Home Home wear City prosecutors ask judge to throw Cincinnati owner in jail for breaking...

City prosecutors ask judge to throw Cincinnati owner in jail for breaking harassment order

20
0

CINCINNATI – A longtime Cincinnati owner is a “danger to the community” and should be jailed until his stalking case is completed, according to a June 25 petition filed by the City Solicitor of Cincinnati.

City prosecutors accuse owner John Klosterman, 71, of repeatedly violating a stalking emergency preparedness order that requires him to stay at least 500 feet from his alleged victim, not to not to contact her employer and not to encourage anyone else to contact her.

Lot Tan

The I-Team questions the alleged victim of stalking in 2020

The alleged victim is one of Klosterman’s former tenants.

“John continued to make hell in my life by skirting the boundaries of the protective order,” said the woman who accuses Klosterman of harassing her. “I have no peace.”

WCPO does not normally use anonymous sources. In this case, the I WCPO 9 team agreed not to identify the woman because she is an alleged victim of a fearful crime, and she believes she is less endangered in her own neighborhood if we do not identify it.

Klosterman “engages in illegal and unethical business practices under the guise of minding personal affairs in order to continue to cause emotional distress to the victim,” wrote Susan Zurface, attorney at the city’s trial, in his motion to revoke the Klosterman link.

The next court hearing is scheduled for July 7.

This is the latest chapter in Klosterman’s legal troubles that began two decades ago when city building inspectors first cited him for code violations at his rental properties.

John Klosterman at a hearing in November 2020

WCPO staff

John Klosterman at a hearing in November 2020

In 2016, a judge sentenced Klosterman to 60 days in prison for his “willful disrespect” of a “dangerous” property he owned, according to court records.

Court records show that a receivership controls dozens of Klosterman’s properties in the Sedamsville neighborhood because he failed to pay a judgment of $ 578,000 for unpaid municipal taxes, infractions, fines and charges. fresh.

Tri-State Organization is the property manager for the receivership. Klosterman’s alleged victim works for the company.

“Klosterman has filed countless complaints, attacking the victim’s employer,” Zurface wrote in his motion. “In the past few weeks, at least thirty (30) complaints have been filed by the defendant with the City of Cincinnati. The defendant has also contacted other local, state and federal agencies and made false allegations regarding the organization. of the tri-state. Most of these complaints have been investigated, at great expense to each of these agencies and to the Tri-State Organization. ”

In September 2020, Klosterman and his wife, Sue, entered into a consent decree with the United States Attorney’s Office that prohibits them from renting or managing residential rental properties.

Under the consent decree, the Klostermans are also required to pay $ 167,000 to 20 other women who said John Klosterman violated the Fair Housing Act by sexually harassing them while they were renting at his house.

“In this settlement, Klosterman acknowledges that the United States has evidence that he sexually harassed tenants on several occasions,” then US attorney David M. DeVillers said in a press release from September 2020.

DeVillers called Klosterman’s conduct “odious”.

According to the city’s motion, Klosterman actively owns and manages residential rental properties in Sedamsville that are not part of the receivership, a violation of the federal consent order.

634 Delhi Avenue in Cincinnati

Craig cheatham

634 Delhi Avenue in Cincinnati

In February, one of Klosterman’s new companies, Bridges and Rivers, LLC, purchased a home at 634 Delhi Ave., according to records from the Hamilton County Auditor’s website.

“On June 16, 2021, it was discovered that the water in this unit had been cut off due to a second floor leak,” Zurface wrote in his municipal court petition. “The defendant told the tenant of 634 Delhi that, pending the resumption of the water service, the tenant could shower in another residential located at 621/623 Delhi, which is owned by the company of Mr. Klosterman, John Jennagans LLC. This property is also NOT in receivership. “

Part of an exterior wall is missing from the house at 621 Delhi Avenue in Cincinnati

Craig cheatham

Part of an exterior wall is missing from the house at 621 Delhi Avenue in Cincinnati

According to the Consent Order, the Klostermans are required to notify the United States Attorney’s Office within 30 days of acquiring direct or indirect management or ownership of a residential rental property that does not not part of the receivership.

The Klostermans are also required to have a property manager approved by federal prosecutors for rental units that are not part of the receivership, according to the consent decree.

In the city’s motion, Zurface wrote, Klosterman “never submitted agent information to the federal prosecutor’s office.”

In his petition, Zurface wrote that Klosterman interfered with the management of the properties of the Organization of the Three States and interacted with the tenants of those properties, which is prohibited under the receivership and consent decree.

The Klostermans could be fined up to $ 100,000 for each violation of the consent decree, according to a federal law cited in the agreement.

The consent decree is in effect until October 2025, but it can be extended “if one or more defendants violate one or more terms of the decree or if the interests of justice so require,” according to the agreement.

“The United States Attorney’s Office is closely monitoring compliance with the Consent Order and would be prepared to take further action if such action is warranted,” said Fred Alverson, spokesperson for the United States Attorney’s Office. United for the Southern District of Ohio.

The Cincinnati district attorney’s office did not respond to I-Team requests for comment on the Klosterman case.

Last November, City Judge Brad Greenberg revoked Klosterman’s bail after prosecutors charged him for the fourth time with violating the protection order.

Court records show that Greenberg subsequently posted a bond of $ 150,000 for Klosterman, who posted the bond.

Greenberg also demanded that Klosterman be placed in “lockdown status” at Klosterman’s home.

In addition, Klosterman must carry an electronic surveillance device.

“The victim cannot be protected from the actions of the defendant as long as he remains on bail and EMD,” Zurface wrote in his petition to Greenberg.

In a text message to the I-Team, Klosterman declined our interview request.

“No comment,” Klosterman replied. “But be there at court. Listen for yourself. ”


Source link