Email from Tony Fantetti to Darke County Ohio Child Support Agency’s Director Gracie Ratliff and Administrator Joel Schinke

From: Tony Fantetti [mailto:tony.fantetti(at)ocffr(dot)org]
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 12:17 PM
To: g ratliff; JOEL SCHINKE
Cc: Kim Newsom Bridges; Amy Alkon; Stephen Baskerville; Mallory, Mark ; Wendy McElroy; Bill Oreilly; Robert Pedersen; Angela Pedersen R.N.; Portune, Todd; Rachel Hutzel; Glenn Sacks; Minister Ronald E. Smith;; Assignment Desk Fox News 19 Assignment Desk Fox News 19; James Beaty; Lauren Bercarich; bob; Jack Brubaker;; DeWine, Pat; Brennan Donnellan; Jessica Donnellon; Brian Duerring; Richard dyer; Todd Dykes; Eric Flack; FOX NEWS Channel 19 FOX NEWS Channel 19;; Courtis Fuller; Michelle George; Clyde Gray; Brian Hamrick; Jonathan Hawgood; Lary Holland; Laura Hornsby; Angela Ingram;;;;; Karin Johnson; Brendan Keefe; Eileen Kelley; Hagit Lamor; Shaun Ley; John London; Jim Long;; Eric Mansfield; Peter Mekeel; Matt Miller; Michael Moely; Bob Morford; Jay Murdock; Lauren Pack; Sheree Paolello; Bill Price; Laure Quinlivan; editor; Ernest Schreiber; Sharon Coolidge; tom; WHIO TV TV; vindy news; Dave Wagner; Amy Wagner; Jay Warren;;;;
Subject: The Darke County Child Support Enforcement Agency Continues to Persecute an Innocent Father

Ms. Ratliff and Mr. Schinke,

As has been the case since I originally contacted you on behalf of Mr. David Rose more than one month ago, you continue to disregard our repeated requests for answers.

Mr. Schinke, the smirks between yourself and Darke County Judge Jonathan Hine that I personally witnessed at Mr. Roses’ sentencing trial lend credibility to Mr. Roses’ allegations of continuous bias and “railroading” at the hands of the Darke County Child Support Enforcement Agency (CSEA). By foregoing Mr. Roses’ sixth request for an Administrative hearing, both of you continue to deprive Mr. Rose of his constitutional right to due process.

Again I respectfully request answers to the following questions:

1. A State level competent tribunal from the Ohio Bureau of Unemployment held
a hearing regarding Mr. Roses’ loss of employment and determined through a
legally binding decision that his involuntary unemployment was through
no fault of his own. Given that Mr. Rose did not contribute to the
cause of his involuntary unemployment the Ohio Bureau of Unemployment
Compensation ruled that Mr. Rose was entitled to unemployment
compensation. However, Caseworker Mallot by the mere power of her
ink pen overruled a State Tribunal’s decision and asserted that Mr. Rose was
responsible for the loss of his job. By whose authority does Caseworker Mallot
overrule a State Tribunal’s legally binding decision?

2. Why is it that more than six thousand dollars of support payments made
by Mr. Rose were never recorded by your office?

3. Why does Mr. Rose’s indictment period include weeks whereby he was fully
employed and paying his child support through automatic payroll deductions?

4. Why is another innocent Ohio Father spending 24 hours a day in lockdown at
the Orient Correctional facility if he is in fact innocent of the charges your
agency brought against him?

5. Mr. Schinke, by whose authority was it determined that Mr. Rose should be
deprived of an Administrative Hearing, when it was requested that he be found
guilty in a court of law through a judicial proceeding instead?

6. Mr. Schinke, when the decision was made (under the authority of your
position) to forgo Mr. Rose’s Administrative Hearing and instead move
for a direct guilty verdict in a Judicial Proceeding, was this done in a deceptive
attempt to shield you from civil liability? After all, if your office is truly
interested in justice for Mr. Rose and not conspiring in a cover up, then why
wouldn’t you move for a Judicial Proceeding to uncover the truth versus a
finding of guilty?

7. Mr. Schinke, do you desire a guilty verdict against Mr. Rose in court only
only because a not-guilty finding would prove another innocent Father has
been incarcerated at the destructive hands of your agency?

8. Ms. Ratliff and Mr. Schinke, I carry a picture of Mr. Rose’s five year old son
(Dustin) in my wallet and have attached it to this email for all to see. Please
look at that innocent child’s picture and tell me how it is in his best interest
that due to the malicious actions of the agency under your direction, Dustin
Rose’s Father is serving six months incarceration and Mr. Rose was ordered
by the Darke County Court not to have contact with Dustin for 15 months.
How is that in Dustin’s best interest that the actions of your agency are directly
responsible for keeping that innocent child away from the Father he so dearly

9.Ms. Ratliff and Mr. Schinke, given Ohio ‘s current child support statutes, your
agency can re-indict Mr. Rose while he sits in a prison cell in 24 hour lock
down. Since Mr. Rose is unable to pay his child support while he is
incarcerated, he will have 24 missed payments during his incarceration. We
know that you can choose to use 2 weeks from his previous false indictment
period to obtain 26 weeks of non-support to secure a second Felony Criminal
Non-support indictment against Mr. Rose during his lockup. Only on his
second felony non-support indictment he faces up to five years in prison and
perpetual incarceration for “voluntary” non-payment of support while he serves
time as an innocent man. That said, is it your intent to re-indict Mr. Rose on a
second felony charge of criminal non-support for “refusing” to pay his child
support while he is incarcerated?

10.Ms. Ratliff, Mr. Rose informed me yesterday that you have completed the
paperwork to seize 65% of his prison pay during his incarceration.
Considering prisoners wages are meager and their net weekly income may
be less than twenty dollars, how is Mr. Rose to purchase toiletries and other
general hygiene products at the prison commissary to bathe himself?

11. Ms. Ratliff and Mr.Schinke, is it your intent to re-indict Mr. Rose while he is
incarcerated for not paying his child support during his incarceration?

12. Ms. Ratliff and Mr. Schinke, do you intend to adjust the $36,000 of annual
income that your agency imputed against Mr. Rose while he is
incarcerated and earning prison wages, despite the fact that he
has never earned $36,000 annually at any point in his life?

13. In order to re-indict Mr. Rose on a Felony Class 3 Criminal non-support
charge, you are required to prove that Mr. Rose was voluntarily
underemployed and chose not to pay his child support during his six
months of incarceration. That said, will caseworker Mallot through the mere
power of her ink pen impute Mr. Rose’s income at $36,000 annually and “rule”
that his unemployment during his incarceration was caused by his own

14. How is it that Mr. Rose caused the loss of his most recent job that he worked
while living out of a one room hotel while he was under indictment considering
he still maintains his innocence?

15. How many other innocent Obligors besides Mr. Rose under the Darke County
CSEA’s jurisdiction has your agency caused to be wrongly incarcerated?

16. Ms. Ratliff, are you willing to share the findings of your investigations
into Mr. Rose’s perjury allegations (whereby he was innocently convicted)
with the media? Would you be willing to turn the Darke County Prosecutor’s
findings regarding the allegations of perjury over to the media? I would
certainly hope so, considering that if Mr. Rose is telling the truth when he
ascertains that his recorded phone conversation with caseworker Mallot
proves his innocence then shouldn’t the office under your direction be
diligently working to release an innocent Father from prison so that he can be
reunited with another child who has been deprived of their Father?

17. Is the separation of Dustin Rose from his Father David Rose how the Darke
County Child Support Agency defines the, “best interests of the children?

Ms. Ratliff, your phone conversations with Mr. Rose were recorded in their entirety. Your claims of forwarding Mr. Roses’ allegations of perjury by Caseworker Mallot as well as his entire case file to the Darke County prosecutor are less than believable. If you did as you claimed, why did the Darke County Prosecutors office deny your assertions? How is it that Mr. Roses’ tape recorded conversation between himself and Caseworker Mallot whereby Mr. Rose alleges he can prove perjury were never reviewed by the Darke County CSEA or the Darke County Prosecutor’s office or you as the Director of the Darke County Child Support Enforcement Agency?

Please explain to me that given the seriousness of Mr. Roses allegations, and given that no one within the Darke County CSEA or the Darke County ’s prosecutor’s office investigated any of Mr. Roses’ allegations, but instead Mr. Schinke insinuated that Mr. Rose was a liar and Ms. Ratliff insinuated that he was a “deadbeat”, why all of you refuse to recuse yourselves from Mr. Roses’ case? Considering the bias against him that I myself have witnessed, it is more than apparent that it’s inherently impossible for him to receive any equitable and just treatment by anyone within the Darke County Child Support Enforcement Agency.

In light of the aforementioned, you leave no other recourse for Ohio Council for Fathers Rights except to assist other Darke County obligors under your agency’s jurisdiction in seeking redress through numerous albeit separate civil actions in the state and federal courts naming the same defendants as did Mr. Rose in his civil suit that was filed in the Darke County Clerk of Court’s office on March 24, 2008.

Please visit our blogs at and and explain to our international audience how the Darke County Ohio Child Support Enforcement Agency acted in the best interest of Mr. Rose’s son five year old Dustin.

Respectfully Submitted,

Tony Fantetti
Ohio Council for Fathers Rights

This entry was posted in Child Support, Darke County Child Support Enforcement Agency (CSEA), Ohio Child Support Enforcement Agency (CSEA), Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.