VOLUSIA EXPOSED

Deputy Pare seeks voluntary evaluation / treatment

According to the incident report filed by VCSO Sgt. Socha, Deputy Pare freely admitted that he needed psychological counselling and would voluntarily seek such at the DeLand Florida Hospital.

Sgt. Socha's report also documents that the doctor's (Florida Hospital - DeLand) initial evaluation concluded that Deputy Pare did NOT meet the requirements to be involuntarily Baker Acted.

However, the report further suggest that it was understood that Deputy Pare would be admitted to the hospital (DeLand) in a voluntary status for further evaluation.

Was Deputy Pare's voluntary status
unacceptable to VCSO administrators?

According to Sgt. Socha's report, when Lt. Palermo advised VCSO Captain Jones of Deputy Pare's voluntary treatment status, Captain Jones was not satisfied that Deputy Pare had not been involuntarily committed under the Baker Act. Sgt. Socha's report further documents that both himself and Lt. Palermo returned to the DeLand hospital, under orders and transported Deputy Pare to Halifax Hospital, in Daytona Beach, for involuntary commitment under the Baker Act.

Did Lt. Palermo's express some concerns
regarding Deputy Pare's Baker Act?
Did he suffer retaliation, because of his concerns?

Apparently, Lt. Palermo also filed a report, in which he articulates his concerns surrounding the Baker Act of Deputy Pare.

It would appear (see the above document) that Lt. Palermo received a written reprimand attached to his questioning of Captain Jones' alleged order regarding the involuntarily Baker Acting Deputy Pare. Apparently, Lt. Palermo held the belief that Captain Jones' order, was an unlawful order.

Within approximately a year and a half, Lt. Palermo would submit his resignation, after the administration of the VCSO accused him of committing perjury. These allegations (perjury, etc) were apparently NOT attached to the Deputy Pare incident. However, Lt. Palermo's career did quickly sour, shortly after his written reprimand attached to the Pare incident.

Conflict of Interest?

During his final internal affairs investigation, the VCSO was somewhat critical of Lt. Palermo vocalizing his conflict of interest concerns attached to his January 31, 2003 County Personnel Board hearing.

Lt. Palermo, during an March 4, 2003 interview, admitted that he had vocalized his concerns attached to Personnel Board member, Leonard Davis sitting on the Personnel Board, and Assistant County Attorney Nancye Jones prosecuting the VCSO's case against him.
** Leonard Davis was a former member of the VCSO administration, and Attorney Jones is the spouse of VCSO Captain Robert Jones. Captain Jones was in Lt. Palermo's chain of command, and a probable witness for the board hearing. Captain Jones was also attached to the Deputy Pare incident.

Did the VCSO / County of Volusia (whether purposely or preceptively) deny Lt. Palermo a fair Personnel Board hearing, as a form of retaliation, in response to his earlier vocalize concerns surrounding the Baker Act of Deputy Pare? If you (our reader) were Lt. Palermo, would you have concerns that your Captain's spouse (a man you had inferred issued you an illegal order regarding the Deputy Pare Baker Act) was prosecuting the county's disciplinary case against you? Or that one of the four board members, on the County Personnel Board, was a former administrator within your employing agency, the VCSO?

Did the VCSO violate Florida Law
in the involuntary Baker Act of Deputy Pare?

Does a review of both Sgt. Socha's and Lt. Palermo's reports, tend to support that Captain Jones ordered them (Socha / Palermo) to secure Deputy Pare from Florida Hospital, and to involuntarily commit him under the Baker Act at Halifax Hospital?

According to the 2001 version of Florida Statute 394.463, it appears to verify that a law enforcement officer can only involuntarily commit an individual after the individual has refused a "voluntary examination after conscientious explanation and disclosure of the purpose of the examination"??

Now remember, according to Sgt. Socha's report (see above link), not only did Deputy Pare admit that he needed treatment, but he had, in fact, voluntarily admitted himself for treatment at Florida Hospital (DeLand). Sgt. Socha's report also states that after a forty five minutes evaluation, the doctor at Florida Hospital had concluded that Deputy Pare did not meet the criteria to be Baker Acted.

So, we (VolusiaExposed.Com) wonder how Sgt. Socha OR Lt. Palermo filed the below mandated MH-3052a Baker Act form (for Halifax Hospital)?

Did they (Socha / Palermo) check the box that indicates that Deputy Pare had refused a voluntary examination? If so, would that qualify as a falsification?

Did they (Socha / Palermo) check the box that indicates that Deputy Pare was "unable to determine for himself whether examination is necessary"? If so, would that qualify as a falsification?

Final Thoughts
&
The Mark Carper - Brian Pare comparison

So in the end, what do we (the public) know about the Deputy Pare 2001 Baker Act?

Did Captain Jones order Sgt. Socha and Lt. Palermo to involuntarily Baker Act Deputy Pare, in apparent violation of Florida law?

While Sgt. Socha's and Lt. Palermo's reports tend to support that such an order was given by Captain Jones, at the end of the day, only Palermo, Jones and Socha know what really occurred.

However, via the available paperwork, Deputy Pare clearly acknowledged his need for mental health assessment. This very same paperwork clearly indicates that Deputy Pare voluntarily admitted himself for such an assessment at Florida Hospital, in DeLand. The paper work further verifies that Sgt. Socha and Lt. Palermo returned to Florida Hospital, removed Deputy Pare from this assessment, and transported him across the county, to Halifax Hospital, placing him under an involuntary Baker Act.

Why would Sgt. Socha and Lt. Palermo do such a thing - and were their actions, of involuntarily Baker Acting Deputy Pare, in compliance with Florida Statutes?

Interestingly, while the VCSO had little to no problem insuring that Deputy Pare was involuntarily committed under the Florida Baker Act, their zest for such concerns proved somewhat lacking approximately ten years later.

In April 2012, DeLand resident Mark Carper would allegedly threaten his neighbors, point a firearm to his head, refuse to obey lawful orders of deputies, thus causing a three and a half hour stand off with the sheriff's office - without the VCSO finding the need to ensure that Mr. Carper was either taken into custody for criminal violations, or taken into custody under the Baker Act.

Approximately two weeks later, Mr. Carper would shoot and kill his neighbor, and then commit suicide.

We invite you to review our Mark Carper article.

Listen to Sheriff Johnson explaining his rationale for not Baker Acting Mark Carper