information on
the complaint affidavit, setting forth the statute number and the degree of the crime for which the
defendant is charged, together with a short statement of the facts involved in the alleged crimes” as
required BEFORE any such request for bond modification can be made, c) there were NO “aggravating
factors” (a.) through (g.)” that would have permitted any bond modification under Administrative Order
2018-020 PI-CIR under Section (4)(B)(7) a, and d) Gualtieri had no firsthand knowledge of any “violent
acts” as he claimed to judge Rondolino that these girls had committed, and even if he did, he was still
not the “arresting officer” with that firsthand knowledge that is required to contact the judge.

Since “sheriff” Gualtieri had no legal, ethical, statutory or administrative justification or standing to
make such a contact, he cannot argue that he was “at all times relevant to the complaint acting in my
capacity as the Pinellas County Sheriff” as he states. Therefore, that leaves him contacting the judge as
lawyer Gualtieri with no standing whatsoever and only his “personal and professional” motivations
barred under Florida BAR enacted EC 8-8, which states “A lawyer who is a public officer should not
engage in activities in which his personal and professional interests are or foreseeably may be in
conflict with his official duties.”

Furthermore, lawyer Gualtieri LIED about both Ostwalt AND Jagneaux, as well as ALL OTHERS only
charged under Fl St. 870.02 for “Unlawful Assembly” by directly stating and claiming that these specific
protesters WERE in fact committing “violent acts” and were a “danger to law enforcement and others” if
they were to be released based upon the legally required bond limits of the Uniform Bond Schedule
contained within Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR. Lawyer Gualtieri LIED to a sitting Chief Sixth
Circuit judge about these two girls (and numerous others) to deny them bond, violate their rights and
retaliate and extra judiciously punish them for daring to protest HIS job as Sheriff. He did so to send a
frightening message to any and all that dare to protest and assert their Constitutionally protected rights
that he personally swore an oath to defend and protect in order to silence and block other protesters
from daring to impact his ability to be elected Sheriff in November.

In the June 19th edition of the Tampa Bay Times, Chief Justice Rondolino gave the following statement;

“Unfortunately, none of the facts and circumstances regarding the alleged violent acts, that had been
described to the chief judge by the sheriff, were included in these arrest papers,” Rondolino’s
statement says. “Similarly, the charges actually cited in the affidavits in question were not serious
felony crimes or even misdemeanors involving violence. This lead to the conclusion that the judge had
intended to hold non-violent law abiding demonstrators without bond, which was certainly not the
case. The fact that the violent circumstances witnessed by the sheriff did not become part of the arrest
papers resulted in this problem.”

Well, that is not the ONLY problem! The real “problem” is that lawyer Gualtieri LIED to this judge about
every single peaceful protester that committed NO acts of violence. Lawyer Gualtieri then used his
badge in an illegal and unethical manner outside the bounds of the office of Sheriff to exact revenge
upon these peaceful protests engaged in constitutionally protected activities and not even committing
ANY crime at all other than being with one other friend on Central avenue just so that he could protect
his personal and professional ass in the next election.

This conduct it so reprehensible on so many levels that the this complainant requests that the Florida
BAR examine the BAR rules in their entirety to determine each and every aspect of those regulations
that would apply to the abhorrent conduct and disbar Robert Gualtieri.

If sufficient action is not taken within this complaint, I will be forced to file 111 separate and individual
BAR complaints on behalf of each of the people that were denied Bond based on lawyer Gualtieri’s
unethical, illegal and reprehensible conduct.

1-10. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT RULE 1-10.1 COMPLIANCE

All members of The Florida Bar shall comply with the terms and the intent of the Rules of
Professional Conduct as established and amended by this court.

Gualtieri does NOT have the right to be able to hide behind his elected office to cover for his flagrant
violations of his oath as a lawyer, the laws of Florida, the Administrative orders of the courts or the
Constitution of the United States.

A recent ABA-sponsored webinar titled, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Alternative Facts,” had a panel of
expert ethics lawyers attempted to answer these questions and discussed the scope of lawyers’ duty of
candor under ABA Model Rules 1.2, 1.6, 3.3, 4.1 and 8.4. Clearly, Robert Gualtieri’s actions, lies, blatant
misrepresentations and violations of law and rule would qualify as “Lies, Damned Lies, and Alternative
Facts” according to the ABA.

Within this ABA webinar, Roiphe said there are three things relevant to determine if a lawyer lied:

1) the amount of deceit the person uses

2) the purpose of deceiving and what that was trying to achieve
3) is there any other way this could have been done

Clearly the amount of deceit by Robert Gualtieri was off the charts. There is no worse lie than one that
withholds a person’s freedom and right to due process. It is crystal clear that every single one of the 111
protesters that were most likely falsely arrested for a 870.02 “Unlawful Assembly” charge and were
denied bond were denied based on lies of “violent acts” by Gualtieri and through Gualtieri’s exparte’
and unauthorized contacts with Judge Rondolino. There is no other way to explain how these non-
violent protesters were denied bond and due process other than because of the LIES that Robert
Gualtieri told the judge and the directive of Gualtieri to his staff to lie in the “complaint/arrest affidavit”
that there existed an actual signed order from Rondolino denying THEM specifically the right to bond
based on the circumstances of THEIR charges and arrest.

1-10. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT RULE 1-10.1 COMPLIANCE

A. General Principles

A lawyer is both an officer of the court and an advocate. As such, the lawyer always should strive to
uphold the honor and dignity of the profession, avoid disorder and disruption in the courtroom, and
maintain a respectful attitude toward the court. A lawyer’s word should be his or her bond.

This does not state “unless he is elected Sheriff”.

GUALTIERI LIE #3: Within Gualtieri’s July 1, 2020 response, Gualtieri states “my actions were in strict
compliance with Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR entered by the Chief Judge for Florida’s Sixth
Judicial Circuit.”

Lie #3 is clear and there can be no other determination and no matter how you dissect Administrative
Order 2018-020 PI-CIR, Gualtieri at no time had any standing to contact any judge to modify or seek a
denial of bond. This is further evidenced by the clear and convincing evidence that Gualtieri flat out LIED
to Judge Rondolino about dozens of protesters, including Ostwalt and Jagneaux causing them to be
denied bond based on Gualtieri’s false statements that either of these two girls were involved in any
“violent activities”. Hell, they weren’t even guilty of what Gualtieri and his PCSO arrested them for!

GUALTIERI LIE #4: “Consistent with the Administrative Order, (which it was not), Chief Judge Rondolino
ordered that anyone arrested as a result of violent acts towards law enforcement during the protests
be held with no bond…”.

Lie #4 is evident for the numerous reasons stated above. Clearly none of Gualtieri’s actions were
“consistent with the Administrative Order”. Additionally, here Gualtieri is LYING to the Florida BAR in an
attempt to persuade the BAR that his exparte’ communications with a Judge had no effect on anyone
other than “violent” protesters, when the facts are clear that everyone that was arrested for only a
870.02 “Unlawful Assembly” charge were NOT “arrested as a result of violent acts towards law
enforcement during the protest” as Gualtieri claims in his BAR response. Yet, they too were denied
bond, had their due process and civil rights violated and were directly harmed by Gualtieri’s actions to
protect his own personal and professional interests in the upcoming election.

GUALTIERI LIE #5: “The violent protesters were arrested after they failed to disburse subsequent to an
order to an unlawful assembly declaration…”

Lie # 5 is clearly evidenced in the cases of Ostwalt and Jagneaux cited above. There is no evidence that
these two girls were ever notified of any “unlawful assembly declaration. They were over a block away
from the SPPD. The only thing the PCSO deputies can be heard telling them is that they will not allow
them to get to their car and to leave or they will be arrested. Both Ostwalt and Jagneaux comply and
walk away from the PCSO deputies for over two blocks (1500 feet, the length of 5 football fields) and are
followed and arrested by 20 PCSO deputies in full riot gear AS THEY WERE LEAVING. Additionally, these
were NOT “violent protesters” and the PCSO did not arrest a single “violent protester” on the day before
he called the judge, the day that he called the judge or the day after he called the judge. This entire
statement to the BAR is a bold faced lie.

GUALTIERI LIE #6: “Those arrested were held with no bond per Chief Judge Rondolino’s order…”

Lie #6 is based on the fact that there WAS NO ACTUAL SIGNED ORDER from Rondolino denying anyone
bond. I defy Gualtieri to produce any such order. Any first year law student knows that if it isn’t on paper
and singed by a judge, there is NO ORDER. Additionally, Judge Rondolino himself stated in the Tampa
Bay Times that he never gave any such order to hold people without bond that had committed no
violent acts. Again, Gualtieri lies to the BAR and the World to cover his dirty corrupt tracks.

Florida BAR rule 4 preamble states that “In addition, there are rules that apply to lawyers who are not
active in the practice of law or to practicing lawyers even when they are acting in a nonprofessional
capacity. For example, a lawyer who commits fraud in the conduct of a business is subject to discipline
for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. A lawyer’s conduct
should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional service to clients and in the
lawyer’s business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate
purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal
system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers, and public officials. As a public
citizen, a lawyer should seek improvement of the law, access to the legal system, the administration
of justice, and the quality of service rendered by the legal profession. Lawyers are officers of the court
and they are responsible to the judiciary for the propriety of their professional activities. Thus, every
lawyer is responsible for observance of the Rules of Professional Conduct.”

Notice it doesn’t say “unless you are a Sheriff”.

Florida BAR Rule ~ Fraud

“When used in these rules, the terms “fraud” or “fraudulent” refer to conduct that has a
purpose to deceive. This does not include merely negligent misrepresentation or negligent
failure to apprise another of relevant information. For purposes of these rules, it is not necessary
that anyone has suffered damages or relied on the misrepresentation or failure to inform.”

Robert Gualtieri committed FRAUD by his level of deceit in his false claim that Administrative Order
2018-020 PI-CIR gave him authorization to contact any judge, his contact with Judge Robolino, his LIES to
Judge Robolino, his attack on the rights of peaceful protesters, his false arrest of many under bogus Fl St.
870.02 charges, his lying on complaint/arrest affidavits about charges and there being an order denying
bond to that specific person, and lying to media, the World and the Florida BAR in his response.

As an attorney, Robert Gualtieri also knew that he has a clear and obvious conflict of personal and
professional political interest in contacting the judge outside of Administrative Order 2018-020 PI-CIR
because he was NOT the required “arresting officer”, had not provided the judge with the required facts,
LIED to the judge about the “violent protesters” and then falsified official documents to reflect that
these persons that were arrested were subject to a non-existent bond denial order, even though Judge
Rondolino himself clearly stated that he never intended to deny non-violent protesters bond.

It can also be argued that Gualtieri is at all times a lawyer and cannot extricate himself from his duties as
a Sheriff and his duties as a lawyer. It can also be argued that at any time he contacts anyone outside the
Sheriff’s office, he is doing so as a lawyer that represents the Sheriff.

RULE 4-1.11
(d) Limits on Participation of Public Officer or Employee. A lawyer currently serving
as a public officer or employee:
(1) is subject to rules 4-1.7 and 4-1.9; and
(2) shall not:
(A) participate in a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and
substantially while in private practice or nongovernmental employment, unless the
appropriate government agency gives its informed consent; or
(B) negotiate for private employment with any person who is involved as a party
or as attorney for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is participating personally and
substantially.
(e) Matter Defined. As used in this rule, the term “matter” includes:
(1) any judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other
determination, contract, claim, controversy, investigation, charge, accusation, arrest, or other
particular matter involving a specific party or parties; and

There is zero doubt that Robert Gualtieri’s actions, lies and blatant unethical conduct clearly rises to the
level of “dishonesty” and “deceit” and “misrepresentation”. There is no doubt that Gualtieri did not
conform to the law, nor was it used in a “legitimate purpose” and was clearly used to falsely arrest,
falsely accuse, deny due process and vilify peaceful protesters as “violent” criminals that were a danger
to the law enforcement and others, when he only thing they were a danger to was Gaultier’s career.

As an officer of the court and a lawyer, Robert Gualtieri had a duty and an obligation under BAR rules to
act at all times ethically, honorably and to avoid even an appearance of impropriety. Immediately
following the breaking news story of Gualtieri’s exparte’ call to Judge Rondolino, there was a firestorm
of protest from civil rights groups, the legal profession and citizens alike. Gualtieri’s actions were
lambasted by numerous trial lawyers clearly stating that what Gualtieri had done was WRONG and
should not have been done. Robert Gualtieri simultaneously brought dishonor to the American Justice
system and the law enforcement profession. For that, he should be disbarred.

Canon 9 provides that a lawyer should avoid even the appearance of impropriety. EC 8-8 says that “A
lawyer who is a public officer should not engage in activities in which his personal and professional
interests are or foreseeably may be in conflict with his official duties.”

Guidelines for Professional Conduct

J. Ex Parte Communications with Courts and Others

A lawyer should avoid ex parte communication on the substance of a pending case with a judge
before whom the case is pending.

Before making an authorized ex parte application or communication to the court, a lawyer should
make diligent efforts to notify the opposing party or a lawyer known or likely to represent the
opposing party and to accommodate the schedule of that lawyer to permit the opposing party to be
represented on the application. A lawyer should make an ex parte application or communication
(including an application to shorten an otherwise applicable time period) only when there is a bona
fide emergency that will result in serious prejudice to the lawyer’s client if the application or
communication is made on regular notice.

Attorneys should notify opposing counsel of all oral or written communications with the court or other
tribunal, except those involving only scheduling matters.

A lawyer should be courteous and may be cordial to a judge, but should never show marked attention
or unusual informality to the judge. A judge should be referred to by surname in court. A lawyer
should avoid anything calculated to gain, or to have the appearance of gaining, special personal
consideration or favor from a judge.

I implore you to right a terrible wrong, and hold Robert Gualtieri accountable for this egregious display
of lack of morality, ethics and his disgusting behavior and censure him in the strictest form possible by
disbarring Robert GUILTY-ERI.

Sincerely

James McLynas
449 129th Ave East,
Unit 11
Madeira Beach, Florida 33708