Loading...
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