HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-05-03 - City Commission Special Meeting Minutes7525 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321.2401
TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900
March 31, 1989
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETINGS
CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING
There will be Special Meetings of the City Council held
on Tuesday, May 2 and Wednesday, May 3, 1989 from 9:00 a.m.
to 12:00 noon, in Conference Room #1 (Room 103), City Clerk's
Office, City Hall, 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida
33321.
The purpose of this meeting is to continue a public
hearing requested by John F. Montalvo, Jr., pursuant to
Section 52.02 of the City of Tamarac Personnel Manual to
. appeal a personnel decision of the City Manager relating to
the employment of John F. Montalvo, Jr.
Additional public hearings may be called if necessary.
All meetings are open to the public.
CAE/nr
06
Patricia Marcurio
Acting City Clerk
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city
Coornl with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or
iio:; ring, he vv;ll noccl a record of the proceedings and for such
y,.'rp, -,r.,, I,_a may ne,,d tc ensure that a verbatim record includes.
u;t •:%i?"ii 3iy and cviiWnce upon which the appeal is to be '
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS
7525 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE 0 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321-2401
TELEPHONE (305) 722.5900
May 1, 1989
NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Special Meeting of the City Council scheduled to be
held on Tuesday, May 2, 1989 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, in
Conference Room #1 (Room 103), City Clerk's Office, City
Hall, 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida 33321 has been
CANCELLED. The meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May 3�, 1989
from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon in Conference Room #1 (Room 103)
City Clerk's Office is still scheduled.
The purpose of this meeting is to continue a public
hearing requested by John F. Montalvo, Jr., pursuant to
Section 52.02 of the City of Tamarac Personnel Manual to
appeal a personnel decision of the City Manager relating to
the employment of John F. Montalvo, Jr.
Additional public hearings may be called if necessary.
All meetings are open to the public.
PurgWrrt toSection 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city
Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or
hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings and for such
Purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes
the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based
CAE/nr
i7-
Carol A. Evans
City Clerk
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS
CITY OF TAP,J� SAC
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 1989
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Abramowitz called this meeting to Order on
Wednesday, May 3, 1989 at 9:13 A.M. in Conference Room #1 (City Clerk's
Office) .
PRRSRNT
ABSENT AND EXCUSED:
ALSO PRESENT!
Mayor Norman Abramowitz
Vice Mayor Dr. H. Larry Bender
Councilman Bruce Hoffman
Councilman Jack Stelzer
Councilman Henry Rohr
John P. Kelly, City Manager
Richard Doody, City Attorney
Alan Ruf, Consulting Attorney
Pauline Walaszek, Special Services
Secretary
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING requested by John F. Montalvo, Jr.,
Pursuant to Section 52.02 of the City of Tamarac's Personnel
Manual to appeal a personnel decision of the City Manager
relating to the employment of John F. Montalvo, Jr.
Mayor Abramowitz announced that the City rested its Case
at the March 6, 1989 Hearing and the Petitioner was now
going to present his Case.
Charles Whitelock, Attorney for John F. Montalvo, Jr.,
called Elena Logan as a Witness.
Pauline Walaszek, Secretary, swore Elena Logan in as a
Witness.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to state her son's
birth date.
Ms. Logan replied, August 14, 1980.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she gave several
statements regarding this Case.
Ms. Logan said through the direction of the Personnel
Director and City Manager, she did.
Attorney Whitelock asked if there was a statement given
by her on January 25, 1988 as directed by Larry Perretti,
previous Personnel Director.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the statement was one page.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 1
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she gave another
statement of 4 pages which was hand written and undated
as directed by John Kelly, City Manager.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if there was a statement filed
with Barbara Chovan, Detective of the Tamarac Police
Department, dated January 8, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she was not sure of the date; however, she
did a file statement.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan filed a tape
statement on February 2, 1988.
Ms. Logan said the only tape statement made was when she
spoke with Detective Chovan.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan spoke with
Detective Chovan on January 8, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she did not know the date.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan went to Detective
Chovan to confide in her regarding some problems Ms.
Logan was having in early January, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she went to Detective Chovan for guidance.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she confronted Mr.
Kelly and Mr. Perretti after the meeting with Detective
Chovan and then met with Detective Chovan again.
Ms. Logan replied that this was incorrect.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she confronted
Detective Chovan before she confronted Mr. Ferretti.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how long she has been
employed with the City.
Ms. Logan replied, almost 2--1/2 years.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she met John
Montalvo in December, 1986.
Ms. Logan said she met Mr. Montalvo in November, 1986.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she first had
contact with Mr. Montalvo as a non -employee relationship.
Ms. Logan said she believed this was sometime in
February, 1987, for a concert.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was early February,
1987.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had contact
with Mr. Montalvo from November, 1986, to February, 1987.
Ms. Logan replied, only at work.
Page 2
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she conversed with
Mr. Montalvo during the time of November, 1986, through
February, 1987, on matters other than work.
Ms. Logan replied, sure, they had become friends.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms.
Logan if
she recalled the
conversations between November, 1986,
through February,
1987.
Ms. Logan said this question
was very
broad. She said in
becoming friends she and Mr.
Montalvo
had several
discussions regarding social
activities.
Attorney Whitelock asked when the first discussion
occurred.
Ms. Logan said this was a difficult question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled what
prompted the discussion.
Ms. Logan said not really. She said it was just as
anyone that she would meet and work with. She said she
did not know what would prompt her to talk with anybody
other than having a working relationship.
Attorney Whitelock said he did not want to be suggestive;
however, he asked Ms. Logan if there was conversation
about dating from November, 1986, through February, 1987.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo asked her out to a boat show.
Attorney Whitelock asked when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said she believed this occurred in November.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was November, 1986.
Ms. Logan said she was not positive; however, she
believed this was the first time.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the boat show was in
December, 1986.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock asked where the boat show was held.
Ms. Logan said she did not know if it was Fort Lauderdale
or Miami.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went with Mr. Montalvo
to the boat show.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked what prompted the conversation
regarding going to the boat show.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo prompted the conversation.
She said Mr. Montalvo liked to take pictures and was
excited about the boat show. She said he thought it
would be a fun thing to do.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to a
concert in early February, 1987.
Page 3
5/3/89
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to the
Mets game two weeks following the concert.
Ms. Logan said it was not two weeks; however, they went
to a Mets game approximately 4 weeks after the concert.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any other
outside social activities with Mr. Montalvo besides the
two mentioned between November, 1986, to early February,
1987.
Ms. Logan said she only recalled the two activities
mentioned.
Attorney Whitelock asked how the date for the concert was
established.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo invited her to the concert.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever called Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not say this. She said it was
possible because Mr. Montalvo may have given her his
telephone number and they may have talked on the
telephone.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever went to
lunch or dinner with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied that they may have gone to lunch in
that time frame; however, she was not sure.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever called Mr.
Montalvo and asked him to go to lunch.
Ms. Logan said she dial not recall doing it; however, it
was possible.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever called and
asked Mr. Montalvo to go to dinner.
Ms. Logan said no, not in that time frame.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she made an effort
to call Mr. Montalvo and seek his social companionship
during November, 1986, through February, 1987.
Ms. Logan said that this was a two way street. She said
Mr. Montalvo came to visit her on numerous occasions in
order to develop a friendship.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to respond to his
question.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to give Ms.
Logan an opportunity.
Attorney Whitelock asked Mayor Abramowitz to direct Ms.
Logan to respond to his question.
Mayor Abramowitz said he would; however, Ms. Logan should
be given an opportunity in her way to respond because Ms.
Logan was not an attorney. He again asked Attorney
Whitelock to give Ms. Logan an opportunity.
Page 4
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked what opportunity he was to give
Ms. Logan.
Mayor Abramowitz replied, to answer your question.
Attorney Whitelock said he was here to ask the questions
and he only wanted a response from Ms. Logan.
Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Whitelock should give Ms.
Logan the opportunity to answer the questions other than
what he would like to hear.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to answer the question
without a speech. He asked Ms. Logan if she contacted
Mr. Montalvo by telephone and asked him to go out with
her between November, 1986, and February, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall; however, she was sure
that they did speak on the telephone. She said she did
not recall asking Mr. Montalvo to go out during that
time; however, Mr. Montalvo asked her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if her answer was that
she did not recall or she did recall telephoning Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she was sure she called Mr. Montalvo and
spoke with him on the telephone.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo called Ms. Logan
to go out between the same time frame.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo asked her to go out to the
Mets game, concert, boat parade and New Years Eve party.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when Mr. Montalvo
asked her to go to the Freddy Jackson Concert.
Ms. Logan guessed that to be in February.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled how
this came about.
Ms. Logan replied, not really.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this took place at work, home
or the boat show.
Ms. Logan said she did not remember where it took place.
Attorney Whitelock asked how the arrangements were made
to go to the Mets game.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall where or when Mr.
Montalvo asked her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was sure that
Mr. Montalvo asked her.
Ms. Logan said sure, Mr. Montalvo stated that his friends
and parents would be there which would be something fun.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever went to
lunch with Mr. Montalvo during the time frame of
November, 1986, through February, 1987.
Page 5
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said it was possible; however, she did not
recall.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was correct that Ms. Logan
went to lunch with Mr. Montalvo on several occasions.
Ms. Logan said after that time frame she went to lunch
with Mr. Montalvo; however, during that time frame she
did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that Ms. Logan went
to the Freddy Jackson Concert and the Mets game in February.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had no more
contact with Mr. Montalvo until June.
Ms. Logan said she and Mr. Montalvo went to Chevy's
Restaurant and Lounge which may have been the end of May.
She said she was not sure of exactly when.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any contact
with Mr. Montalvo between the Mets game and the Chevy's
date.
Ms. Logan said at work, not socially.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any further
social contact.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall any, no.
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo did not call her or
she did not call Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not say this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she called Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said it was possible. She said she was sure
that they did speak on the telephone several times.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how many times she
called Mr. Montalvo between the Mets game and the Chevy's
date.
Ms. Logan said she did not know, maybe a couple of times.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what the purpose of
her calls were.
Ms. Logan replied, friendly nature.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what the substance of
the conversation was.
Ms. Logan said she did not know. She said when you call
anyone, you call to say what was going on during the day
or at work.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who called first.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo ever showed any
disinterest in her.
Page 6
5/3/89
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo ever indicated
that he was busy and could not go out with her.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever called Mr.
Montalvo to go out with her and Mr. Montalvo indicated
that he was busy and could not go to lunch or dinner.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she started dating
Mr. Montalvo in June.
Ms. Logan said she thought that it was at the end of May.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she stopped
dating Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, June or July. She said by the
beginning of August, she was letting him know that she
wanted the relationship to end.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any
relationships with anyone else during this time.
Ms. Logan said during the time she was with Mr. Montalvo,
no.
Attorney Ruf objected as to relevancy of whether Ms.
Logan had a relationship with anyone else during this
time. He said he did not see how this was relevant to
the charge which was pending against Mr. Montalvo. He
said it was only relevant as to what Ms. Logan's
relationship was with Mr. Montalvo.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Ruf suggested that Mayor Abramowitz hear
Attorney Whitelock's explanation.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this meant that Ms. Logan's
character or credibility was not a issue in this case.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if Attorney Whitelock was saying
that the fact Ms. Logan had another relationship she was
not creditable.
Attorney Whitelock said quite possibly and he believed he
would be able to show this.
After discussing the matter with City Attorney Doody,
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to explain what
direction was he going. He said he failed to see the
relevancy. He said if Attorney Whitelock was going in a
direction that was important, he would allow the
question.
Attorney Whitelock said when someone claims to have a
relationship with somebody while having a relationship
with another .... He said he would have to disclose his
defense before the case was started. He said if the
Witness was having a relationship with more individuals,
she could not have been having a relationship with Mr.
Montalvo. He said the question of Ms. Logan's time,
Page 7
5/3/89
account of what took place and her credibility had to be
assessed by the City Council, which could not be done
unless all of the facts were evident. He said by
sustaining the question without giving him the
opportunity to present...
Mayor Abramowitz said he would allow the question;
however, if it went in a direction that was not relevant,
he would stop the questioning.
Attorney Whitelock said this was fair.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Ms. Logan to answer the question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a
relationship with anyone else between December, 1986,
through August, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she had a relationship from December,
1986, until May, 1987 with someone else and then began to
see Mr. Montalvo after that relationship was over.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was dating
someone during this time frame.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question because Attorney
Whitelock stated during this time. He said Ms. Logan
just indicated that the time was from December to May.
He said the time frame should be stated.
Attorney Whitelock said if Attorney Ruf wanted to coach
the Witness or testify, he could; however, this was an
improper objection because Attorney Ruf was not able to
testify. He said it was not important if Attorney Ruf
did not understand the question; however, it was
important if the Witness did not understand the question
and Ms. Logan did not indicate that she did not
understand.
Mayor Abramowitz said he sat through approximately 3
meetings on this case and he learned more each time. He
asked Attorney Whitelock to explain the type of
relationship he was referring to because he had a
relationship with several people which did not mean that
he cheated on his wife. He said the terminology
"relationship" was very confusing.
Attorney Whitelock said he did not use the term
"relationship". He said he asked Ms. Logan if she was
dating someone else during this time frame.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection and he asked
Attorney Whitelock to mention the time frame specifically
so that the Witness could answer the question correctly.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she understood the
time frame being referred to.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to inform her of the
time frame.
Attorney Whitelock said December, 1986, through August,
1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was dating
someone other than Mr. Montalvo during this time frame.
Ms. Logan said through to May.
Page 8
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was dating
someone other than Mr. Montalvo during this time frame.
Ms. Logan said through to May, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she technically
broke up with Mr. Montalvo during this time frame, in
August.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was dating
anyone else from August, 1987 until the complaint against
Mr. Montalvo was filed.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who she was dating.
Ms. Logan said a couple of people.
Attorney Whitelock asked who.
Ms. Logan replied, Joe Gavita and David Santucci.
Mayor Abramowitz said the fact that the Witness was
dating other people...
Attorney Whitelock asked Mayor Abramowitz if he was
making a gesture on behalf of the City.
Mayor Abramowitz said he wanted to ask a question.
Attorney Whitelock objected to Mayor Abramowitz making
statements on behalf of the City.
Attorney Ruf said he made an objection and Mayor
Abramowitz overrode his objection and allowed Attorney
Whitelock to proceed as long as the proceeding was
relevant.
Mayor Abramowitz said he stopped the proceeding now.
Mayor Abramowitz asked the Attorneys to allow him to
confer with City Attorney Doody before proceeding.
Attorney Whitelock objected to the whispering because it
was a public meeting and any conversation between the
Board members and the City Attorney must be public. He
said the record should reflect that Mayor Abramowitz was
presently having a private conversation with the City
Attorney in discussing the matters of this case.
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not quite understand.
Attorney Whitelock said it was too late because Mayor
Abramowitz did not state this. He said the conversation
already took place and Mayor Abramowitz made a decision.
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not understand the relevancy
of who the Witness dated for this case. He said he may
be incorrect; however, this was his feeling. He said he
indicated that he would allow the questioning providing
it was relevant; however, he did not see the questioning
relevant to the case before the City Council. He said
Page 9
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock specified a time frame and then asked
the Witness who she dated. He said the Witness did not
have to answer the question and he asked Attorney
Whitelock to continue.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to state who she was
dating during the time frame.
Ms. Logan said she did.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was dating
those individuals she named and no one else.
C/M Hoffman said Attorney Whitelock was pursuing the same
line of questioning.
Attorney Whitelock said he had to have the response in
the record in case of an Appeal so that the Court could
make a determination as to whether or not the questioning
was relevant. He said the Witness already admitted
making five different statements and she already
testified in direct examination on behalf of the City.
He said he was entitled to lay a foundation or predicate
to use those statements as impeachment. He said he felt
that the Courts would sustain this on Appeal.
Mayor Abramowitz said the City Council, as ridiculous as
it was, was sitting as Judge and Jury and, when he made a
determination against or for the Attorneys, he would
appreciate it if the Attorneys would abide by the
decision.
Attorney Ruf said Attorney Whitelock asked the question,
"So during that time you were dating those individuals
you named". He said Ms. Logan's testimony was she dated
those individuals after August. He said Attorney
Whitelock asked Ms. Logan the question again in which Ms.
Logan answered, yes; however, she did not understand the
question because she previously testified that she dated
the individuals after August, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock said this was not the time frame he
was referring to. He said Attorney Ruf was obviously
confused as to the dates and times because he kept
referring to the matter as being in 1988. He said this
matter did not occur in 1988.
Attorney Ruf said, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock said Attorney Ruf was confused to the
time frame and not the Witness.
Attorney Ruf said Attorney Whitelock's questioning was
confusing and Attorney Whitelock was a master in
confusing the Witness.
Attorney Whitelock suggested that Attorney Ruf kept his
comments to himself; however, if Attorney Ruf was
confused to the time frame it was not the Witness's
problem. He asked Mayor Abramowitz to not allow Attorney
Ruf to make evidentiary coaching for the Witness.
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not see it this way. He
said Attorney Ruf seemed to be clarifying a point and,
since Attorney Whitelock was interested in fairness and
the record being precise, the record should be correct.
Page 10
5/3/89
V/M Bender asked that the question be restated so that he
could understand the matter.
Attorney Whitelock said the time frame was from August,
1987, when Ms. Logan informed Mr. Montalvo that she did
not want to continue the relationship until the time when
the matter was reported to the City through either
Detective Chovan, City Manager Kelly or Mr. Perretti.
Ms. Logan agreed to this time frame.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she understood the
time frame.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she dated anyone
else in that time frame other than the individuals she
mentioned.
Attorney Ruf objected and he asked what time frame.
Attorney Whitelock said during that time frame.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to specify the
time frame so that he could understand it.
Attorney Whitelock said if Mayor Abramowitz wanted to
conduct the examination, he would not object. He said
Mayor Abramowitz and Attorney Ruf continued to object on
behalf of the Witness when the Witness has not voiced one
time during the questioning that she did not understand.
He said when the Witness did not understand the question,
she asked him to clarify the question.
Mayor Abramowitz said he understood Attorney Whitelock;
however, he would like Attorney Whitelock to understand
him. He said in order to make a determination, he had to
know his facts. He said Attorney Whitelock mentioned a
time frame four times and he asked Attorney Whitelock to
specifically indicate what time frame he was referring
to.
Attorney Whitelock said it was the same time frame
referred to in the last five minutes.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to repeat the
time frame again for the record.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what dates they were
referring to.
Ms. Logan said August through December or January.
C/M Stelzer asked what year.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this occurred in 1987.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan understood the time
frame.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 11
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she dated Mr.
Montalvo again during the time of August, 1987, until the
matter was reported.
Ms. Logan replied, no, she did not date Mr. Montalvo
again.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to the
Bombay Bicycle Club with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said this was a luncheon that Mr. Montalvo
invited her to, to apologize for threatening to fire her.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was in October, 1987.
Ms. Logan said this occurred in December, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew how Mr.
Montalvo paid for the luncheon.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this occurred before of after
Christmas.
Ms. Logan said this occurred before Christmas.
Attorney Whitelock asked why Ms. Logan started dating Mr.
Montalvo in June, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she liked Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she and Mr.
Montalvo went out on a daily basis.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when the first date
occurred.
Ms. Logan said the first date was going to Chevy's.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was late night.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when her next contact
was with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said it may have been a week or so... they went
to dinner.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where they went after
that.
Ms. Logan said she did not know exactly.
Attorney Whitelock said they went to Chevy's...
Ms. Logan said they went to Sassafras. She said this may
have been the same night, she did not know.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when the next date
occurred after Chevy's. He asked if this was in June.
Ms. Logan said she did not know exactly. She said she
was sure it would have been very soon.
Page 12
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when the next date
occurred after Chevy's.
Ms. Logan said she did not remember.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how she broke up with
Mr. Montalvo in August.
Ms. Logan said at first she informed Mr. Montalvo that
she wanted the relationship to slow down because she felt
that Mr. Montalvo was trying to accelerate the
relationship too quickly and strongly.
Attorney Whitelock asked where Ms. Logan informed Mr.
Montalvo of this.
Ms. Logan said she could not remember if it was by
telephone or in person.
Attorney Whitelock asked how Mr. Montalvo reacted to the
breakup.
Ms. Logan said not well.
Attorney Whitelock asked what Mr. Montalvo said, if
anything.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was very upset.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo said
anything else to her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo said many things.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled
anything that Mr. Montalvo said.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo could not understand why she
wanted the relationship to end because he felt that
things were going very well.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled any
other instances of dating Mr. Montalvo from the time
frame of the Chevy's date until the telephone call
regarding the breakup.
Ms. Logan said they dated throughout that time. She said
she did not understand Attorney Whitelock's question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled if
they went anywhere else and how often she saw Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said the relationship started very slowly. She
said they saw each other once or twice a week.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how many weeks this
occurred.
Ms. Logan said probably three or four weeks.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how frequently they
saw each other after this.
Ms. Logan said probably three times a week.
Attorney Whitelock asked how long this occurred.
Page 13
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said probably about four weeks.
Attorney Whitelock asked what the degree of frequency was
after this.
Ms. Logan said this was about it because it was a very
short relationship.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that during this
time, Ms. Logan saw Mr. Montalvo once at Chevy's at least
three times at the most, eight times during the three to
four week period and about 12 other times during the four
week period Ms. Logan described.
Ms. Logan said she never counted.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan described her
relationship with Mr. Montalvo as an intimate
relationship and he asked if this was true.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how intimate the
relationship was.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain his
question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what the degree of
intimacy was in the relationship.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to define intimate.
Attorney Whitelock said he was asking Ms. Logan what she
meant by an intimate relationship.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to please be more
specific. She said she understood intimate to be
intimate, She said she did not understand what Attorney
Whitelock meant. She asked Attorney Whitelock if he was
referring to sexual.
Attorney Whitelock said he did not know. He said he was
asking Ms. Logan because she gave a statement to
Detective Chovan indicating that she had an intimate
relationship with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she understood intimate to be this as well
as other things.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a sexual
relationship with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan in what degree of
frequency.
Ms. Logan said not too frequent.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was one time or on a daily
_
basis.
Page 14
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said not on a daily basis, definitely not.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how many times she and
Mr. Montalvo slept together during the 21 times they saw
each other during this time frame.
Ms. Logan said she did not know.
Attorney Whitelock said it obviously must have been more
than once.
Ms. Logan replied, yes, it was more than one time.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was 21 times.
Ms. Logan said she doubted it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they stayed at each
others place.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they had separate
places.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo owned a
condominium at this time.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was an adult condominium.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was renting an
apartment.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
spent time at her apartment.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan in what degree of
frequency.
Ms. Logan said it did not occur until the third or fourth
week, maybe once. She said it then became more frequent,
maybe another week, twice. She said as the relationship
progressed either she was at Mr. Montalvo's home or he at
hers.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they spent the
weekends together.
Ms. Logan said no, she worked.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to Mr.
Montalvo's home after she got off of work or did he pick
her up.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo never picked her up. She
said only on occasions.
Page 15
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan was right, he may be
incorrect on this matter. He asked Ms. Logan if there
was any other time she would get off of work and go to
Mr. Montalvo's home.
Ms. Logan asked which job.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to inform him.
Ms. Logan said she recalled going to Mr. Montalvo's home
a couple of times.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a key to
Mr. Montalvo's home.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo gave her a key she did not
want.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she gave the key
back to Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she tried to give it back to Mr. Montalvo;
however, he refused to take it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo forced
the key on her.
Ms. Logan said she did not say Mr. Montalvo forced it on
her. She said Mr. Montalvo refused to take the key back.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever left the
key in his apartment when she left.
Ms. Logan said she did not bother with it. She said she
left it go because it was no big deal to her. She said
she did not want the key.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was saying it
was no big deal or that Mr. Montalvo forced it upon her.
Ms. Logan said she did not say that Mr. Montalvo forced
the key on her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo had a
key to her home.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo stole her key.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo stole
her key and forced his key upon her.
Ms. Logan said she did not say Mr. Montalvo forced his
key upon her. She said Mr. Montalvo gave her his key but
stole her key sometime later without her knowing it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she demanded her
key back from Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if anyone witnessed this or did
Ms. Logan tell anyone about this.
Ms. Logan said it was possible; however, she did not
recall at this time.
Page 16
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
during this time because of the boss/employee
relationship.
Ms. Logan said somewhat in the beginning.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was somewhat
concerned.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever had a
relationship with any of her other bosses.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever dated Mr.
Perretti.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever went out
with Mr. Perretti.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever dated any
other employee or boss in Tamarac.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever dated
anyone else from Tamarac.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said she took that back
because she dated Bob Hershkoff.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she dated him.
Ms. Logan replied, December.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was 1986 or 1987.
Ms. Logan replied, 1988. She said this was about the
time she received the four dozen roses from Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock said this this would have been in
December, 1987, actually this would have been January 51
1988.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if he received the
note on January 8, 1988.
Ms. Logan asked, who?
Attorney Whitelock said Bob Hershkoff. He asked if Ms.
Logan was dating Mr. Hershkoff during this time frame.
Ms. Logan said from December.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock what note he
was referring to.
Attorney Whitelock said this was the note in evidence
which was taken to the Hollywood Police Department and
Mayor Abramowitz said he recalled this note.
Page 17
5/3/89
Referring to the time frame from May to August, Attorney
Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a business
relationship with Mr. Montalvo during this time frame
such as loaning her money.
Ms. Logan asked, with who?
Attorney Whitelock replied, Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo loaned her money on three
different occasions in the amount of $35.00, $40.00 and
$60.00. She said these loans were paid back and she had
cancelled checks if Attorney Whitelock would like to see
them.
Attorney Whitelock said he would like to see the checks
in a few minutes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo gave
her any other money besides this.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo signed
a car loan for her.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked when Mr. Montalvo did this.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo co -signed the car loan.
Attorney Whitelock asked when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said she believed this to be in July.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was when the
relationship was going hot and heavy.
Ms. Logan said she would not call it hot and heavy.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she would not call
this hot and heavy when they were seeing each other three
or four times a week and sleeping with each other.
Attorney Ruf objected to Attorney Whitelock's
characterization of Ms. Logan's answer.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock said he was just asking Ms. Logan if
she considered the relationship hot and heavy.
Ms. Logan said the relationship was not hot and heavy on
her part.
Attorney Whitelock asked how the car loan was arranged.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo informed her that he would
sign a car loan for her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she asked Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not ask Mr. Montalvo.
Page 18
5/3/89
TAPE 2
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo came to her one day
and guessed that she was applying for a car loan.
Ms. Logan said she believed Mr. Montalvo did it to
accelerate the relationship and base a foundation.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she said to Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she accepted it because she needed a
co-signer.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo
approached her regarding being guarantor for a car loan.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo offered to co-sign for her to
purchase a car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo came
to her as opposed to her going to Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo knew that she was looking for
a car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo came
to her or she went to Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo came to her because she would
not ask Mr. Montalvo to co-sign a loan for her. She said
she accepted; however, she would not ask.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
about the employee relationship when she had Mr. Montalvo
co -signed for the car.
Ms. Logan said she did not have Mr. Montalvo sign the
loan. She said Mr. Montalvo wanted to sign the loan.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
about the employee relationship when the loan was signed
with Mr. Montalvo being the guarantor.
Ms. Logan replied, no, because she knew she would be
paying for the loan.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo gave Ms. Logan
the borrowed money without her asking for it.
Ms. Logan said, no, she may have indicated that she was a
little short and would like to borrow the money.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
about the employee relationship at that time.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
about the employee relationship while they were staying
at each other's homes and having an intimate relationship
which included sexual contact.
Ms. Logan said her concern was in the beginning and at
the end of the relationship.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was concerned
while the relationship was taking place.
Page 19
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she became concerned toward the end of the
relationship.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what time of
relationship she had with Mr. Montalvo's parents.
Ms. Logan said very friendly. She said they are very
nice.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was at their
house for dinner.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if they baby sat for her.
Ms. Logan said they had when she worked.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo's
family members baby sat for her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo's mother did when she worked.
She said she worked a lot.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood. He asked if Mr.
Montalvo's family members and friends would baby sit for
her on occasion.
Ms. Logan said on occasions, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo
watched her son.
Ms. Logan said yes, on occasions.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if her son began
calling Mr. Montalvo "daddy".
Ms. Logan said this was not true.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was true.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo bought her
son a
birthday gift.
Ms. Logan said probably, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo gave her son
a
birthday party.
Ms. Logan said she gave him a birthday party.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was before or after
the
telephone call where she informed Mr. Montalvo that
the
relationship was going too fast.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo knew at this point that
the
relationship was slipping away.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to Mr.
Montalvo's house after the roller skating party and
spent
the night with him.
Ms. Logan said in the afternoon, after the rolling
skating party, Mr. Montalvo came to her apartment.
I
1
I -
Page 20
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she took a vacation
in August.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked where Ms. Logan went.
Ms. Logan said she went to Tampa.
Attorney Whitelock asked how long she was gone.
Ms. Logan said just a couple of days.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if her son was with
her.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she and Mr.
Montalvo continued their relationship when she returned.
Ms. Logan said when she returned Mr. Montalvo contacted
her about getting together one last time before returning
to work. She said they went to Six Flags Atlantis one
day and at that time she was trying to explain to him how
important it was to resume a normal working relationship.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to correct him if he
was wrong. He said this was the same time Ms. Logan was
receiving flowers and poems from Wayne.
Ms. Logan replied, yes. She said this was someone she
had not seen in six years.
Attorney Whitelock said this man was married.
Ms. Logan said he was not married at the time.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Wayne was not married at the
time he was sending Ms. Logan flowers and poems.
Ms. Logan said at the time the flowers and poems were
being sent, Wayne was married.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Wayne was going to fly her up
to Chicago or come down.
Ms. Logan replied, yes. She said she had no relationship
at this time and not for six years.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever commented
to anyone that men were only good for sex.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever made this
comment to anyone.
Ms. Logan replied, no, she did not.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever said this
to her co -employees.
Ms. Logan replied, yes. She said she hoped Attorney
Whitelock subpoenaed his witnesses.
Attorney Whitelock said he has.
Page 21
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever commented
to Mr. Montalvo's mother regarding the living
arrangements with him.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall any conversation with
her of this nature.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she discussed with
Mr. Montalvo's mother anything about Mr. Montalvo selling
his condominium so that they could buy a house and move
in together.
Ms. Logan replied, not a chance. She said she did not
discuss this; however, Mr. Montalvo may have.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she discussed with
any of Mr. Montalvo's other family or friends about their
living arrangements.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever suggested
that she did not want her apartment because it was too
small and move in with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo would have loved this. She
said this was not what she wanted.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she was with Mr.
Montalvo if she did not want this.
Attorney Ruf objected to the form of the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock asked on what basis.
Mayor Abramowitz said he felt that it was an improper
question.
Attorney Whitelock asked what was improper about it.
Mayor Abramowitz said the fact that Attorney Whitelock
was leading the Witness and making a suggestion.
Attorney Whitelock said Mayor Abramowitz was correct and
he MOVED to have the Witness declared as an Adverse
Witness because she was the City's Witness. He asked
that the Chair declare the Witness as an Adverse Witness.
Mayor Abramowitz said he would consult with the City
Attorney in a whisper with Attorney Whitelock's
permission.
Mayor Abramowitz said the Chair DECLARED the Witness as
an Adverse Witness. He said he failed to see the
relevancy of the question; therefore, he would rule it
out of order.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she continued
going on with the relationship if she was concerned with
this.
Ms. Logan said she did not understand the question.
Attorney Whitelock asked why Ms. Logan would continue the
relationship and have a sexual relationship with Mr.
Page 22
5/3/89
Montalvo if Mr. Montalvo wanted to see them living
together and she was concerned about it.
Ms. Logan asked what she was to be concerned about.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan testified that Mr.
Montalvo would have loved it; however, she did not want
this under any circumstance.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she continued the
relationship with Mr. Montalvo if she felt this adamant
about the matter at this time.
Ms. Logan asked why there was a problem with having a
relationship while living in separate homes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was because Ms. Logan was
getting financial rewards from Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan asked, financial rewards? She said, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she could get her
car otherwise.
Ms. Logan said she needed a co-signer and Mr. Montalvo
never paid any money towards the car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she could have
received the loan without Mr. Montalvo co-signing for it.
Ms. Logan said she needed a co --signer.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever talked to
Mr. Montalvo regarding being pregnant.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said she was never pregnant.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan ever informed Mr.
Montalvo that she may be pregnant and asked him what he
would do about it at which time Mr. Montalvo replied that
he promised he would marry her.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she was only kidding.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever informed
Mr. Montalvo that she wanted to test his commitment to
her.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what he meant.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan ever had any
conversation with Mr. Montalvo regarding the fact that
she may have been pregnant and then told Mr. Montalvo
that she was kidding and was only testing his commitment.
Ms. Logan replied, no way. She said this was sick.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had
conversation with Mr. Montalvo regarding a problem living
in the residence.
Page 23
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo wanted her to live with him;
however, he saw a problem with it. She said she did not
even want to live with him.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she could go into the computer and change
the address so that nobody would ever find out about it.
Ms. Logan said she could do a lot of things in the
system.
Attorney Whitelock said he did not ask this because he
knew it. He asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr. Montalvo
that she would go into the computer and change the
addresses so that nobody would know about it so they
could live together.
Ms. Logan said she would never do this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to answer her
question. He asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she would go into the computer and change
the addresses so that nobody could find out.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the conversation ever
occurred.
Ms. Logan said this conversation never occurred.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever talked to
Mr. Montalvo's mother regarding making the relationship
permanent.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall ever having a
conversation in this nature with Mr. Montalvo's mother.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever asked Mr.
Montalvo's mother what she thought about them moving in
together without being married.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo's
mother ever informed her to move in and save common
expenses so they could buy a house.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo's mother may have had that
conversation with Mr. Montalvo; however, she never said
this to her.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan was in the room at
the time.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said this may have happened.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was a figment of Mr.
Montalvo's mother's imagination.
Ms. Logan said she never said it was a figment of Mr.
Montalvo's mother's imagination. She said Mr. Montalvo
may have wanted this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she made any
complaints to the Coral Springs Police Department in
October, 1987.
Page 24
5/3/89
Ms. Logan asked, in October?
Attorney Whitelock replied, yes, October, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she did not believe it was October.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she complained to
the Police Department.
Ms. Logan said it would have probably been around
January.
Attorney Whitelock asked, January of?
Ms. Logan said whenever it was that he was sending me all
of the "Desperately wanting you" cards.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she complained on
two different occasions about a guy that was following
her home one Friday night.
Ms. Logan said at least one, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this guy was Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms., Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she made this guy mad because she wanted to
teach him a lesson; therefore, he was following her home.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why this guy followed
her home.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock objected because it was during the
time frame that was very crucial. He said this occurred
in October, 1987 and he did not know what the allegations
were because there were no charges.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock if he was
asking the Witness to determine why a man followed her
home.
Attorney Whitelock said he was asking the Witness if she
made the comment concerning the matter. He withdrew the
question and he asked Ms. Logan if she reported to the
Coral Springs Police Department that someone followed her
home in the time frame of October, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she did not report it. She said she was
driving home one evening when someone began to drive
beside her and follow her. She said she drove to the
Police Station rather than to her apartment and an
Officer escorted her home.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the individual was Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Page 25
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms.
Logan.if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she was making
the guys she was dating mad
and related this incident to
Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall ever saying this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms.
Logan who David and Caroline
Cooper were.
Ms. Logan said they were friends of Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms.
Logan if she asked Mr.
Montalvo for their telephone
number in October or
November, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she asked for Caroline's telephone number.
Attorney Whitelock asked why.
Ms. Logan said she wanted to contact her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she called her.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Robert Hershkoff
filed a report with the Hollywood Police Department on
January 7, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she did not know if it was January 7;
however, it would have been the day after she received
the four dozen roses.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she called him and
had a conversation concerning it.
Ms. Logan asked, who, Bob Hershkoff?
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Bob Hershkoff called
her and informed her that he received a letter.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed him of
anything.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain his
question.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Hershkoff of anything about the letter.
Ms. Logan said Mr.
Hershkoff read the letter
to her. She
said they were trying to figure out who sent
the letter.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan what she
told Mr.
Hershkoff.
Ms. Logan said she
informed him that she did
not know.
Attorney Whitelock
asked, you did not know?
Ms. Logan said she did not know who sent the letter to
him.
Page 26
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Hershkoff
reported to the Police that he made contact with her who
did not have any further information as to a possible
suspect.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked why Ms. Logan did not name Mr.
Montalvo as a possible suspect.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to repeat the
question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she did not tell
Mr. Hershkoff that she was having some problems with Mr.
Montalvo and it must be him.
Ms. Logan asked why she would have or would not have.
Attorney Whitelock replied, would not have.
Ms. Logan said she considered it to be a possibility that
Mr. Montalvo sent the letter.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan did not inform him
about any possible suspects. He asked Ms. Logan if she
had any information about a possible suspect on January
7, 1988.
Ms. Logan said within her mind she did; however, who was
she to point a finger at someone.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she contacted
Detective Chovan the following morning regarding the
case.
Ms. Logan said she spoke to Detective Chovan.
Attorney Whitelock exhibited Detective Chovan's Police
Report which was in evidence and dated February 2, 1988.
He said this Report indicated that on Friday, January 8,
1988, Ms. Logan had a conversation with Detective Chovan
concerning the problems Ms. Logan was having with Mr.
Montalvo. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said this was after receiving the "Desperately
wanting you" letters.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she received the
letters.
Ms. Logan said she did not know the exact date. She said
the first one sometime early in January which consisted
of four dozen roses with a card signed, "Desperately
wanting you".
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was January 5, 1988.
Ms. Logan said the following day Mr. Hershkoff received
his life threatening letter. She said it probably would
have been sometime that week or the day after this in
which she reported to Detective Chovan.
Attorney Whitelock said the Report indicated that Mr.
Hershkoff called at 2032 hours/8:30 P.M. on January 7,
1988. He said Ms. Logan had a conversation with Mr.
Hershkoff regarding the matter and Ms. Logan had no
Page 27
5/3/89
possible suspect; however, the following morning, Ms.
Logan walked into Detective Chovan's Office asking her to
do something about Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said this was not correct.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Detective Chovan
was incorrect in the Report.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she reported to
Detective Chovan that she received anonymous letters and
flowers in the past few days.
Ms. Logan replied, yes, signed, "Desperately wanting
you
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed
Detective Chovan that Mr. Montalvo was responsible for
sending them.
Ms. Logan said she informed Detective Chovan that she
believed Mr. Montalvo was responsible for sending them.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received a copy
of the letter to Mr. Hershkoff on January 18, 1988, and
submitted it to Detective Chovan.
Ms. Logan said somewhere on that date.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she would do this.
Ms. Logan asked, to show it to Detective Chovan?
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Hershkoff who in turn informed the Hollywood Police that
Ms. Logan had no information about Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said Detective Chovan asked her to bring a copy
of the letter.
Attorney Whitelock said on January 18, 1988, Ms. Logan
submitted a letter to Detective Chovan indicating that
the letter could have been sent by Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain his
question.
Attorney Whitelock said on January 5, 1988, Ms. Logan
received the note and flowers. He asked if this was
correct.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock said on January 7, 1988, at
approximately 8:30 P.M., her boyfriend received a
threatening letter.
Ms. Logan said this occurred the day after she received
the four dozen roses.
Attorney Whitelock asked if January 7, 1988, was an
incorrect date.
Ms. Logan said she did not know; however, this was how it
occurred.
Page 28
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received the
note and flowers from Mr. Hershkoff.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Hershkoff reported the letter the
night he received it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received a
letter and roses prior to receiving a call from Mr.
Hershkoff.
Ms. Logan said she received a note and roses from Mr.
Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to
Detective Chovan the day after Mr. Hershkoff called her.
Ms. Logan said the next day, Mr. Hershkoff received a
letter and reported it to the Hollywood Police then
called her.
Attorney Whitelock said he would accept this. He said at
8:30 P.M. that night, Mr. Hershkoff called Ms. Logan;
however, Ms. Logan did not have any information about a
possible suspect even though Ms. Logan already received the roses
and the card. He said Ms. Logan went to Detective Chovan
and on January 18, 1988, Ms. Logan brought the note to
Detective Chovan indicating that it was sent by Mr.
Montalvo. He asked Ms. Logan why she would say this.
Ms. Logan said this did not occur this way.
Attorney Whitelock said Detective Chovan was lying in her
Report.
Ms. Logan said she would like to explain.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Detective Chovan
was incorrect in the Report.
Ms. Logan said Detective Chovan was not incorrect. She
said if Attorney Whitelock would give her a chance to
explain, she would explain.
Attorney Whitelock said if Ms. Logan was able to give
Detective Chovan the information on January 8, 1988...
Ms. Logan said she did not give Detective Chovan the
information on January 8, 1988. She asked Attorney
Whitelock if he was referring to the letter.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan gave Detective Chovan
the information regarding the anonymous letters and the
suspect being Mr. Montalvo. He asked if this was
correct.
Ms. Logan said not on January 8, 1988.
Reading from the Detective Chovan's Police Report,
Attorney Whitelock stated, "On Friday, January 8, 1988,
City Employee Elena Logan contacted me regarding some
anonymous letters...". He asked Ms. Logan if Detective
Chovan was incorrect to the date. He asked Ms. Logan if
she contacted Detective Chovan on that Friday.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 29
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that Ms. Logan
first complained about an incident that took place on
November 11, 1987. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan asked, November 11, 1987?
Attorney Ruf objected and he asked for a date.
Attorney Whitelock said November 11, 1987.
Attorney Ruf said Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when
she first contacted Detective Chovan. He asked if this
was the question.
Attorney Whitelock replied, no, and Mayor Abramowitz
agreed.
Attorney Ruf asked Attorney Whitelock to rephrase the
question.
Attorney Whitelock asked why he should have to rephrase
the question because he asked it correctly.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to rephrase the
question.
Attorney Whitelock said because Attorney Ruf did not
understand what was occurring, he did not have to explain
it to Attorney Ruf.
Mayor Abramowitz said he was not interested in Attorney
Ruf's concerns; however, he was interested in his
concerns. He asked Attorney Whitelock to state the
nature of the question.
Attorney Whitelock suggested that the tape be rewound and
played back.
Pauline Walaszek, Secretary, said she did not know if
this could occur without a Recess.
City Attorney Doody suggested that it be the prerogative
of the Chair to ask the Counsel to restate the question.
He said he did not see how this was out of line.
Attorney Whitelock asked what the Chair wanted him to
restate since he indicated the date to be November 11,
1987.
Mayor Abramowitz said this was all he wanted Attorney
Whitelock to state.
Attorney Whitelock said he stated this three times.
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not hear this. He said
wanted to understand the nature of the question. He said
if Attorney Whitelock had a problem with this, then
Attorney Whitelock did not want anyone sitting here.
Attorney Whitelock said he could not proceed satisfying
everyone's objections. He said the Witness did not have
any problem in comprehending the questions.
Attorney Ruf said the Witness was not going to make the
decision; however, the City Council was. He said he
wanted to make sure that the City Council understood the
time frame.
Page 30
5/3/89
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not want to agree with
Attorney Ruf because Attorney Whitelock may become very
upset; however, he was very interested in understanding
and trying to follow, in order, what was occurring. He
said the Attorneys may find it simple; however, the
laymen did not find it simple. He asked Attorney
Whitelock to restate the question so that he could
understand it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if there was an
incident which occurred on November 11, 1987, which Ms.
Logan reported to Detective Chovan.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain what
incident he was referring to.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if there was a
incident which occurred in November, 1987, which involved
Mr. Montalvo and Ms. Logan reported it to Detective
Chovan.
Ms. Logan said she reported to Glenda Christian,
Supervisor of Data Processing, the first week of
November, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever informed
Detective Chovan of the incident.
Ms. Logan said she informed Mrs. Christian.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed
Detective Chovan that she discovered gum on the door
handle.
Ms. Logan said she went to her Supervisor first.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever informed
Detective Chovan of the incident.
Ms. Logan said she was sure she informed Detective Chovan
about it; however, the incident was initially reported to
her direct Supervisor.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed
Detective Chovan about the incident.
Ms. Logan replied that she was sure she did at some
point.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Detective Chovan
conducted an investigation concerning this incident.
Ms. Logan said no, not concerning the incident. She said
not until much later after all of the "Desperately
wanting you" letters.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this occurred at the
Baystreet Restaurant.
Ms. Logan asked, what occurred?
Attorney Whitelock said the November incident.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain his
question.
Page 31
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she wanted him to
explain.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what incident he was
referring to.
Attorney Whitelock said the gum on the door handle. He
asked Ms. Logan if she knew of this incident.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo placed the gum on her car in
the City parking lot.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this occurred at
Baystreet.
Ms. Logan replied, no. she said the incident occurred in
the City parking lot. She said this occurred the day
after the opening of Baystreet.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan was informing him
that the incident did not occur at Baystreet; however, it
did occur in the City parking lot.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked what Baystreet was.
Ms. Logan said it was a Restaurant located in Tamarac.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what street the
Restaurant was located on.
Ms. Logan said she believed it was on University Drive.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how far away it was
from City Hall.
Ms. Logan replied, just a couple of miles.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was a few miles
away when this incident occurred.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to explain what
happened.
Ms. Logan said if Attorney Whitelock was referring to
what he was reading, what happened was, there was an
opening at the Baystreet Restaurant where the City of
Tamarac was invited. She said many people attended and
she was reporting that the following day after the
opening, which she believed occurred on the 4th the
following day Mr. Montalvo stuck gum to the door handles
of her car in the City parking lot.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she saw Mr.
Montalvo do this.
Ms. Logan said she did not see Mr. Montalvo do this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if anyone saw Mr.
Montalvo do this.
Ms. Logan said, no; however, Mr. Montalvo admitted to
doing it to several people. She said Mr. Montalvo
bragged about it in the City.
Page 32
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she confronted Mr.
Montalvo about it.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was angry when
she confronted Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo became
upset.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was most upset.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo asked
her how she dare accuse him.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan's statement indicated
that she was almost convinced that Mr. Montalvo did not
do it.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was very convincing and was
quite an actor. She said Mr. Montalvo swore to her that
she had no right to accuse him of putting gum on her car
when, in fact, he did do it.
Reading from her report, Page 6, Attorney Whitelock said
Ms. Logan stated that because Mr. Montalvo was so
convincing she did not report this to Detective Chovan.
Ms. Logan said this was incorrect. She said she reported
that Mr. Montalvo was convincing. She said she knew that
Mr. Montalvo did, in fact, do it. She said she asked Mr.
Montalvo about it in which Mr. Montalvo denied it
adamantly.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was very angry
the day she went to the office.
Ms. Logan said she was quite angry.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed
Detective Chovan that she was not going to back down.
Ms. Logan said she did not say this to Detective Chovan.
She said she was sorry and she asked if Attorney
Whitelock was referring to the Police Report.
Attorney Whitelock said he was referring to the sworn
statement given by Ms. Logan to Detective Chovan. He
asked Ms. Logan if she stated this.
Ms. Logan replied, yes. She said she indicated that when
she walked into Mr. Montalvo's office to ask him about
the gum on her car that she could not ask Mr. Montalvo
easily about doing it because she knew Mr. Montalvo would
lie. She said Mr. Montalvo did lie all the way to the
end.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what time this took
place.
Ms. Logan asked if Attorney Whitelock was referring to
the confrontation in the office.
Page 33
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock said the gum incident.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did this the previous night.
Attorney Whitelock asked at what time?
Ms. Logan said she did not know.
Attorney Whitelock asked what time Ms. Logan discovered
it.
Ms. Logan said when she got off work it was dark and
raining.
Attorney Whitelock asked at what time?
Ms. Logan said it would have been either 6:00 P.M. or
6:30 P.M. She said her hours have changed a couple of
times.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she was at
Baystreet.
Ms. Logan said the night before.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that the City
of Tamarac was invited to the Baystreet opening.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what time she went to
Baystreet.
Ms. Logan said after work that evening.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was about 6:00 P.M. or
6:30 P.M.
Ms. Logan said it may have been later, she was not sure.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she used her car.
Ms. Logan said she was not sure; however, she went and
picked a guest up to take with her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who she picked up.
Ms. Logan replied, David Santucci.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if he worked for the
City.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she drove and
picked him up.
Ms. Logan replied, right.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the gum was on the handle at
this time.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did not do it that night.
She said the Baystreet opening was November 4, 1987, and
Page 34
5/3/89
the evening of November 5, 1987, the gum was on her car.
She said the morning of November 6, 1987, she went into
Mr. Montalvo's office to ask why he put the gum on her
car.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that the night Ms.
Logan went to Baystreet she did not return to find the
gum on her car.
Ms. Logan replied, no. ,
Attorney Whitelock asked if this occurred the next day
when she came to work.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what occurrence he was
referring to.
Attorney Whitelock said the gum incident.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo put the gum on her car the
day after Baystreet which would have been November 5,
1987. She said the following day after finding it...
Attorney Whitelock asked what time of day Ms. Logan
discovered the gum.
Ms. Logan said in the evening when she finished work.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what time she came to
work that day.
Ms. Logan said the next morning, after finding gum on her
car, was when she confronted Mr. Montalvo about it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what time she came to
work on November 5, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she was not sure if her schedule started
at 9:00 A.M. or 10:00 A.M. She did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo was in
the office on November 5, 1987.
Ms. Logan said this would have been the day after
Baystreet and she replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she saw or spoke
with Mr. Montalvo that day.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall speaking to Mr.
Montalvo that day. She said not until the day she found
the gum on her car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she left work on
November 5, 1987 and found gum on the car.
Ms. Logan relied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how she related the
gum on her car in the City parking lot to the incident of
going to the Baystreet opening with another guy.
Ms. Logan said when she went in to ask Mr. Montalvo why
he put the gum on her car, Mr. Montalvo told her that she
had no right coming in his office accusing him of putting
gum on her car. She said Mr. Montalvo stated that she
had no class and at this point she stopped him and asked
why he put gum on her car. She said Mr. Montalvo said
Page 35
5/3/89
that she had no right to bring that guy into Saystreet
last night. She said at this point she felt this was Mr.
Montalvo's way of admitting that he put the gum on her
car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo told
her to leave him alone and get out of his office.
Ms. Logan said, no, Mr. Montalvo told her that he would
fire her. She said Mr. Montalvo threatened to fire her
at that time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what was the first
thing she said to Mr. Montalvo when she came in angry the
next morning.
Ms. Logan said she asked Mr. Montalvo why he put the gum
on her car.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if she was speaking
the same way she was
at this time.
Ms. Logan said she
walked in and said, "I want to know
why you put the gum
on my car.".
Attorney Whitelock
asked if Mr. Montalvo ever raised his
voice.
Ms. Logan said Mr.
Montalvo pretended not to know what
she was talking about.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if she raised her
voice.
Ms. Logan said Mr.
Montalvo became very irate. She said
she was talking the
way she is talking now.
Attorney Whitelock
suggested Mayor Abramowitz ask Ms.
Logan to respond to
the question.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Ms. Logan to answer the question.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan to please answer his
question.
Ms. Logan said as they are speaking now.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if she ever raised her
voice.
Ms. Logan said she
never screamed.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
raised his voice.
Ms. Logan said it was like they are speaking now, not
yelling.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
yelled.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was not yelling in the office
at that time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo yelled
at her at any time including when Mr. Montalvo threatened
her job.
Page 36
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said not that day.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
raised his voice to her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo has raised his voice her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo raised
his voice on that day.
I
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said she wanted to be as
detailed as possible.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she described Mr.
Montalvo as speaking in a loud whisper.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she threatened Mr.
Montalvo's job.
Ms. Logan asked how she could threaten Mr. Montalvo's
job.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she threatened
other people's jobs. He asked Ms. Logan if she
threatened Sylvia Iglousky's job.
Ms. Logan said she did not threaten Sylvia Iglousky's
job.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan ever told Sylvia
Iglousky that she would have Sylvia Iglousky's job if
Sylvia Iglousky did not stop bothering her.
Ms. Logan said, no; however, she relayed a message to
Sylvia Iglousky through the Police Department which was
to not be the mediator for Mr. Montalvo. She said this
was all that was said.
At 10:25 A.M., Mayor Abramowitz RECESSED this meeting and
RECONVENED at 10:35 A.M. with ALL PRESENT.
** The questioning by Attorney Whitelock continued with Elena Logan,
who was previously sworn in.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that November 4,
1987 was when Ms. Logan went to Baystreet, November 5,
1987 was when Ms. Logan found the gum and November 6,
1987 was when Ms. Logan confronted Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was angry when
she went to see Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she was upset.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan informed Detective
Chovan that she was angry.
Ms. Logan said probably angry and upset.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo
admitted at any time that he put the gum on her car.
Page 37
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said that day, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any further
contact with Mr. Montalvo after this.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo called her into the office of
Ken Burroughs, Finance Director.
Attorney Whitelock asked what date this was.
Ms. Logan said that afternoon.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what Mr. Montalvo said
to her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo called her in and closed the
door. She said she thought Mr. Burroughs was present;
however, he was not. She said Mr. Montalvo proceeded to
sit at Mr. Burroughs's desk and told her to sit down.
She said Mr. Montalvo asked her why she was angry and she
told him that she did not appreciate his juvenal acts of
putting the gum on her car. She said she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she wanted him to leave her alone.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she stated that Mr.
Montalvo threatened to fire her at this time.
Ms. Logan said that morning.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what Mr. Montalvo
said.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo told her to get out of the
City and that he would see to it that she would leave the
City.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she made any
threats in firing Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said not to firing him.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she threatened to
get his job.
Ms. Logan said she informed Mr. Montalvo that she would
tell City Manager Kelly what he just said to her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she was going to go to the City Manager and
inform him of what happened.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she said, "And I
will have your job.".
Ms. Logan said she did not say this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was what
happened.
Ms. Logan said she did not say that she would have Mr.
Montalvo's job.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to the
City Manager .
1
Page 38
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she went to her immediate Supervisor
immediately after leaving the office.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was before she
met with Mr. Montalvo in Mr. Burroughs's Office.
Ms. Logan replied,
yes. She
said immediately following
this.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms.
Logan if this was when
Glenda Christian,
Supervisor
of Data Processing,
indicated that Ms.
Logan should not worry about it
because there was
nothing Mr.
Montalvo could do.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian informed her that Mr.
Montalvo could not fire her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was satisfied
with it at this time.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to Mr.
Kelly.
Ms. Logan said she did not go to Mr. Kelly.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what her intention was
when she informed Mr. Montalvo that she would go to Mr.
Kelly.
Ms. Logan said she went straight to her immediate
Supervisor first. She said she did not know the exact
chain of command was; therefore, she proceeded to go to
her immediate Supervisor.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she informed Mr.
Montalvo that she was going to go to Mr. Kelly.
Ms. Logan said she was going to inform Mr. Kelly that Mr.
Montalvo just threatened to fire her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo
threatened her before she threatened Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she never threatened Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever informed
Mr. Montalvo that she was going to tell about the gum
incident.
Ms. Logan said after Mr. Montalvo threatened to fire her,
she told Mr. Montalvo that she was going to report it to
Mr. Kelly.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan met with Mr. Montalvo
later...
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo called her into Mr.
Burroughs's Office.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan sat down with Mr.
Montalvo and he asked her why she was so angry. He asked
if this was correct.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 39
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo tried
to resolve the matter with her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo wanted to know what the
problem was and she told him not to put gum on her car
because she resented that he put gum on her car.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo tried
to resolved whatever differences were existing between
them at that time.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo stated that he was having a very
difficult time since the breakup. She said Mr. Montalvo
indicated that he was having a very difficult time
handling it. She said she informed Mr. Montalvo to stop
bothering her and Mr. Montalvo agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was a "yes" or "no"
answer.
Ms. Logan asked what the question was.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo tried
to reconcile the differences between them.
Ms. Logan said she supposed this would be "yes".
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that they did come
to an agreement. He said Mr. Montalvo indicated that he
would not bother her anymore.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did agree.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that if Mr.
Montalvo left her alone, she would leave Mr. Montalvo
alone.
Ms. Logan said she did not say she would leave Mr.
Montalvo alone because she never bothered him.
Attorney Whitelock said this was what it was.
Ms. Logan said, no, this was not what it was.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo told
her that he would leave her alone.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had further
contact with Mr. Montalvo in November, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she believed the remaining of the month
was fairly quiet. She said as far as socially, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any
problems with Mr. Montalvo in December, 1987.
Ms. Logan said through work, she was supposed to have Mr.
Montalvo sign an End -of -Day Report each day for the
Finance Department. She said Mr. Montalvo would sign
this Report and, if he was not available, she was to take
the Report to Thelma Fagelbaum. She said there was no
problem for the rest of November, 1987.
Page 40
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any further
problems with Mr. Montalvo in the remaining days of
November, 1987.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any further
problems with Mr. Montalvo in December, 1987.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo mailed poems through
inter -office mail to her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was in
October, 1987.
Ms. Logan said this probably started in October, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo made
any more advances or threats in the month of December,
1987.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did. She said after Mr.
Montalvo threatened to fire her, sometime later, Sylvia
Iglousky came to her and indicated that Mr. Montalvo
really felt bad about what happened. She said Sylvia
Iglousky stated that Mr. Montalvo wanted to get together
with her. She said the working environment was
absolutely terrible and it was very rough for her too.
She said Mr. Montalvo wanted to have a luncheon to bury
the hatchet.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said she believed this was December, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked where this took place.
Ms. Logan said she believed this was the Bombay Bicycle
Club.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was before
Christmas.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a luncheon
with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo made any more
advances or threaten her.
Ms. Logan said the luncheon was very nice and Mr.
Montalvo was very nice at the luncheon. She said it was
understood that they would resume a normal working
relationship and she thought this was fine. She said
when they left Mr. Montalvo made a comment that was a
little scary and she chose to overlook. She said Mr.
Montalvo said that he had thought about killing her but
he decided not to make her son an orphan.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she stated, "John,
I thought you were so angry at me that you would kill
me." and Mr. Montalvo replied, "No, I would never want to
make your son an orphan.".
Ms. Logan said this was totally incorrect.
Page 41
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was incorrect.
Ms. Logan said this was a lie.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo said
this with malice.
Ms. Logan said there was no malice.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo was
joking.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was not joking.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if it was serious.
Ms. Logan said it was just a statement and this was why
she overlooked it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she attached any
significance to it.
Ms. Logan said she did not like it especially after
thinking that Mr. Montalvo recently indicated that there
were no problems and they would be friends.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
did anything to her physically other than having a sexual
relationship.
Ms. Logan said physically, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
threatened her in any fashion such as to beat or harm
her.
Ms. Logan said beat or harm her, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she recalled giving
a taped statement to Detective Chovan on February 3,
1988. Referring to Page 10, Attorney Whitelock said the
Report indicated that Detective Chovan asked, "Has
anything changed at work or had you felt threatened, had
he made any more advances or threatened you or anything
in the month of December. Answer: No." He said the
report continued "Nothing in December then. Answer:
December? Nothing."
Ms. Logan said to keep reading because she did go back
and say that she meant to tell Detective Chovan about the
luncheon and the comment made by Mr. Montalvo at the
luncheon.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was in a
letter.
Ms. Logan asked, which letter?
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if there was another
incident in November, 1987, with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what incident he was
referring to.
Attorney Whitelock referred to correspondence dated
November 10, 1987.
Page 42
5/3/89
1
TAPE 3
1
Attorney Ruf asked if this correspondence was in
evidence.
Attorney Whitelock offered the letter as Respondent
Exhibit "Montalvo 3".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the letter
indicated that Mr. Montalvo wanted his name taken off of
the loan.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did not say anything to her
about getting off the loan. She said Mr. Montalvo may
have taken steps to do it; however, he did not inform
her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo sued
her.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo sued her for defamation.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo sued
her to get off the loan.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said it may have said that in
there; however, she did not recall it word for word.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she made any
attempts to get Mr. Montalvo off the loan.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo is off the loan.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said sometime ago.
Attorney Whitelock asked, when?
Ms. Logan said she did not recall exactly, probably
around 8 months or so the car was refinanced and she no
longer needed a co --signer.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the bank contacted
her after Mr. Montalvo contacted the bank.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said she contacted the bank
because she wanted the matter cleared up.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was a few days
after the confrontation regarding the gum incident.
Ms. Logan said she had no idea when Mr. Montalvo wrote
the letter.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had ever seen the
letter.
Ms. Logan said she never saw the letter.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever had
conversation with Mr. Montalvo regarding the matter.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock if he was referring to
the car loan.
Attorney Whitelock said concerning getting off the car
loan.
Page 43
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she did not recall having any conversation
with Mr. Montalvo regarding getting off the car loan.
She said Mr. Montalvo was off the car loan because it was
something she took care of.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo left
silk roses at her door.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did this on many occasions.
Attorney Whitelock said he was referring to December,
1987. He asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo left silk roses
at her door.
Ms. Logan said she believed Mr. Montalvo did.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the roses were from Mr.
Montalvo or from Mr. Hershkoff.
Ms. Logan said they said "from Santa Claus".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew the roses
were from Mr. Montalvo or Mr. Hershkoff.
Ms. Logan said due to the fact that Mr. Montalvo sent her
silk roses several times before, she knew they were from
Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where she was living
at this time.
Ms. Logan said at her apartment.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she moved.
Ms. Logan said right after this. She was in the process
of moving.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when she moved.
Ms. Logan said it was at the end of December.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it was before Christmas.
Ms. Logan said she did not move before Christmas. She
said she may have a few days before; however, she could
not remember exactly when she moved.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo gave
her son Christmas gifts.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo left a package outside.
Attorney Whitelock asked if the package had her son's
name on it.
Ms. Logan said the package had Ryan's name on it.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo's name was on
the package.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo's name may have been on the
package.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ryan knew who the package
came from.
Page 44
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she did not remember if she told Ryan or
not.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew the
package was from Mr. Montalvo. He asked if the package
and silk roses were delivered together.
Ms. Logan said she did not think so.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo knew
where she lived after she moved.
Ms. Logan said she hoped not.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan informed Detective
Chovan that she moved and Mr. Montalvo was not aware of
where or what the telephone number was.
Ms. Logan said she hoped not.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received a
letter and roses on January 5 or 6, 1988.
Ms. Logan replied, yes, at the City.
Attorney Whitelock asked, at the City?
Ms. Logan replied, at the City.
C/M Stelzer asked if Ms. Logan meant the City Hall.
Ms. Logan said the City of Tamarac.
Referring to Exhibit "City 7", Attorney Whitelock asked
Ms. Logan if she received this note on January 5 or 6,
1988.
Ms. Logan said she received this before she was receiving
the roses and letters from Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked where the flowers were
delivered.
Ms. Logan said to her desk.
Attorney Whitelock asked what day the flowers were
delivered.
Ms. Logan said she was not sure what day it was delivered; however
she thought it was right after Christmas.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo asked
her for her address or telephone number.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall Mr. Montalvo asking her
for this information.
Attorney Whitelock said Exhibit "City 7" indicated that
Mr. Montalvo stated, "I hope in 1988, we will have a
better year". He asked Ms. Logan if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo said this after he apologized
for making 1987 "not that great".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what her answer was.
Ms. Logan replied, yes, a better friendship.
Page 45
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo
stated, "we will have a better year in 1988".
Ms. Logan read from the letter, "I hope that in 1988, you
will have a better year and that our friendship will get
better".
After reviewing the Exhibit, Attorney Whitelock said Ms.
Logan was correct.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why Detective Chovan
had in her statement that the letter stated, "we".
Ms. Logan said she did not know because she did not type
the Report.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter stated that their
friendship would get better.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo indicated that he hoped it
would.
Attorney Whitelock asked who Brian was.
Ms. Logan said she did not know who Brian was.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if her son's name was
Ryan.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she stated Brian in
her statement.
Ms. Logan said she did not state Brian. She said this
was interpreted from the tape.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who Ryan was.
Ms. Logan said Ryan was her son.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how old Ryan was.
Ms. Logan said Ryan was 8.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo indicated in the
letter that if Ryan needed anything, especially a friend,
Ms. Logan should not hesitate to call him.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did say this in the letter.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the letter
indicated that she could count on Mr. Montalvo to take
care of Ryan.
Ms. Logan said the letter indicated that, "If God forbid
anything should happen to her, she could count on Mr.
Montalvo to take care of Ryan".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was the
statement made as opposed to the statement at a luncheon.
Ms. Logan said this was totally incorrect. She said
these were two different statements.
Page 46
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was indicating
that in December, prior to this letter, Mr. Montalvo made
the statement.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo made the statement that he
thought about killing her but decided not to make her son
an orphan. She said the letter came after the comment.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she did with the
letter.
Ms. Logan said she threw it away. She said she had to
retrieve it from the garbage at a later time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why she threw it away.
Ms. Logan said it made her sick.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mr.
Montalvo that the letter made her sick.
Ms. Logan said she did not tell Mr. Montalvo anything.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she responded at
all in any fashion.
Ms. Logan said she did not believe she responded.
Attorney Whitelock asked, why not?
Ms. Logan said she may have thought at the time that Mr.
Montalvo was trying; however, she did not know how far to
trust this man.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to the
City Manager.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she went to Mrs.
Christian.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she told anyone.
Ms. Logan said she may have; however, she did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she felt the letter
posed a threat to her or her family.
Ms. Logan said she questioned it because of Mr.
Montalvo's comment earlier. She said she questioned at a
later date why the letter stated, "God forbid if
something happens to you".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she questioned the
matter at the time.
Ms. Logan said she pretty much overlooked the letter.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan received four dozen
roses on about January 6, 1988. He asked Ms. Logan if
she informed Detective Chovan that Mr. Montalvo
confronted her regarding where the roses came from.
Ms. Logan said not at that time.
Page 47
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo came
into the computer room three nights in a row stating,
"what is this, a florist?".
Ms. Logan
said
Mr.
Montalvo
came in the day she received
the four
dozen
roses,
looked
real disgusted and stated,
"what is
this
a flower shop"
them left. She said Mr.
Montalvo
came
back
later and
urged her to call him if she
found anything
out.
Attorney
Whitelock
asked Ms.
Logan if she mentioned
anything
about
the
previous
letter at that time.
Ms. Logan said she did not think so.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received
another letter on January 14, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she was not sure of the date. She said
that same week she may have received a letter from Mr.
Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter began, "Dear Beautiful
Lady".
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
admitted to sending the roses.
Ms. Logan said the day she received the roses Mr.
Montalvo came into her office and asked, "what is this, a
flower shop?".
Referring to Exhibit "City 1", last Page, Attorney
Whitelock said Ms. Logan previously testified that she
received this letter on January 14, 1988.
Ms. Logan said this was one of the last letters.
Attorney Whitelock said between January 5, 1988, when Ms.
Logan received the four dozen roses and the receipt of
the letter "Dear Beautiful Lady"... He asked if Ms. Logan
received flowers with this letter.
Ms. Logan replied, yes. She said no, she was sorry, she
was confusing this matter. She said she believed that
the second set of flowers came with a different card.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if there was a note
attached to the roses when she received them.
Ms. Logan said there was a card.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the card was
unidentified.
Ms. Logan said the card was signed, "Desperately wanting
you".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if anyone identified
themselves.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan thought it was the
guy she was dating at the time.
Page 48
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she thought it was possible.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was when Ms. Logan had
the conversation with Mr. Montalvo regarding the florist.
Ms. Logan said this was when Mr. Montalvo had the
conversation with her.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan had any conversation
with Mr. Montalvo or learn the identity of who sent the
roses before receiving the "Dear Beautiful Lady" letter.
Ms. Logan said the guy she was seeing at the time did not
send her the roses and, once she was told that it was not
the guy she was seeing, she believed immediately that it
was Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was working at
any other jobs during this time.
Ms. Logan said she thought so.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where she was working.
Ms. Logan said in a restaurant.
Attorney Whitelock asked what the name of the restaurant
was.
Ms. Logan replied, Cafe Continental.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what her work hours
were.
Ms. Logan said weekends and evenings.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew what day
January 14, 1988 was.
Ms. Logan said not off hand.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was aware of
who the letter came from.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed
Detective Chovan of this.
Ms. Logan said, no, this was why she went to see her.
She said she wanted to find out who did send them and to
verify who she believed was sending them.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she gave a sworn
statement to Detective Chovan.
Ms. Logan said Detective Chovan interviewed her. She
said she did not know if it was a sworn statement.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Detective Chovan took a tape
statement from Ms. Logan.
Ms. Logan replied, okay.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Detective Chovan asked Ms.
Logan what occurred and Ms. Logan made a statement.
Page 49
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said Detective Chovan asked her questions but
did not have her read the letters. She said she did not
understand Attorney Whitelock's question.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter stated, "The four
dozen roses I sent have a significance but I can not
reveal it at this time."
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter continued, "You were
probably surprised and shocked when you received them but
more so by the fact that you do not know who sent them."
He asked Ms. Logan if she knew who this may have been.
Ms. Logan said she knew when he put "still running". She
said the next line indicated, "Well, at this time, I feel
I can not reveal myself to you due to the fact that you
are still running." She said previously and several
times, Mr. Montalvo told her that she was running away
from him.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter also stated, "We have
crossed paths many times and the next time it would be
for love.". He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this gave Ms. Logan any
indication of who it was.
Ms. Logan said the line before this did.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter stated, "Until then, I
wish you all the love and understanding this life has to
offer. Desperately wanting you." He asked if this
letter was signed as the previous letter.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she perceived this
as a threat.
Ms. Logan said she was very concerned with the turn of
events. She said Mr. Montalvo promised to leave her
alone; however, it started all over again.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she approached Mr.
Montalvo about this.
Ms. Logan said no, not about the letters.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she approached Mr.
Montalvo about the earlier letter.
Ms. Logan asked, which one?
Attorney Whitelock said the January 5 or 6 letter or the
one she received with the roses, "Desperately wanting
you
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo walked into the computer room
at the time she received them. She said, of course, when
four dozen roses are received, everybody is in awe of it.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was flattered.
Page 50
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she did not know how to feel about it.
She said she had several different feelings,
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she suspected Mr.
Montalvo for sending the roses.
Ms. Logan said at that instant, no.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan knew that Mr. Montalvo
sent the letter because Mr. Montalvo signed his name.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew who sent
the four dozen roses.
Ms. Logan said she did not believe it to be Mr. Montalvo
at the time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew who sent
the "Dear Beautiful Lady" letter on January 14, 1988.
Ms. Logan said by this time, Mr. Montalvo's fingerprints
were found.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she knew on January
14, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she guessed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received
another letter on January 21, 1988. He exhibited the
letter to Ms. Logan.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if these letters were in evidence.
Attorney Whitelock said the letters were in evidence as
"City 1".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to read the last
letter in the Exhibit for the record.
Ms. Logan read, "Dear Beautiful Lady, Thank you for
serving me the other night. I did not know you worked at
Cafe Continental. The food there is average but it was
real good seeing you, you made my evening. You should be
serving at a better place or better yet, you should be
served at a better place, like the Down Under or the Plum
Room. Maybe one day you will allow me to take you to
these places. I hope you liked the flowers. Desperately
wanting you."
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how long she had been
working at the Cafe Continental.
Ms. Logan said quite a long time. She said she did not
know exactly how long.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how long she was
working at the restaurant prior to the time she received
the letter.
Ms. Logan said she did not know, maybe a year.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she worked there
during the time the relationship with Mr. Montalvo began.
Page 51
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she was either there or at another
restaurant. She did not remember exactly.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan was working at the
Cafe Continental in the summer of 1987.
Ms. Logan said she believed so.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo knew
she was working there.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan received the letter on
January 21, 1988 and he asked Ms. Logan if she saw Mr.
Montalvo at the restaurant.
Ms. Logan said she never saw Mr. Montalvo inside the
restaurant.
Attorney Whitelock Ms. Logan if she saw Mr. Montalvo
between the time of the first letter dated January 5,
1988, until the letter dated January 21, 1988.
Ms. Logan said she never saw Mr. Montalvo inside of the
restaurant.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever saw Mr.
Montalvo between January 14, 1988, and January 21, 1988.
Ms. Logan said not inside the restaurant.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where she saw Mr.
Montalvo. He asked Ms. Logan if she saw Mr. Montalvo
outside the restaurant.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo had been at the restaurant
several times; however, Mr. Montalvo was outside the
restaurant.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she meant by
outside the restaurant.
Ms. Logan said only to leave flowers on her car, things
of this nature.
Attorney Whitelock asked when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said it was sometime after she broke the
relationship off; however, she was not sure of the exact
time frame it occurred.
Attorney Whitelock asked what type of flowers Mr.
Montalvo left.
Ms. Logan replied, silk roses.
Attorney Whitelock asked, silk roses?
Ms. Logan said more silk roses.
Attorney Whitelock said he thought Mr. Montalvo left the
silk roses at her door during Christmas.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo left them there and on her
car.
Page 52
1
H
i.,
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo took them back
and left them again.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo would bring her new sets of
silk roses.
Attorney Whitelock said assuming that the letter was
written by Mr. Montalvo, the letter indicated that it was
real good seeing her. He asked Ms. Logan if she spoke
with Mr. Montalvo between January 14, 1988, and January
21, 1988, at the Cafe Continental.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was not even inside the Cafe
Continental. She said it was just another lie.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo sent
her a balloon as well.
Ms. Logan said to City Hall.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was with the flowers.
Ms. Logan said she thought it was with the flowers.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any other
contact with Mr. Montalvo, other than the luncheon,
between the time that he threatened to fire her and the
time that she received the flowers. He asked if there
was any other contact that would have indicated that Mr.
Montalvo would have sent this type of correspondence to
her.
Ms. Logan asked if Attorney Whitelock was referring. to
the "Desperately wanting you" letters.
Attorney Whitelock replied, yes. He asked Ms. Logan if
she had any other type of contact with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock if he meant contact
that would indicate that Mr. Montalvo sent the letters.
Attorney Whitelock replied, yes.
Ms. Logan said she did not know Mr. Montalvo sent the
letters when she received them initially.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she felt threatened
by any of the letters.
Ms. Logan said she was concerned with the turn of events
because Mr. Montalvo agreed on several occasions to leave
her alone.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan when the other
occasions occurred.
Ms. Logan said she informed Attorney Whitelock of the day
in Mr. Burroughs's Office and Mr. Montalvo agreed
sometime earlier when she first broke off the
relationship. She said at first Mr. Montalvo was very
against it; however, he later agreed to leave her alone.
She said Mr. Montalvo would not leave her alone and he
would come into the computer room at night.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan's direct testimony on
the City's case indicated that there were notes sent on
Page 53
5/3/89
September 17, and September 24, 1987. He said Ms. Logan
testified that Mr. Montalvo sent the notes to his
ex -fiance.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what examination he
was referring to.
Attorney Whitelock said when Janet Lander, Consulting
Attorney, called Ms. Logan as a Witness.
Ms. Logan said she was aware of this time.
Attorney Whitelock said Attorney Lander exhibited the
documents to Ms. Logan. He said Ms. Logan indicated that
the notes were sent to Mr. Montalvo's ex -fiance.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo showed her a book of poems he
sent to his ex -fiance. She said she did indicate this.
Attorney Whitelock said the notes had dates on them of
September 24, 1987, and September 15, 1987. He asked if
this was correct.
Ms. Logan said this was pretty questionable, yes. She
asked why they would have dates.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan testified to notes she
received on October 9, 1987, and October 10, 1987. He
said Ms. Logan indicated that the poems were not sent to
her but were sent to Mr. Montalvo's ex -fiance. He asked
if this was correct.
Ms. Logan asked, which poems? She said the poems that
Mr. Montalvo sent her were photostats from something that
was published in a magazine.
Attorney Whitelock said there were three poems dated
October 9, 1987, October 10, 1987, and October 26, 1987,
which were exhibited to Ms. Logan by Attorney Lander .
He said Ms. Logan's direct testimony in response to the
poems was that Mr. Montalvo sent the poems to his
ex -fiance. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said she saw the poems in a book that he sent
to his ex -finance.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Mr. Montalvo sent the poems.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did not send the poems to
her.
Attorney Whitelock said it was correct that Mr. Montalvo
did not send the poems to her.
Ms. Logan said the poems were not sent to her. She said
the poems were rewritten and dated; however, she did not
know why.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where she got the
poems.
Ms. Logan said she did not get them. She said Attorney
Whitelock was the one who presented them into evidence.
Attorney Whitelock asked if he submitted the poems into
evidence.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 54
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she broke off the
relationship in August, 1987, because Mr. Montalvo was
obsessive.
Ms. Logan said, extremely.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo was
chasing her and getting too serious in the relationship.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was very, very serious.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if it was the other
way around.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was chasing Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she pursued Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said they were in a relationship. She said Mr.
Montalvo was trying to accelerate the relationship.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was so, if she
could explain why Mr. Montalvo was corresponding to his
ex -fiance in September and October of 1987 when
supposedly, Mr. Montalvo was madly in love with her.
Ms. Logan said she thought that Mr. Montalvo wrote the
letters and submitted them for this purpose. She said
she never received the poems and she asked why they would
be dated. She asked if Mr. Montalvo wrote her a poem
and date and then make a photostat copy for the hearing.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received the
poems.
Ms. Logan said she did not receive them.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received
anything from Mr. Montalvo in September or October.
Ms. Logan said she did not receive those.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had an
explanation why Mr. Montalvo was sending something to his
ex -fiance when she just broke his heart.
Ms. Logan said she did not know why Mr. Montalvo
submitted them into evidence.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had contact
with Mr. Montalvo in October, 1987.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo came into the computer room
in the evenings when he thought everyone was gone, ask
her to come back with him and question why she ripped his
heart out.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she asked Mr.
Montalvo to take Ryan to a Halloween Party.
Page 55
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo asked her while she was
working during the day.
Attorney Whitelock asked, he asked you?
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo came into the computer room
while she was working.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo took
Ryan to a Halloween party.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever called Mr.
Montalvo indicating that Ryan was asking for him and ask
Mr. Montalvo to take Ryan to a Halloween party.
Ms. Logan said the relationship was over and, if
anything, she was discouraging Mr. Montalvo which Mr.
Montalvo could not accept.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was
discouraging Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said entirely, the entire time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was trying to
encourage him.
Ms. Logan said absolutely not.
Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if she agreed to allow
Mr.
Montalvo to take
Ryan for Halloween.
Ms.
Logan -said she
did not. She said the atmosphere was
so
bad at the time
she was working she said yes to get
Mr.
Montalvo out of
the office; however, Mr. Montalvo did
not
take Ryan. She
said she did it to get Mr. Montalvo
out
of her work area.
Attorney Whitelock asked if this was a couple of nights
before the Baystreet incident.
Ms. Logap said the Baystreet incident was in November.
Attorney Whitelock said Halloween was only a few nights
before.
Ms. Logan said she did not remember exactly.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated in her direct
testimony that in December a Secretary came to her
regarding her relationship with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said many times.
Attorney Whitelock asked who the Secretary was.
Ms. Logan said this would have been Sylvia Iglovsky.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan ever threatened to
take Sylvia Iglovsky to Mr. Perretti if she bothered Ms.
Logan again.
Ms. Logan said she never threatened Sylvia Iglovsky.
Page 56
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan ever informed
Sylvia Iglovsky that she would report her to Mr.
Perretti.
Ms. Logan said she informed Sylvia Iglovsky at the
direction of the Police Department that she was not to be
a mediator for Mr. Montalvo because it could jeopardize
her position.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan informed Sylvia
Iglovsky that she would lose her job.
Ms. Logan said she did not tell Sylvia Iglovsky that she
would lose her job.
Attorney Whitelock asked who in the Police Department
directed Ms. Logan.
Ms. Logan said Detective Chovan.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was after she
contacted Detective Chovan on January 8, 1988.
Ms. Logan said it happened after Sylvia Iglovsky came to
her. She said she informed Detective Chovan that Mr.
Montalvo was passing messages through Sylvia Iglovsky to
her. She said Detective Chovan directed her to go to
Sylvia Iglovsky and indicate that Sylvia Iglovsky should
not be a mediator for Mr. Montalvo because it could
jeopardize Sylvia Iglovsky's position. She said she did
not threaten Sylvia Iglovsky.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan was indicating that
Detective Chovan went to Sylvia Iglovsky regarding not
making any more contact.
Ms. Logan said no, Detective Chovan asked her to tell
Sylvia Iglo�aky not to be the mediator.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was after
January 8, 1988 when she reported to Detective Chovan.
Ms. Logan said this was after Mr. Montalvo was suspended
because Mr. Montalvo contacted Sylvia Iglovsky.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was after the
Administrative action was taken.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan testified in her direct
testimony that Sylvia Iglovsky came to her regarding a
luncheon Mr. Montalvo wanted to have to bury the hatchet.
He said Ms. Logan stated that she agreed to have lunch
with Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said this was two different incidents. She
said Attorney Whitelock discussed this matter earlier.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was at the
same time.
Ms. Logan said this was a different time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Sylvia Iglovsky
came to her in December, 1987.
Page 57
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said it happened after Administrative action
was taken.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she discussed Ryan
and his soccer games by making arrangements to have Ryan
picked up.
Ms. Logan said she was sure that the luncheon had nothing
to do with her son. She said the luncheon consisted of
Mr. Montalvo telling her that he had resolved in his own
mind that the relationship was over, he would not bother
her and they would be friends only.
Attorney Whitelock said after the incident was reported,
Ms. Logan did not allow Detective Chovan to handle the
matter but in fact Ms. Logan went to Mr. Perretti. He
asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan asked what incident Attorney Whitelock was
referring to..
Attorney Whitelock replied, on January 25, 1988. He
asked Ms. Logan if she went to Mr. Perretti.
Ms. Logan said on January 25, 1988, she did go to Mr.
Perretti.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever discussed
the matter with Mr. Ferretti before this.
Ms. Logan said previously, never.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo picked
her son up from soccer.
Ms. Logan asked, John who?
Attorney Whitelock said, Montalvo.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo ever
picked her son up from soccer.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said Mr. Montalvo would not
have known where to pick her son up.
Attorney Whitelock said unless Ms. Logan told Mr.
Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not tell Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked when the soccer season was.
Ms. Logan said she thought it started in November or
December.
Referring to Exhibit "Montalvo 1", Attorney Whitelock
asked Ms. Logan if the letter which started "Good Morning
Darling" was her handwriting.
Ms. Logan replied yes. She said she wrote this while
they were in the relationship; however, she did not write
the date on it of June or July, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where she was staying
at this time.
Page 58
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said it looked like she spent the night with
Mr. Montalvo that night.
Attorney Whitelock asked who "Crystal" was.
Ms. Logan said this was her nickname she had her entire
life.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if everybody called
her Crystal.
Ms. Logan said a lot of people called her Crystal.
Attorney Whitelock said the letter asked Mr. Montalvo to
get Ryan up and take care of him. He asked Ms. Logan how
often this occurred.
Ms. Logan said a couple of times.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they were sleeping
together that night.
Ms. Logan said it looked like it, they were in the
relationship and she indicated that they had been
intimate. She asked Attorney Whitelock what more he
wanted.
Attorney Whitelock said the first paragraph seemed to
imply that there was no more intimacy that night because
Ms. Logan missed Mr. Montalvo coming to bed.
Ms. Logan said she guessed she did.
Attorney Whitelock said it was obvious Ms. Logan did not
go to bed for intimate behavior but to sleep there that
night.
Ms. Logan said she supposed.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that this
never occurred. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said she did not say this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo never
slept at her house with her and Ryan.
Ms. Logan said she did not say that Mr. Montalvo did not.
She said she stated that Mr. Montalvo had. She said
this matter was discussed earlier.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if it was for purposes
other than intimacy.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what he meant.
Attorney Whitelock
said he was trying
to indicate that
Ms. Logan and Mr.
Montalvo were living
together as much
as possible during
that time frame and
Mr. Montalvo was
taking care of Ms.
Logan's child. He
asked if this was
correct.
Ms. Logan said Mr.
Montalvo and she never
lived together.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they were living
together the morning she wrote the note.
Page 59
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo spent the night. She had
spent the night; however, they never lived together.
Attorney Whitelock said he understood that they did not
have the same legal addresses; however, Ms. Logan and Mr.
Montalvo shared the same bed for a continuing period of
time. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said on several occasions.
Attorney Whitelock asked, just on occasion?
Ms. Logan said on several occasions.
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo had such a
relationship with Mr. Montalvo's son that he would get
her son up in the morning, take care of her son's
medicine and take her son to school. He asked if this
was correct.
Ms. Logan said not get her son to school. She said this
must have been on a weekend because she did not think
that Mr. Montalvo would have ever taken her son to
school. She said it must have been a weekend because at
the bottom of the letter there was a telephone number.
She said this must have occurred ❑n a Friday night in
which she was going to work the next day.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she spent the
weekend together.
Ms. Logan said if this was what Attorney Whitelock wanted
to call it. She said she was working days and evenings
with a couple of hours off in between.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what her work hours
were over that weekend.
Ms. Logan said she began working in the mornings until
the afternoon and then return to work at 5:00 P.M. or
6:00 P.M. and work through the evening until about 11:00
P.M.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how Mr. Montalvo left
himself in and out of the house.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did not leave himself in and
out of her house.
Attorney Whitelock said when Mr. Montalvo took Ryan out
of the house...
Ms. Logan said she was spending the night at Mr.
Montalvo's house. She said Mr. Montalvo did not take her
key until sometime later than this.
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo was not at Ms.
Logan's house.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was not at her house.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if there was anything
which occurred that was unusual in the relationship with
Mr. Montalvo that she did not mention.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what he meant by
unusual.
Page 6.0
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock said he meant anything extraordinary
which stuck out in Ms. Logan's mind. He said anything
they forgot to cover.
Ms. Logan said there were a lot of things which stuck out
in her mind.
Attorney Whitelock asked, like what?
Ms. Logan said one
of the things was
after their
vacations, Mr. Montalvo
wanted to get
together to go to
Six Flags Atlantis
and she agreed because
she felt this
would be the time
to discuss with Mr.
Montalvo how
important she felt
it was to maintain
a friendship
because they worked
together. She said
that day Mr.
Montalvo tried to
give her a ring.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she was supposed
to be doing that day.
Ms. Logan said they were going to Six Flags Atlantis.
Attorney Whitelock asked, for what purpose?
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo wanted to get together one
last time. She said she thought it was a very good idea
because she felt it was important to stress how important
it was to maintain a normal working relationship.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan was only on vacation
for a couple of days.
Ms. Logan said she had a two week vacation.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was only out of
town for a couple of days.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had a two week
vacation and went to Tampa for a few days.
Ms. Logan said she was gone and Mr. Montalvo was in Rhode
Island somewhere.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she decided to
inform Mr. Montalvo that the relationship was breaking up
when Mr. Montalvo returned from vacation.
Ms. Logan said she thought Mr. Montalvo knew before then
to slow the relationship down because she felt Mr.
Montalvo was trying to accelerate the relationship. She
said once Mr. Montalvo returned from vacation it was
still very difficult for Mr. Montalvo; however, by the
time they went to Six Flags Atlantis, Mr. Montalvo knew,
without a doubt, that she did not want the relationship.
She said this occurred at the end of August, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how Mr. Montalvo tried
to give her a ring.
Ms. Logan said the day they were going to Six Flags
Atlantis, Mr. Montalvo asked her to sit down on the
couch. She said Mr. Montalvo had a friend there.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what Mr. Montalvo's
friend's name was.
Page 61
5/3/s9
Ms. Logan said she thought his name was Steve. She said
she never met him before. She said Mr. Montalvo asked
her to come and sit down.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where Steve was.
Ms. Logan said Steve was in the living room.
Attorney Whitelock asked, he is in the living room.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where her son was.
Ms. Logan said Ryan was in the house with a friend of
his. She said Steve asked the boys to go outside for a
minute which she thought to be odd. She said Mr.
Montalvo went into his bedroom to get something and came
out and asked her to sit down on the couch which she did.
She said Mr. Montalvo began to put something on her hand
and she stopped him. She said it appeared to be a
diamond and she informed Mr. Montalvo that she could not
accept it because it was not what she wanted and he knew
this. She said she informed Mr. Montalvo that it was
beautiful; however, she could not accept it, she was
sorry and she handed it right over to Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan testified that Mr.
Montalvo's friend said, "What is the matter, Elena, don't
you believe in long engagements.".
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was what he
said.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock said this was the first time Ms. Logan
ever met him.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan why he would have used
her first name.
Ms. Logan asked, Elena?
Attorney Whitelock replied, yes.
Ms. Logan said this was a silly question.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how anyone would have
known her if she never met anybody before.
Ms. Logan said obviously he was Mr. Montalvo's friend.
She asked why they would not know her name. She said
obviously he was there for moral support.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan how he would have
known her.
Ms. Logan said he was Mr. Montalvo's friend. She
suggested Attorney Whitelock ask Mr. Montalvo.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what he meant by
"don't you believe in long engagements.".
Page 62
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she had no idea.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she asked him.
Ms. Logan said, no, and she asked why she should ask him
this. She said she did not even know this man.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what she said in
response to it.
Ms. Logan said she was very upset.
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo went into his room,
got a bag and came out with a diamond ring.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock said Mr. Montalvo came over to where
Ms. Logan was sitting.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo asked her to come over and
sit down.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where Mr. Montalvo was
sitting.
Ms. Logan said on the couch.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan where the friend was
sitting.
Ms. Logan said the friend was sitting in a chase chair
next to the couch.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the chair was
close.
Ms. Logan said very close.
Attorney Whitelock said at this point in time Mr.
Montalvo tried to slip something on her hand and the
comments took place.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock said the friend said something and Ms.
Logan said nothing in response.
Ms. Logan said she did not remember exactly what she said
to him. She said she did not know this man and she asked
why he would say such a thing to her. She asked why Mr.
Montalvo was even trying to give her a ring.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was the end of
the conversation and they went to Six Flags Atlantis.
Ms. Logan said, no. She said Mr. Montalvo was crying and
she felt terrible for him yet she could not accept the
ring. She asked what should be done when someone tried
to give a ring that appeared to be a diamond. She asked
if a person should get up and leave. She said she did
not know what to do; however, she said she was sorry and
indicated that they could go that day. She said she got
up and got her son in the car to leave and Mr. Montalvo
came out right behind her, jumped in the car like nothing
had just transpired. She said this was very odd.
Page 63
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if any further
conversation took place.
Ms. Logan said during the drive, Mr. Montalvo said all
types of things.
Attorney Whitelock said he meant in .the apartment in the
presence of Mr. Montalvo's friend.
Ms. Logan said she just informed Mr. Montalvo that he
knew when he tried to give her a ring...
Attorney Whitelock asked at the time Steve made the
comment, "don't you believe in long engagements.", was
this the end of the conversation.
Ms. Logan replied, no. She said she turned to Mr.
Montalvo and said that he knew she did not have these
feelings for him. She said the whole purpose of the day
was just to talk about how they were going to have a
normal working relationship. She said this was not Mr.
Montalvo's purpose.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if they were talking
about a normal working relationship.
Ms. Logan said absolutely. She said this was the intent
of her going.
Attorney Whitelock said previous to Ms. Logan going on
vacation, they were sleeping with each other at least
three times a week for the previous four weeks. He asked
if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said they had slept together; however, she was
breaking the relationship off because Mr. Montalvo was
too...
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she called people
that she had a normal relationship with, "Darling".
Ms. Logan said she is affectionate.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that someone
had come to her and complained about her performance as
an employee. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan said this was after continual attempts by Mr.
Montalvo for her to go back to him.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if her answer was,
"yes" .
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what date this was.
Ms. Logan said she did not recall.
Attorney Whitelock said this was late in December, 1987.
Ms. Logan said probably around December, 1987.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was in her
evaluation. He asked Ms. Logan if someone called her in
and informed her that she was not doing well.
'I
1
1
Page 64
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she was not called in; however, she was
sitting in her work area when her Supervisor asked her
why she was not concentrating.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was in regards
to her evaluation of her performance. He asked if yearly
performances were done.
Ms. Logan replied, yes; however, this was not when this
occurred.
TAPE 9
Attorney Whitelock asked when this occurred.
Ms. Logan said this would have been in December, 1987
because of why she was having problems with concentrating
at work. She said she explained to her Supervisor that
there was a lot of interference in the work place.
Attorney Whitelock asked, with who?
Ms. Logan replied, with Mr. Montalvo. She said it had
been going on for some time.
Attorney Whitelock said they discussed their relationship
extensively today in September, October, November and
December, 1987. He asked Ms. Logan to explain what Mr. Montalvo
did to interfere with her performance as an employee
with the City, other than the Baystreet incident.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo did a lot of things. She
asked Attorney Whitelock to explain what he meant.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if it was prior to the
time of December, 1987.
Ms. Logan said continually, yes.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who she informed of
this.
Ms. Logan said her Supervisor.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who here Supervisor
was.
Ms. Logan replied, Glenda Christian.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her what to do.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian did not give her any advice
whatsoever, unfortunately.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she received three
previous complaints about her performance.
Ms. Logan said not that she was aware of.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was confronted
on two previous occasions by Mrs. Christian regarding her
performance not being appropriate.
Ms. Logan said one time. She suggested Attorney
Whitelock call Mrs. Christian as a Witness and ask Mrs.
Christian.
Attorney Whitelock said he was asking Ms. Logan.
Page 65
5/3/89
Ms. Logan said she recalled one time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
confronted her one time.
Ms. Logan said, one time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she ever worked for
Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she understood that Mr. Montalvo was over
Mrs. Christian and he oversaw the Data Processing
Department as well as several other Departments.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mr. Montalvo was
ever her Supervisor.
Ms. Logan said Mr. Montalvo was not her direct
Supervisor.
At this time, Attorney Whitelock submitted Respondent
Exhibit, "Montalvo 4" into the record.
Attorney Ruf asked if he could read the Exhibit before he
questioned the Witness.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to allow
Attorney Ruf to read the Exhibit before he continued with
the questioning.
C/M Stelzer asked Ms. Logan where the gum was placed on
the car.
Ms. Logan said the gum was placed on the door handle and
the keyhole was below it.
C/M Stelzer asked Ms. Logan if the gum was on the
keyhole.
Ms. Logan said on the door handle. She said it was on
top and under the door handle and not on the key hole.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Ms. Logan if she grabbed the gum
when she opened the door.
Attorney Ruf asked Attorney Whitelock if he was going to
enter the document into evidence. After discussion, the
Attorneys agreed to enter the document into evidence
which was marked, "Montalvo 4".
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if, on October 13,
1987, Mr. Montalvo wrote a letter of commendation on her
behalf requesting her merit raise.
Ms. Logan said he must have.
Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Whitelock just made
reference to the fact that three times Ms. Logan received
reprimand from her Supervisor regarding her performance.
He asked Mayor Abramowitz if the letter of commendation
came before or after the reprimands.
Attorney Whitelock said this matter had not been
discussed yet.
Page 66
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she was evaluated
last in April 2, 1987, and he submitted the evaluation to
Ms. Logan for review.
Ms. Logan agreed.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what recommendations
were made...
Attorney Ruf asked Attorney Whitelock if he was going to
enter this document into evidence.
Attorney.Whitelock said he did not care and then, he
asked for the document back.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her at this time that her concentration level
was not appropriate.
Ms. Logan said not at all, not at this time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her that she needed to concentrate more on her
weakness to complete tasks.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian may have written this on
the evaluation; however, Mrs. Christian did not discuss
it with her.
Attorney Whitelock said the evaluation indicated that Ms.
Logan's ability to tackle things would come as she
continued experience on the City's computer system.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian wrote this.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was the first
time she was confronted regarding her concentration.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian did not mention to her that
her concentration was bad. She said this was Mrs.
Christian's way of explaining her really high standards.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian had
higher standards than her.
Ms. Logan said she did not say they were higher; however,
Mrs. Christian had very exceptionally high standards.
She said Mrs. Christian made no complaint to her at the
review. She said she felt the review was not very good;
however, Mrs. Christian made not complaint.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she felt the review
was not correct.
Ms. Logan said she did not say this. She said it was an
average review.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms, Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her of her concentration level at this time.
Ms. Logan said no, not at this time.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her that she had to work on her concentration.
Ms. Logan said Attorney Whitelock was misinterpreting the
statement. She said the statement indicated that she
Page 67
5/3/89
needed to concentrate more and she asked if she could
read the statement.
Attorney Whitelock agreed.
Ms. Logan read, "Completing one task at a time, rather
than being involved in too many things at one time." She
said this meant that she took on a lot of different
things. She said it depended on how the statement was
interpreted.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this was the way
she was looking at it.
Ms. Logan said she knew how she worked.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if Mrs. Christian
informed her to take a course because she was not able to
complete the tasks on a timely basis.
Ms. Logan said it did not indicate this. She asked if
she could see the review again.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan to read the bottom
paragraph.
Ms. Logan read, "Elena should enroll in classes at
Broward Community College Basic Programming." She said
this did not say what Attorney Whitelock indicated.
Attorney Whitelock said it did not state exactly what he
said; however, Mrs. Christian suggested that Ms. Logan
take courses. He asked if this was correct.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Attorney Whitelock said this was in April 21, 1987. He
said Ms. Logan was not involved with Mr. Montalvo then.
He asked Ms. Logan what her excuse was for her
concentration level then.
Ms. Logan said she did not understand what Attorney
Whitelock was talking about.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan informed him that Mrs.
Christian came to her sometime in December and Ms. Logan
informed Mrs. Christian about the problems with Mr.
Montalvo which was the reason her concentration level was
not appropriate.
Ms. Logan said she informed Mrs. Christian that there was
interference in the work place.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she identified
anyone with the interference in the work place.
Ms. Logan said Mrs. Christian knew.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she told Mrs.
Christian.
Ms. Logan said she was sure she knew.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she told Mrs.
Christian.
Ms. Logan replied, yes.
Page 68
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she informed Mrs.
Christian that the reason her concentration was bad was
because of interference by Mr. Montalvo.
Ms. Logan said she did not use his name at this point.
She said she indicated that there was too much
interference in the work place. She said Mrs. Christian
knew what she was talking about.
Attorney Whitelock said Mrs. Christian came to Ms. Logan
regarding her work performance in December; however, in
reality, Mrs. Christian already commented on Ms. Logan's
concentration level in April, 1987.
Ms. Logan said no she did not.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she took it to be a
negative criticism.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what dates he was
talking about.
Attorney Whitelock said April 21, 1987, when the review
was signed by Ms. Logan, Mrs. Christian and Mr. Perretti.
Ms. Logan said the review was from November, 1986, to
April 21, 1987. She said Mrs. Christian came to her once
in December, and told her she was not concentrating. She
said when she received the review, there were no
problems; however, during the month of December, she
informed Mrs. Christian that there was too much
interference.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if the review was
eight months previous to that.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock to explain.
Attorney Whitelock said the review was in April, 1987;
however, the conversation Ms. Logan was talking about
occurred in December, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she was sorry, this would have been after.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan what her excuse was in
April, 1987.
Ms. Logan asked Attorney Whitelock what he expected
because through September, October, November and
December.
Attorney Whitelock said he did not want to be
argumentative with Ms. Logan; however, he just wanted an
answer. He asked Ms. Logan what her excuse was back in
April because she had no relationship with Mr. Montalvo
then.
Ms. Logan said the man would come into the computer room,
harass her and did a lot of things for months.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if this occurred in
April, 1987.
Ms. Logan said in December, her Supervisor...
Page 69
5/3/89
Attorney Whitelock said he was not discussing this. He
asked Ms. Logan to respond to his question of what her
excuse was for April, 1987.
Ms. Logan said she did not need an excuse.
Attorney Whitelock said he knew she did not need an
excuse and he asked if she had one.
Ms. Logan said she did not need one and she suggested
that Attorney Whitelock read the review.
Attorney Ruf said Ms. Logan should not worry because
Attorney Whitelock would be putting the review in
evidence and the triers of the facts would review it. He
said Ms. Logan explained what the review said three
times.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan did not.
Attorney Ruf said Ms. Logan did and she read the document
into the record.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any
explanation for it.
Ms. Logan said she did not need an explanation.
Attorney Ruf objected because Ms. Logan already explained
it.
Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Whitelock asked the same
question four times and he received the same answer four
times. He said it was not appropriate for Attorney
Whitelock to ask the question again.
Attorney Whitelock said he was entitled to an answer.
Mayor Abramowitz said Ms. Logan gave him an answer.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that she did
not need to give him an answer.
Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Whitelock did not like Ms.
Logan's answer; however, Ms. Logan gave him an answer.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan indicated that she did
not have to give Attorney Whitelock an answer. He said
Ms. Logan tried to change her answer first and thought
that this occurred during the time frame that she went to
Mrs. Christian and she was incorrect.
Mayor Abramowitz agreed.
Attorney Whitelock said when the mistake was pointed out
to Ms. Logan, her first explanation was given; however,
he was now asking Ms. Logan what her excuse was at that
time.
Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan
this question twice and, after the mistake was made,
Attorney Whitelock received the same answer twice. He
said Attorney Whitelock may not like the answer; however,
it was the answer Ms. Logan gave him.
Attorney Whitelock asked if Ms. Logan did not have to
give him an answer.
Page 70
5/3/89
Mayor Abramowitz said this was not what Ms. Logan said.
Attorney Whitelock said he would instruct his Witnesses
on cross-examination that he did not give anybody an
answer.
Mayor Abramowitz said if this was the answer they give...
Attorney Whitelock said that Mayor Abramowitz was
incorrect because Ms. Logan was evading the question. He
said Mayor Abramowitz was responsible for directing the
Witness to answer the questions.
Mayor Abramowitz said if Ms. Logan did not answer the
question in any way then he would have done what Attorney
Whitelock just suggested. He said Attorney Whitelock
asked the question several times.
Attorney Whitelock withdrew his question and he asked Ms.
Logan if she had any factual excuse for the reason.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any factual
excuse.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock said he was entitled to get it on the
record.
Attorney Ruf said the question was on the record
approximately 8 times. He said the record was clear that
Attorney Whitelock tried to ask the question. He said he
objected by saying that Attorney Whitelock had already
asked the question and Mayor Abramowitz sustained the
objection.
Mayor Abramowitz suggested that Attorney Whitelock
continue and the objection was well noted.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she had any Factual
reasons why she did not have an excuse.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock asked if there was any reason.
Attorney Ruf objected to the question.
Mayor Abramowitz sustained the objection.
Attorney Whitelock asked Attorney Ruf what he was
objecting to.
Attorney Ruf said the question was asked and answered
multiple times.
Attorney Whitelock said Ms. Logan answered that she did
not need to give an answer. He said he was now asking
Page 71
5/3/89
Ms. Logan if there were any factual basis and he was
entitled to an answer.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to continue.
Attorney Whitelock said he was here to elicit facts and
Ms. Logan could not refuse to give facts.
Attorney Ruf said Ms. Logan did not refuse.
Mayor Abramowitz said Ms. Logan gave an answer to the
best of her ability. He said Attorney Whitelock asked a
question and he was given an answer.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she agreed to the
evaluation.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she filed a
complaint about the evaluation.
Ms. Logan replied, no.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan if she signed the
evaluation freely and voluntarily.
Ms. Logan said she signed it.
Attorney Ruf asked Attorney Whitelock if he was going to
put the document into evidence.
Attorney Whitelock said no.
City Attorney Doody announced that the Hearing was
scheduled to end at 12:00 P.M.
Attorney Whitelock asked Ms. Logan who John Sorello was.
Attorney Ruf objected.
Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Ruf for the basis of his
objection.
Attorney Ruf said he objected because Mayor Abramowitz
ruled earlier that there was no necessary to go into an
examination of who Ms. Logan was dating.
After discussion with City Attorney Doody, Mayor
Abramowitz asked Attorney Whitelock to explain the
purpose of his question.
Attorney Whitelock said John Sorello was a City employee
and Supervisor and Ms. Logan dated him. He said it was a
part of Ms. Logan's credibility.
Ms. Logan said John Sorello was not a City employee.
Mayor Abramowitz said he wanted to know where the
question would lead.
Attorney Whitelock said this was Ms. Logan's pattern of
behavior in which he would show as her credibility. He
said this was her former Supervisor that she worked for
and dated during the time frame.
Page 72
5/3/89
Mayor Abramowitz said the objection was sustained because
it did not have anything to do with the case at hand. He
said the case was between Mr. Montalvo and Ms. Logan.
Attorney Whitelock asked if it had nothing to do with Ms.
Logan's credibility if she engaged in a pattern of
dating fellow employees, especially Supervisors.
Mayor Abramowitz said he would not think any less of Ms.
Logan regardless of who she dated. He said this was not
his purpose at the hearing.
Attorney Whitelock said for the record, he understood
that John Sorello was an individual who Ms. Logan worked
with and who supervised her. He said Ms. Logan solicited
and sought out his companionship and had an intimate with
hifft f-or some period of time. He said he was professing
itf,or the record so that when he argued to the Judge
that, in effect, he has been precluded from presenting
the testimony and this Body was not considering the
testimony, which he considered totally relevant to not
only show a pattern of behavior but also to determine Ms.
Logan's credibility. He said in essence, he would have
to have this on the record if they were refusing to allow
her to testify to it.
Attorney Ruf said his objection stood because it did not
have any relevance to the case.
V/M Bender asked Attorney Whitelock if he had evidence
that this individual was Ms. Logan's Supervisor.
Attorney Whitelock replied, yes.
V/M Bender asked if he could see it.
Mayor Abramowitz said this matter was just ruled that it
would not be presented in this case.
Attorney Whitelock had no further questions.
Attorney Ruf had no questions.
Attorney Whitelock said he had one Witness he would like
called.
Mayor Abramowitz said providing that the process was not
long.
Attorney Whitelock said it may take time with the
Witness.
City Manager Kelly
said that Attorney Whitelock had
several people which
were
Subpoenaed and he asked if a
time certain could
be set
for the Witnesses for the
following sessions.
Attorney Whitelock
said he
would like to get this matter
resolved; however,
it was
difficult to try the matter in
a piece -meal fashion.
He
said he would be willing to work
weekends or nights
to get
this matter resolved.
Mayor Abramowitz suggested that a schedule be worked out
to the satisfaction of everyone.
Page 73
5/3/89
City Attorney Doody said Attorney Whitlock '...ad a right
to have his Witnesses attend in whatever fashion he
pleased. He said the Witnesses were to deal with
Attorney Whitelock.
With no further business, Mayor Abramowitz ADJOURNED this
meeting at 11:55 A.M.
i
NO MAN ABRAMOWITZ, MAYOR
C OL A. EVANS, CITY CLERK
"This public document was promulgated at a cost of $246.40 or $20.80 per
copy to inform the general public, public officers and employees o;
recent opinions and considerations of the City Council of the City of
Tamarac.
ci �` `� OF TAMARAC
t PiffiED AT MEETING t)F
City Clerk
1
Page 74