FL FL - Michelle Parker, 33, Orlando, 17 Nov 2011 - # 9

[Eefive]

Sorry, but I have been away from the computer since my first post.

I know this won't help much, but here is all that I know.

I went to the OCC website to check about custody,
I saw the case I posted, and clicked the link
After I read the docket, I copied the info.
Unfortunately, no link or screenshot.
Went yo the WS page to see how to make the post,
I decided to try to do a link, so I went back to the OCC site and it was gone.
I would seriously think I had lost my marbles except that I had copied the info.

Thinking back over it and everyone's comments, I think it was probably sealed until an arrest, so I probably shouldn't have posted it. I assumed at the time it was a computer problem.

As to the dates, I can think of a few possibilities for the delay

In 2010, they did not think it was worth charging him and they could not get a conviction.
Or possibly, the wife added info during her depo


Sorry I don't have a screenshot.

 

[Patty G]

Not necessarily. If he was caught by the police in 2010 the SA's office has until the statute of limitations runs in which to file their charges. The case number is dated the day they file a criminal "information" document. For this case it looks like they had 5 years for the felony and 2 years for the misdemeanors. Here is where I got the statute of limitations information:

http://law.findlaw.com/state-laws/criminal-statute-of-limitations/florida/

I am not sure why the Information document showed up and then disappeared unless they sealed it immediately after filing it. Maybe the Clerk's office posted it and then realized they weren't supposed to and then they pulled it. I hunted for the case number too and it isn't there although there are some numbers before and after it present. The numbers should be consecutive. I think if this is in fact Dale Sr, OPD is trying to put some pressure on him because they think he knows something about Michelle.

I understand the limitations etc., but normally when someone is arrested and a file is set up within LE, a number is assigned usually starting with the year of the offense. Not sure what happens when it gets to court.

 

[nobodynoz]

Sorry, but I have been away from the computer since my first post.

I know this won't help much, but here is all that I know.

I went to the OCC website to check about custody,
I saw the case I posted, and clicked the link
After I read the docket, I copied the info.
Unfortunately, no link or screenshot.
Went yo the WS page to see how to make the post,
I decided to try to do a link, so I went back to the OCC site and it was gone.
I would seriously think I had lost my marbles except that I had copied the info.

Thinking back over it and everyone's comments, I think it was probably sealed until an arrest, so I probably shouldn't have posted it. I assumed at the time it was a computer problem.

As to the dates, I can think of a few possibilities for the delay

In 2010, they did not think it was worth charging him and they could not get a conviction.
Or possibly, the wife added info during her depo


Sorry I don't have a screenshot.

I'm glad you returned, Eefive!

 

[stilettos]

Okay these are NOT drug charges but I did find the orginal judgement against Dale Wayne Smith (Sr) on the OC Comptroller Site.

http://or.occompt.com/recorder/eagleweb/downloads/2545367.pdf?id=DOCC2545367.A0&parent=DOCC2545367

Any idea why these charges that Sr spent 60 days in jail for were not recorded on the Orange County Clerks site??? Anyone?

IDK but I don't like it! You can bet if I had done 60 days in jail for any crome it would be found in the county clerks site. No wonder these people feel entitled their crimes don't carry the same weight as the rest of the world. :furious: MOO

 

[Omachka]

**Search Menu**Refine Search*Back*
Location : Orange County
Register of ActionsCase No. 2011-CF-016494-A-O
STATE OF FLORIDA - VS - SMITH, DALE WAYNE §
§
§
§
§
§
§
Case Type: Criminal Felony
Date Filed: 12/08/2011
Location: Div 22
Judicial Officer: Arnold, C Jeffery
Uniform Case Number: 482011CF016494000AOX
Party Information
Lead Attorneys
Defendant
SMITH, DALE WAYNE

DOB: 11/24/1947
*
Plaintiff
STATE OF FLORIDA
Charge Information
Charges: SMITH, DALE WAYNE
Statute
Level
Date
1. * SELL/MANUFACTURE/DELIVER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE 893.13(1)(A)(2) Third Degree - Felony 06/17/2010
2. * POSSESSION OF CANNABIS <20 GRAMS 893.13(6)(B) First Degree - Misd 06/17/2010
3. * POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 893.147(1) First Degree - Misd 06/17/2010
Events & Orders of the Court
* * * OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
12/08/2011 * * Information Filed
12/08/2011 * * Order Finding Probable Cause

BBM. Is it possible it's just a clerical task -- such as filing? LE could've looked up any past criminal history, saw the drug charges from 1 1/2 years ago and used that as some kind of leverage during yesterday's questioning. I'm kind of assuming any time paperwork's involved, LE has to state why they're looking up old records. The "Other Events" dated today look like they had probable cause to search, then the info was filed after it was looked at.

All speculation on my part.

Good job if you found that again! :rocker: On your bold... "Information Filed" is the Court's charging document which contains the charges and dates, etc. This is the first document filed in any court case and the date of that Information is, IIRC, when the speedy trial rule begins.

IMHO, "Order Finding Probable Cause" is an order of the court giving probable cause for an arrest warrant to be issued. It's possible he was not arrested for these charges prior for whatever reason and will be arrested now (maybe they found more evidence or something). That would explain the 2011 case number too.

I think we have to wait and see but if this is all true, the poo is about to fly into the fan.

 

[momtective]

My heart hurts! https://twitter.com/#!/orlandosentinel/status/144859492683743233/photo/1

http://twitpic.com/7qgxv1

 

[Omachka]

I'm just supposin' here. Can't explain the entry suddenly disappearing but let's say it was indeed there.

Remember, I'm just supposin' here:

Supposin' when this case started or at some point, another LE goes to the LE handling this case and says something like, "You know, his Dad (DSSR) was involved in another case I was working, but we were only interested in some one else and decided not to move on him." So they go back and review what all they had from the previous case in 2010 and decide there is enough (probable cause) to go forward with charges now, and do so, maybe to gain some leverage with DSSR.

The case would then have a 12/08/2011 date and sequential case number.

I think you are on to something. Hoping this leverage will work so this poor family can have some closure. Michelle's mom just broke my heart today when she realized what finding the phone probably meant.

 

[Angelonline]

IDK but I don't like it! You can bet if I had done 60 days in jail for any crome it would be found in the county clerks site. No wonder these people feel entitled their crimes don't carry the same weight as the rest of the world. :furious: MOO

I know me either and there appear to be other things that they get away with as well. Maybe its just me, but the fact that DS Jrs name was no where to be found in articles concerning the guy who died even though DS Jr was an adult at the time, the fact that MP had a restraining order against him denied by a judge, the fact that most recently a judge went against the opinion of a GAL (which is very rare IMO) and decided to give kids back to Jr, that the 2nd wifes death was ruled as it was...... just several things that make me go hmmmm Is his family connected in some way to someone??? If so that might be why Jr was so bold as to get rid of Michelle on the date he did, he simply thought he would get away with it that someone would look the other way.

MOO

 

[Mosby]

Good job if you found that again! :rocker: On your bold... "Information Filed" is the Court's charging document which contains the charges and dates, etc. This is the first document filed in any court case and the date of that Information is, IIRC, when the speedy trial rule begins.

IMHO, "Order Finding Probable Cause" is an order of the court giving probable cause for an arrest warrant to be issued. It's possible he was not arrested for these charges prior for whatever reason and will be arrested now (maybe they found more evidence or something). That would explain the 2011 case number too.

I think we have to wait and see but if this is all true, the poo is about to fly into the fan.

ITA. Question: Would it be common practice if an arrest warrant is being issued to seal this info from the public until a warrant is issued and executed?

 

[Omachka]

I understand the limitations etc., but normally when someone is arrested and a file is set up within LE, a number is assigned usually starting with the year of the offense. Not sure what happens when it gets to court.

I'm thinking he wasn't arrested in 2010 but that he was being investigated. Something (enough to tip his old case) may have come to light during the investigation into Michelle's disappearance. That's the only thing I can think of that would have the Information being filed today.

 

[Bravo]

My heart hurts! https://twitter.com/#!/orlandosentinel/status/144859492683743233/photo/1

http://twitpic.com/7qgxv1

Oh my. A picture really does say a thousand words. So very sad.

 

[Coldpizza]

finnperkins finn perkins
@
@bobkealing @SyanRhodesWESH #missingmom #Michelleparker the data is on a sealed flash drive unlk old iphon. The data is retrievable
24 minutes ago

http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=#Michelleparker

bbm

 

[Tammy N]

Could be in such a high profile case. Could have been input into the system and eefive just happened to snap it up before they locked it out from public view? could happen. Thing is, shows he was CHARGED with felony drug possess in 2010. I would think there would be record of that somewhere. But, that said, just because he was charged, doesn't mean he was prosecuted on it, so now on further thinking, it's very possible that, after speaking with him yesterday, they feel they need to push harder on him, thus the filing of the previous charges - they've filed a warrant on him (or perhaps his home?). I don't know... but can't wait to find out... I so hope they find her soon.

 

[Omachka]

ITA. Question: Would it be common practice if an arrest warrant is being issued to seal this info from the public until a warrant is issued and executed?

Sorry, Mosby, I don't know for sure. I'm thinking that maybe that showed up briefly by accident though.

 

[Mosby]

Could be in such a high profile case. Could have been input into the system and eefive just happened to snap it up before they locked it out from public view? could happen. Thing is, shows he was CHARGED with felony drug possess in 2010. I would think there would be record of that somewhere. But, that said, just because he was charged, doesn't mean he was prosecuted on it, so now on further thinking, it's very possible that, after speaking with him yesterday, they feel they need to push harder on him, thus the filing of the previous charges - they've filed a warrant on him (or perhaps his home?). I don't know... but can't wait to find out... I so hope they find her soon.

See I'm reading it differently. I think the 6/17/2010 is the date of the OFFENSE, but he is just being charged today.

 

[Omachka]

Sorry, but I have been away from the computer since my first post.

I know this won't help much, but here is all that I know.

I went to the OCC website to check about custody,
I saw the case I posted, and clicked the link
After I read the docket, I copied the info.
Unfortunately, no link or screenshot.
Went yo the WS page to see how to make the post,
I decided to try to do a link, so I went back to the OCC site and it was gone.
I would seriously think I had lost my marbles except that I had copied the info.

Thinking back over it and everyone's comments, I think it was probably sealed until an arrest, so I probably shouldn't have posted it. I assumed at the time it was a computer problem.

As to the dates, I can think of a few possibilities for the delay

In 2010, they did not think it was worth charging him and they could not get a conviction.
Or possibly, the wife added info during her depo


Sorry I don't have a screenshot.

No apologies necessary! You did a GREAT job finding that. Sorry I didn't say so before but

:welcome4:

 

[Patty G]

FWIW, I have a couple of reporters that follow me, so I selected one and sent the info from the OC website and ask them to look into it.

 

[TexasLil]

See I'm reading it differently. I think the 6/17/2010 is the date of the OFFENSE, but he is just being charged today.

I agree with your thoughts!

I was also thinking perhaps he gave up the goods on a larger fish in the pond so LE took it lightly on him at the time but have now decided it's time for him to pay the piper.

All IMO.

 

[beach]

Not necessarily. If he was caught by the police in 2010 the SA's office has until the statute of limitations runs in which to file their charges. The case number is dated the day they file a criminal "information" document. For this case it looks like they had 5 years for the felony and 2 years for the misdemeanors. Here is where I got the statute of limitations information:

http://law.findlaw.com/state-laws/criminal-statute-of-limitations/florida/

I am not sure why the Information document showed up and then disappeared unless they sealed it immediately after filing it. Maybe the Clerk's office posted it and then realized they weren't supposed to and then they pulled it. I hunted for the case number too and it isn't there although there are some numbers before and after it present. The numbers should be consecutive. I think if this is in fact Dale Sr, OPD is trying to put some pressure on him because they think he knows something about Michelle.

BBM

This is my best guess too.

finnperkins finn perkins
@
@bobkealing @SyanRhodesWESH #missingmom #Michelleparker the data is on a sealed flash drive unlk old iphon. The data is retrievable
24 minutes ago

http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=#Michelleparker

bbm

:woot:

 

[4BB]

The 2010 charges could have been expunged. (X) Therefore there will be no record of arrest left at all. However, the department will have a record of charges by officer. I think they opened up the charges to add to the new (2011) case number and get another warrant for probable cause.

I've had a charge expunged and it was actually fairly easy. Took about a month and you cant find a single thing anywhere about it.

Or he was offered a clean slate for turning over on his supplier at that time so they wiped it clean. I believe there is a new case number referencing these charges and that's what we caught a glimpse of.