Tag Archive for skip jarvis

Skip Jarvis Withdraws Candidacy

State Attorney Robert “Skip” Jarvis, who will appear before a grand jury on an allegation that he misused his office has withdrawn his candidacy for re-election to the seat. Below is a statement that Jarvis issued Monday:

Twenty-eight years ago I proudly took an oath to enforce the laws of the State of Florida and to protect and defend it’s Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. I have continued to serve proudly, twenty-four years as an Assistant State Attorney and for the past four as your elected State Attorney.
During these twenty-eight years I feel that I have directly made a difference in many lives, both victims and defendants, while pursuing justice under the law. I have used my position to promote the interests of the citizens I serve.
Now, in the midst of my bid for re-election, I am faced with a decision of whether to fight an allegation initiated by a former disgruntled employee and further pursued by persons unknown that has resulted in a grand jury investigation. I have reviewed the limited information that the specially appointed State Attorney has been willing to provide to me and firmly believe that there is no basis for any charges, much less the time and expense of a grand jury investigation. It appears to be purely politically motivated, however in responding to it to prove my innocence I will be distracted from my re-election campaign and forced to spend personal funds that were intended to fund my campaign. The mere fact that there was an announcement of a grand jury investigation has brought political hurdles that must be overcome irregardless of the outcome of the investigation.
Additionally, I have watched the toll this first term in office has taken on my family members, especially my wife who has stood by my side for over forty-three years.
We have both withstood the personal attacks during the 2008 campaign, the false allegations in 2010 made by a former employee who was directed to cease involving this office in her personal politics, and now the allegation that I have somehow acted improperly as State Attorney by accessing certain criminal intelligence information and law enforcement records which I had, as State Attorney, full authority to view. While each of these issues in themselves carry little merit, as a whole they wear upon a person to the extent that I must consider whether remaining in office is worth the price to me and my family.
I have considered the strides we have made with the office in the face of a drastically reduced budget. I have begun assembling a team of young prosecutors to take the place of older retiring ones. I have put in place upgrades in equipment and vehicles,
training, and job assignments for better efficiency.
I am proud of what we have done over the past four years and of my twenty-eight year career with this office.
With that said, I am tired. I have given my life to the citizens of the Third Judicial Circuit. I have given my health to them. I have sacrificed precious time that I could have spent with my wife and family and given priority to the interests of the people. Many recognize this, most do not. Some appreciate this, most do not care, and some even resent it.
I feel a loyalty to my staff, some of whom left other jobs to come to work for me. I fear that their loyalty to me might become for them a liability and jeopardize whether their career with this office is safe from reprisal.
I feel a loyalty to my loyal supporters who have pledged their support in my bid for re-election, however it comes down to the fact that the spark in me is dying. I no longer have the spirit nor desire to go on in the face of the pressure and current public attitude toward public servants.
Therefore, Pam and I have decided that I should accept the offer made to me by State Attorney Brad King that if I would withdraw my bid for re-election, all issues scheduled to be presented to the Leon County Grand Jury will go away, that I will be allowed to complete my current term in office, and that my thirty plus years service toward vested retirement will not be affected. It is their threat of taking my retirement, something I had trusted would take care of my wife after I am gone, that is my greatest fear.
With this, I thank each and every one whose faith in me has kept me going. To my staff, I thank each and every one of you for your faithfulness and loyalty. To others, I wish you the best, whether you are a supporter or an opponent.
Thank you to the citizens who entrusted me with this office for the past four years. I will forever be proud of the job that I have done and of your trust in me. Now it is time for me to make up for lost time with my family so I bid you each a most sincere good-bye.

Robert L. “Skip” Jarvis, Jr.
State Attorney
Third Judicial Circuit of Florida

Share

State Attorney To Seek Death Penalty For Givens

Re: State vs. Gary Leonard Givens, Jr.
Case no. 12- 0089 CF

I. First Degree Murder
II. Burglary While Armed
III. Burglary of a Dwelling
IV. Grand Theft III: Specified Property (Automobile)
V. Grand Theft III
VI. Credit Card Fraud: Stolen Card
VII. Credit Card Fraud: Stolen Card
VIII. Credit Card Theft
IX. Credit Card Theft

State Attorney Skip Jarvis announced today that after considering the facts developed during the continuing investigation of the death of James Edward Campbell on March 15, 2012, and the Indictment returned by the Madison County Grand Jury on April 20, 2012, the State of Florida will be seeking the death penalty upon a conviction in this case.
Jarvis said “This decision is not taken lightly. The facts show a vulnerable victim living alone who was coldly and callously killed, then left for days on the floor of his home while the defendant came and went, stealing items from the victim’s home.”

Share

Third District State Attorney Recuses Himself From Voter Fraud Investigaton

Jacob,

When I was first approached by counsel for the candidate asking for an investigation into the election process, I referred them to the Florida Division of Elections which would be the appropriate agency to look into the matter. It was the Division of Elections that contacted FDLE.
Later I was given a briefing by FDLE of their initial findings and at that time it appeared to me that they needed an advisory prosecutor available to them while conducting their investigation. I also believed that with the investigation involving elected officials with whom I have a working relationship, it would be best that I step aside to allow an independent prosecutor be appointed. While I felt that my staff was capable of working with the investigation, I wished to avoid any appearance of impropriety.
I contacted the Governor’s office and asked that a special prosecutor be appointed. For this reason the case is being handled by the State Attorney for the Second Judicial Circuit.

Skip Jarvis

Share

State Attorney Appears Before Parole Commission To Oppose Edenfield Release

State Attorney Skip Jarvis appeared Wednesday, July 13, before the Florida Parole Commission in the case of Orin Dale Edenfield who was convicted in Madison County in 1982 of the First Degree Murder of Sally Rae Trimmer of Valdosta, Georgia. On May 7, 1982 Edenfield kidnapped Ms. Trimmer in Valdosta and brought her against her will to Madison County where he killed her and buried her body. He was indicted in Case No. 82- 57 CF for First Degree Murder for the killing.
On November 19, 1982 he pled guilty to the murder and was sentenced by Circuit Judge John W. Peach to life imprisonment.
Edenfield was sentenced during the time that Florida law provided for parole. He has served the minimum mandatory twenty-five years and is eligible for parole consideration.
Jarvis appeared before the Parole Commission to oppose his release and was successful in convincing the Commissioners to follow a recommendation to set a prison presumptive release date of May 11, 2107. Mr. Edenfield was 26 at the time of the murder in 1982. If he is able to serve his entire sentence, when released in 2107 he will be 151 years old.
Jarvis said “I appear at each and every one of these hearings because the victims cannot. Many times there will be family members also testifying, but in some cases such as this there are not. Sally Rae Trimmer was a person, not a statistic, and should not be forgotten.”

Share

Mutual Statement Released Between Skip Jarvis and Krisanne Hall

Krisanne Hall v. Robert L. “Skip” Jarvis, Jr., State Attorney
Case no. 3:10-cv-00443-RBD-TEM
U. S. District Court, Middle District, Jacksonville Division

MUTUAL STATEMENT

On July 5, 2011, we, KrisAnne Hall and Skip Jarvis, attended a court ordered mediation in an attempt to resolve the case without a court ruling or a jury verdict. We understand that the cost of defending this lawsuit is and remains substantial and is being funded by Florida taxpayers.

This case presents issues which are vitally important to the parties. These issues involve inherent conflicts which require careful balancing between the First Amendment rights of public employees and the acknowledged rights of public agencies to maintain the integrity and efficiency of their offices.

Ms. Hall strongly believes that she was exercising her right to free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and United States Supreme Court precedent when she spoke at certain political groups’ functions on issues she felt were of public concern that are subject to serious debate.

Mr. Jarvis strongly believes that he, as the elected State Attorney, had the authority to ask her to limit her speech because of complaints he was receiving about her speech and his belief that she was associating her ideas to the State Attorney’s Office for the Third Judicial Circuit (“SAO”). He desired to preserve the essential perception of neutrality of his office while at the same time preventing potential negative impact on his office. Mr. Jarvis, therefore, believed that he gave Ms. Hall an option to remain a State prosecutor under such circumstances and that he was not infringing on her First Amendment rights, but was protecting the integrity of the SAO.

We both agree that government employees have an interest in commenting upon matters of public concern. We also agree that the SAO has an interest in promoting the efficiency of public services, such as prosecuting criminals, it performs through its employees. We further agree that the United States Supreme Court has recognized that a government employer, like the SAO, needs a significant degree of control over its employees’ words and actions and that when a private citizen enters government service, the citizen must accept certain limitations on his or her freedom.

The legal issues involved in this case are important to both parties, but we agree that the issues are complex and unpredictable in the courts. In an effort to avoid expending additional taxpayer dollars over this debate, the SAO has agreed to pay a portion of Ms. Hall’s reasonable attorney fees in exchange for Ms. Hall’s promise to voluntarily dismiss her lawsuit against the SAO and fulfill certain other obligations.

Share