Varnau Vermin Update: Pathological Denial Continues

Dennis Varnau really should seek professional help.  The man appears to be a pathological sore loser and darn near psychotic when it comes to his vendetta against Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger.  He made his wife run for and get the coroner's job so she could be his extension and weapon in his never ending black helicopter conspiracy.  The guy really needs some meds.  Here is the latest from the Brown County Press:

Letters have been sent to Ohio Governor John Kasich
and Ohio Attorney General Mike Dewine claiming that
Brown County Sheriff Swayne Wenninger is
unqualified to hold his office.

On March 21, Joe Podolsky of Felicity faxed two
documents to the office of Kasich and one to the
office of Ohio Lt. Governor Mary Taylor.  The first page
of one document faxed to Kasich reads “Now you
know what is going on in your state.  Show me you
can do something with/about the information
because you now have the knowledge the same as
everyone else. Just how good are you?, Sincerely
Joe Podolsky.”

The other pages of the document were a four page
letter written to Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine on March 21 by Dennis Varnau.  Varnau told DeWine “I want to personally make sure you are completely aware of an ongoing pattern of corrupt activities (enterprise) that is well into its ninth year of operation unabated. I am a victim of this enterprise who has lost four years of salary vestment in the PERS retirement system and other benefits approximately worth at least around $500,000.00.  The taxpayers of our county are also victims of this criminal enterprise who have unawares lost a much greater amount of money, public service, and safety.”

Varnau continued, “The corrupt activities enterprise was created on or about October 9th, 2003, when Republican visiting Judge Robert Ringland sealed (contrary to State law) the criminal  record of Sheriff Dwayne ‘Wenninger.  Wenninger was accused of knowingly falsifying his candidate election documentation for the year 2000 election.  The jury found Wenninger “not guilty” of knowingly falsifying the documentation”.

Varnau goes on to say the verdict did not change the fact that Wenninger was unqualified, and then goes on to allege that a juror in the Wenninger case recently got special treatment from the justice system.

“Leroy Louderback, a friend of Mr. Wenninger,  was one of the jurors who found Mr. Wenninger “not guilty.” That vote to acquit turned out to be a valuable “get out  of jail free” card for Mr. Louderback. On December 16, 2012, Leroy shot his son to death, because his son John Louderback, supposedly had verbally threatened to kill Leroy.  Contrary" to forensic evidence and other information, Leroy was "no billed” by a Grand Jury for voluntary manslaughter on February 28, 2013. One way or another Leroy would have walked away from any charges, either at grand jury or from court, because Leroy was one of many in court who heard Judge Ringland tell Mr. Wenninger that he was not the sheriff during his criminal trial.”

Varnau then recounts the history and his arguments of his civil case against Wenninger.  The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case, upholding the judgement against Varnau by the Ohio Supreme Court.
Varnau then references two letters written to his wife, Dr. Judith Varnau in her capacity as Brown County Coroner and to Brown County Prosecutor Jessica Little.

Little requested a legal opinion on behalf of Judith Varnau concerning the qualifications of the Sheriff.

So, let me get this straight....This conspiracy of Mr. Varnau's imagination now includes Judge Robert Ringland, the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals, the Ohio Supreme Court, and even citizens of Brown County.  I guess all the grand jurors in Mr. Louderback's case are in on it, too. 

Mr. Louderback and every member of the grand jury should sue Mr. Varnau for defamation of character.  Judge Ringland should sue. 

But, in Dennis's world, the case would go before a judge in on the grand conspiracy led by the Illuminati under the command of secret commander of the Universe, Dwayne Wenninger, who apparently is the head of this international cabal that wants to control a small rural county in Ohio.

Yeah, that sounds believable, doesn't it?

To top it off, he is claiming he has been denied half a million in retirement from the state retirement system that he would have gotten if he had been sheriff.  Hey, Dude!  WAKE UP!  Time and again, for sheriff and for prosecutor, the voters of Brown County have found you to be the egotistical, self serving, psychotic and delusion LOSER!  Get over it!

I hear your cry for help, Dennis, I do...unfortunately, I am not a licensed therapist....just like you are not the elected sheriff....

Brown County: Coroner Reaps What She Sows, Makes Ludicrous Request

The Newly elected Coroner of Brown County is at it again. This time, she had to reap what she sowed. In a previous post, we shared the Brown County Press coverage of Jilted Judith Varnau, new Brown County Coroner, who is hellbent on continuing her husband's insane vendetta against Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger. Well, now it has affected business in the county. Varnau, who basically mouths whatever her conspiracy nut husband tells her too, never agreeing to interviews but only communicating via email or memo, ruined the relationship between the sheriff's office and the coroner. She questioned the ability of sheriff deputies to be able to process evidence or handle death scenes. Well, her chickens have come home to roost, and she is the only one looking like an arse. From intrepid editor Wayne Gates of the Brown County Press:

​Varnau has complained about the actions of the Brown County Sheriff's office in an e-mail to the Brown County Commissioners.She is also asking the commissioners for a $500,000 increase in her budget. ​Meanwhile, Brown County Prosecuting Attorney Jessica Little has asked the commissioners to appoint special counsel for Varnau and allow her to withdraw. ​ In a letter to the commissioners dated Jan. 23, Little wrote; "It has come to my attention that the Coroner, Dr. Varnau, is claiming that I breached attorney-client privilege...It appears to me that I cannot continue to represent a statutory client that has made such claims against me and the county." The basis of the complaint of violation of attorney-client privilege stems from Little complying with public records requests submitted by The Brown County Press.  Brown County Commission President Tony Applegate said that the board sees no reason to grant the request of Little at this time. He added that the 2013 budget of the Coroner has been set and that an increase at this time would not be forthcoming.

So, Varnau has besmirched every law enforcement county official. She claims Little violated attorney client privilege for complying with a public records request. Gee, Mrs. Varnau, what have you to hide? Are you part of a great Varnau conspiracy? But it gets better. Following is info from the Press article about why she wants the 500k increase to her budget:

On Jan. 30, the body of Rhonda Cheesman, who had been reported missing from Georgetown, was discovered near Russellville. Varnau wrote the following e-mail to the Brown County Commissioners on Friday, Feb 1. It was obtained through a public records request.  Commissioners Applegate, Woodruff, and Gray: ​On January 30, 2013, I was called out to the scene of Ms. Cheesman's car in the middle of a field, at least a quarter mile off-road, on McNoun Road. The deputies escorted me to the scene and relayed that it was a coroner's death scene and refused to be involved. Although I remarked that as agreed upon January 3rd, the coroner's scene should be the immediate area surrounding the body. So, the entire car in the field was not the coroner's scene. The deputies stated that if the Sheriff's Office was needed for further assistance, I would have to request it through the prosecutor's office. They left me alone out in the field with a locked car containing a dead body with no way of accessing the body, so I could not do my job of determining the manner and cause of death. I then called for a towing company, Shafer Towing, and Carl Shafer and his assistant "Dennis" responded to the location. Carl assisted in getting the car unlocked. I made a cursory exam of the body and noted what appeared to be potential bruising on the decedent's hands and moisture content surrounding the body, causing me to think that it was a suspicious death, but could be a suicide with special circumstances (normal procedure is to investigate all suspected suicides as potential homicides). I called the Communications Center to contact Jessica Little so that I could summon SO assistance on the scene. She stated she would contact the SO. After waiting more than an hour, I contacted the Communications Center to get an estimated time of arrival (ETA) of the SO, only to find that there was no request made to the SO to respond. In calling Jessica Little again, she stated that she left a message on my phone (my home phone) while I was out in the field at the scene, not leaving a potential crime scene unattended which would have broken any chain of evidence present. In contacting her again, she stated that she needed my written report and a written request for what kind of evidence the SO would need for me from the scene. She also stated that it was my responsibility to preserve and secure the scene and obtain evidence for use in any potential trial. I explained to her that I was out in the field (in the rain, sleet, mud, and cold), keeping the scene secured without capabilities to write and/or fax a coroner's report for her to request SO assistance at the scene. She stated she was sorry but could not do anything since I did not sign the SO policy. Apparently, more new policies were developed (that I was not informed of prior to this incident) that I had not signed. I then contacted the Communications Center, asking them to contact the Sheriff for me. I got a reply call from Chief Schadle. He said that the SO would not assist until after the autopsy report confirmed that it was a homicide, due to the new policy developed because I would not sign the prior SO policy. I told him I was not aware of a new policy different from our agreements made at the January 3, 2013 meeting. I then contacted the Communications Center to have them contact BCI to get an investigative unit out to the scene. I first responded to the scene at 1550 hrs by call from the Communications Center at 1530 hrs. I remained on the scene along with Carl Shafer and my husband (who I called to come help, arriving at the scene about 1730 hrs), waiting for BCI to show up, keeping the scene secure for investigation. (Sgt. Hency from Russellville PD also came out around 1945 hrs with heavier coats, gloves, rain gear, and flashlights, after he called my husband to find out if we needed anything. He remained on the scene with the three of us until the vehicle was removed from the field and put on the rollback tow truck). When BCI arrived, they did a cursory scene assessment in the field where there was so much mud and water around the vehicle that it would be impossible to make any determination of tire tracks, etc, and they decided that it would be best to remove the car from the field and take it to a garage where the vehicle and body could be processed by the BCI agents, as the only scene now was inside the vehicle. The vehicle was towed to Mount Orab Maintenance Building for processing, which was completed about 0150 hrs, and I left to notify the next-of-kin on Hamer Road from about 0200 to 0315 hrs.

Now, remember, it was Dr. Varnau who raised issues about deputiees being liable for handling death scenes and how death scenes were her territory. Sheriff Wenninger and Co. were following the letter of the law. After all, we wouldn't want to violate the law and be subject to charges by Varnau, who does have the power to charge law enforcemement with breaking rules of evidence, etc. But yet, she calls her husband to come to a crime scene and I don't believe he is a law enforcement official, just an attorney. So isn't her calling in her husband to a potential crime scene a possible break in the chain of evidence? Ms. Varnau goes on to complain that she was unaware of changes to policy, when my sources tell me every effort has been made to get her to come to some type of agreement with the sheriff's office. Ms. Varnau's statements do not match fact, as in her claim she made no request to Jessica Little to ask the Attorney General to rule of Wenninger's qualifications for duty, even though her attorney did indeed make a request (kind of stretches plausible deniability, don't you think?). She has shown that she cares more for this vendetta than in doing her job. But here is where the 500K request comes in:

After consulting with two coroners, Clermont and Montgomery Counties, they said that I could had no power to make the SO do their duty, but if I was going to have to perform what had to be done on this type of scene regularly, then I would need about $500K to establish the necessary personnel and equipment to handle death scene cases. It was suggested that since the SO has been being paid to handle all these scenes in the past, this $500K might be deducted and/or moved from the SO budget over to the coroner's budget. The scope of my investigation was to determine the cause and manner of death. Any other investigation of a potential crime scene was the responsibility of the SO. For the coroner's office to possess the investigative capabilities, including evidence collection and storage at a coroner's office here in Brown County, I would need extra funding and change in the law to cover any assumption of these law enforcement's duties, not being a "law enforcement officer." ​ According to the Attorney General opinion, AGO 88-035: Scope of investigation; discretion: Neither the coroner, nor his staff may go beyond the investigative tasks necessary to determine the manner, mode, and cause of death; however, it is within the coroner's discretion to determine which investigative tasks are necessary. ​ When I determined that it was a suspicious scene, and that investigative protocol was necessary, the SO should have responded upon a verbal request through the Communications Center. If this were a crime scene and the perpetrator had returned to that remote field, and harmed or killed me being alone, or, if I were attacked by a pack of wild dogs or coyotes without any means to protect myself, would CORSA cover the liability incurred by the SO dereliction of duty? I, and my husband, do not think Det. Moore would have left his wife, or any other individual or elected official by themselves, out in the field unprotected from the elements and whatever could possibly happen at such a remote location." ​

So, what Varnau is going to do, is she is going to end up suing the county or some such nonsense claiming she is unable to do her duty. More vengeance by the Varnaus, who can't get over the fact that the County has rejected Dennis Varnau for public office again and again! Sheriff Wenninger, for his part, is trying to stay above the fray:

"If she is going to a scene and she feels that there may be a safety issue, she can call 9-1-1 and request help. We will respond if there is any danger of life and limb to her." Regarding the tensions between the two offices, Wenninger said he has no choice but to follow Ohio Law. "She insisted on going exactly by the law at the beginning of all this, so we are going to go exactly by the law as well.", he said. "If we both go exactly by the law, we'll be just fine."  Regarding her difficulty at the Cheesman death scene, Wenninger was unsympathetic. "She wanted the job and she's got it. It's up to her to do it. If she doesn't want to do the job, if it's too much for her, let her resign and get somebody else." He also said that due to recent decisions by Varnau, he cannot operate with the same level of trust with her that he has operated under with previous coroners. "I can go down a list and show you how many times she's approved our policy and then go home and come back and change her mind two or three times." ​ He also said he was disturbed by things Varnau has reportedly said. "She's made statements like 'If anybody touches the body, how do I go about filing charges on people'. When you have those type of statements and you can't agree on anything, it's not a good situation. We've had more problems in the past 30 days than we've had in the last 24 years with other coroners." ​ Wenninger said that after working with Varnau since she's taken office, he cannot go back to the way the sheriff's office operated with previous coroner Dr. Tim McKinley. He said his new policy of only assisting Varnau on homicide cases is firm and permanent. "I will not bend one bit. These type of people, if you bend a little bit to help them, they'll use it against you", Wenninger said. He added, "(Varnau and her husband Dennis) are just looking for any chance they have to get at me, and I'm not going to put my people at risk because they have a personal vendetta."

And that is what is causing all this. One man's childish vendetta because he can't get what he wants. Pathetic! And because she has earned the distrust of those who were willing to help in the past, she wants the taxpayers to pay for her seeking of vengeance and its repercussions. Dr. Varnau needs to be removed as coroner. She is a disgrace, a laughingstock, and a huge liability for the county. Bill Cornetet has an excellent editorial regarding this at the News Democrat, and letters have been coming in to both papers asking for Varnau to be removed.....

Brown County Update: Coroner Butchers the Truth in Squabble with Sheriff?

Dr. Judith Varnau is at it again...and this time, there is a bit of a paper trail showing, shall we say, some muddling or misrepresentation of the truth... Intrepid Editor Wayne Gates has the story at the Brown County Press:

Brown County Prosecuting Attorney Jessica Little is asking the Ohio Attorney General for a formal opinion on the qualifications of Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger to hold that office. Little took the action after receiving a request to do so from the attorney of Brown County Coroner Dr. Judith Varnau...but Varnau herself is denying that she wanted an official Attorney General opinion on the matter. In an e-mail to the Brown County Press, on Jan. 23, Varnau wrote "I did not request Ms. Little to forward my request (for an opinion) to the Attorney General (AG), as she has already provided me with her official legal opinion, on January 18th, that is completely sufficient to cover my concern on liability I potentially faced without it." Brown County Prosecuting Attorney Jessica Little is asking the Ohio Attorney General for a formal opinion on the qualifications of Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger to hold that office. Little took the action after receiving a request to do so from the attorney of Brown County Coroner Dr. Judith Varnau...but Varnau herself is denying that she wanted an official Attorney General opinion on the matter. In an e-mail to the Brown County Press, on Jan. 23, Varnau wrote "I did not request Ms. Little to forward my request (for an opinion) to the Attorney General (AG), as she has already provided me with her official legal opinion, on January 18th, that is completely sufficient to cover my concern on liability I potentially faced without it."

So, Doctor Judy would have you believe that she has nothing to do with this request, that this is all overreach and sensational journalism. What are we supposed to believe, that her lawyer acted alone? Come on now, this is a bit much! These Varnaus are some of the most vindictive, pathetic sore losers I have ever seen. Evidently, Judy doesn't like to talk, so the Press had to do email exchanges. Makes one wonder, is Judy afraid she will deviated from Dennis's storyline, or is Dennis doing the typing?...more from the story:

In her e-mail on the matter, Varnau continued, "I asked her for the same legal opinion that I requested of the AG, on the AG's suggestion for me to consult with her." When responding to the written question "Do you have a response to her decision?", Varnau replied "That's her decision not my request. I did not ask her to do that." To the written question "If the Attorney General responds as they did last week, that the sheriff is qualified to serve, what will be your next step?", Varnau replied "There is no next step. I am completely satisfied with Ms. Little's official legal opinion. Ask her for a copy of that opinion." (Little declined to release her opinion to The Brown County Press, citing attorney-client privilege to Varnau. Varnau was asked directly for the opinion via e-mail and a response had not been received at press time.) Varnau was then asked in the e-mail: "If the Attorney General responds that the Sheriff is not qualified, what will your response be?" Her reply: "It does not matter to me what the AG may say, as I already have an opinion from Ms. Little, legal counsel for county coroner. It's finished as far as I am concerned. My question has been satisfactorily answered." Varnau was asked other questions via e-mail. At press time, answers to the following questions had not been received: "Jessica Little and Dwayne Wenninger are both maintaining that you have an agenda against the Sheriff. How do you respond to that?" "Do you believe that a productive working relationship with Wenninger is possible? If not, why not?" "Little is saying you disparaged her character in your Dec. 30 letter to the Attorney General. Do you feel you did so?" (Varnau wrote in the Dec. 30 letter "The county prosecutor, however worked diligently to prevent the unsealing of Mr. Wenninger's trial record..."

This last section refers to the schizophrenic paranoid notion that Dennis Varnau has that there is a vast conspiracy against him and protecting Wenninger. Back to the article:

"The Sheriff has also issued policy that states that no BCSO investigation will take place at the scenes of accidental deaths, natural deaths or suicides. Are you concerned that having to generate investigation requests for the prosecutors office will add to the workload and time commitment of the coroners office?" "Are you prepared to store evidence and comply with chain of custody issues?" As referenced in the questions above, the Brown County Sheriff's Office has changed certain procedures regarding death scenes. Among the changes are no investigations will be conducted at death scenes where the death has been ruled to have been by natural causes, accident or suicide. Any investigation of those scenes will fall to the coroner's office. Retired Ripley Police Officer Don Newman has been named as Varnau's investigator. If the coroner feels that a criminal investigation needs to take place, Ohio Revised Code states that the coroner must request such an investigation from the Prosecuting Attorney, who would then forward the request to the agency with jurisdiction. Retired Ripley Police Officer Don Newman has been named as Varnau's investigator. At Homicide scenes, Wenninger has declared that BCSO personnel will secure any weapon used in the interest of safety and will process evidence outside the declared death scene. The size and scope of the death scene is at the discretion of the coroner. The policy also states that "Upon the Coroner's order to remove the body, photos and documentation of injuries will be completed with the permission of the Coroner." Wenningers policy also clearly states that at all death scenes "The body and the area near the body shall not be disturbed." According to Ohio Revised Code, if a coroner determines that a body has been disturbed without permission, a person found to have done so can be charged with a fourth degree misdemeanor. Another major change is that notification of next-of-kin in all death cases is now the exclusive responsibility of the coroner, as stated in Ohio Revised Code. "That's part of her job and we used to do that as a courtesy to Dr. McKinley, but we are short-staffed and we are going to be turning that back over to her.", Wenninger said. Regarding the request that Little forwarded to the Attorney General, Wenninger said of Varnau, "They are just grasping at straws. I have won every legal challenge and I have nothing to hide." Little said that she feels that Varnau is already operating as if Wenninger is not legally qualified to serve. "She already believes the sheriff is not the legal sheriff. She is not asking the Attorney General to assume that. She believes that. She just wanted to know how she should handle the evidence because he's not the lawful sheriff." Little added, "I'm very disappointed that Dr, Varnau has maintained this belief that the sheriff is not the lawful sheriff of the county." She also questioned the working relationship between Varnau and the BCSO. "I am very suspect of her motives in light of that letter that she sent to the Attorney General. It was my belief that when she took office that she wanted to communicate and that she wanted to work together and that letter shows me that that was not her plan.", Little said. She said she believes that Varnau's stance will eventually become a problem as time goes on. "Since Dr. Varnau believes that the sheriff is not the lawful sheriff of the county and that his deputies are not legally sworn, I am very concerned because I don't know how there can be a working relationship if you don't believe that a person has a role or a place in the proceedings." Wenninger agreed, saying "It's obvious there is another agenda, but I have a sheriff's office to run and she has a coroner's office to run. She has indicated several times that she wants to go by the letter of the law, so that's what we're going to do...We have some people on the staff that do not trust her. We will work with her, but we don't trust her. That's why we've made some policy changes." Wenninger added that he thinks Varnau's agenda stems from the long running court battle her husband, Dennis Varnau, waged against Wenninger regarding his qualifications to serve as Sheriff. "If they think they can go through the coroners office to try to get me, they have another think coming, because it's not going to happen because we go by the rules and we do what's right."

Little is exactly right. Despite numerous court cases and the will of the electorate of Brown County in several elections, she is acting as if Wenninger is not qualified to hold office. This is not the stance of someone who "says the matter is finished and wants to be a team player" as Varnau has said she has wanted to do. This woman, whether of her own volition or at the insistence and demand of her sore loser husband, is using the powers of her office for a personal agenda against the sheriff that will cost the integrity of county law enforcement and the taxpayers. But, to the Varnaus, who cares about the citizens? After all, Dennis wanted to be annointed Sheriff after the voters rejected him. The article concludes with an emailed statement from Dr. Judy:

DR. VARNAU'S RESPONSE TO BROWN COUNTY PRESS ARTICLE Here's my response to all the prating contained in The Brown County Press article published in the January 20, 2013 issue, "Sheriff to Coroner: 'No trust at all.'" For more than the last four years my husband was involved in a legal challenge of Mr. Wenninger's credentials to hold and execute the office of sheriff. The facts presented in the court record created are simple enough for most lay persons to understand and come to the same conclusion as I. He did not initially meet the requirements to be a valid candidate, and that initial deficiency led to a complete loss of his police certificate by operation of law all within his first term in office. This is clear to anyone interested and intellectually honest enough to "connect the dots." One does not have to be legally trained to understand this fact. A modicum of common sense and logic are the only requisites necessary to reach the same conclusion. Every forum presented with the question of Mr. Wenninger's legality avoided addressing the issue on its merits and instead dismissed every petition on procedural grounds. That left the issue in question "legally" unanswered. Instead, every decision specifically held that Mr. Wenninger's qualifications could not be challenged by Dennis Varnau. Therefore, the underlying question of qualifications survives every court decision made to date. I know this to be a fact even though others, including some attorneys, may have difficulty understanding this legal reality. Therefore, I asked the Attorney General's (AG's) Office for a legal opinion on my personal dilemma to protect me from any future legal liability, in my performance as coroner, knowing what I knew to be irrefutable fact. I was aware the county prosecutor would have a genuine "conflict of interest" handling the question under her professional code of conduct as counsel representing many independent county office clients simultaneously. The question was solely my personal concern; it did not affect the sheriff's office since my husband's case had become final when the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to accept his case for review. The maligning of my intent and motivation to become coroner started with an article published in The News Democrat that accused me of having an "agenda." That accusation was nurtured into an "agenda against Mr. Wenninger." Then it was the Chief Deputy who started accusing me of being out to bring charges against him and his deputies in the performance of my duties. This concern of the Chief Deputy led to three separate meetings to discuss "my policy" as coroner. The third meeting, which included the sheriff, resulted with an overall understanding between all parties involved. I thought everything was settled from that point onward. I asked the prosecutor the same question presented to the AG, and received her formal legal opinion that completely settled the matter for me forever, as far as I was concerned. Never did I ever expect the prosecutor, knowing the unnecessary tensions that had previously been present between the SO and my office, would unilaterally inform the SO of my personal request for an opinion to the AG to cover my personal legal concerns. I still don't know why she chose to reveal the existence of my AG letter to the sheriff's office without first consulting me before doing so. What would be her "agenda" in poisoning the past strained relationship anew after it had already been settled during the last meeting with the sheriff present on January 3, 2013? I had earlier signed a memorandum of understanding with the Chief Deputy in the presence of the prosecutor, but found, after my first death scene on New Year's Day, that I should not be involved in approving another office's policies, where I found that doing so could result in the perception that I approved of what had transpired on that day. Mr. Irvin had passed away during his sleep. Mrs. Irvin called her neighbor around 1100 hrs to inform him of Mr. Irvin's death. The neighbor responded to the Irvin's home within about 10 minutes, only to find Mrs. Irvin had shot herself. 911 staged the Fayetteville EMS at its station within minutes of the call. The police chief was standing by with the squad awaiting clearance from the SO to accompany its squad to the scene. After a while the EMS and police chief took it upon themselves to stage on the highway close to the residence, which was about a five minute drive away from the fire station. More than 30 minutes had passed. The neighbor flagged the squad down to come assist Mrs. Irvin, because she was still alive. The squad and police chief then immediately responded to Mrs. Irvin's bedside to administer first aid. The squad took Mrs. Irvin to Clinton Memorial and arrived about 1206 hrs. Mrs. Irvin passed away the next day at Miami Hospital. The first deputy did not arrive on the scene until 1155 hrs. That incident left me with a deep concern that the "county mutual aid agreement" approved by the prosecutor and SO may have contributed to Mrs. Irvin's death as she laid there bleeding and in pain from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to her chest. That's when I realized that I should not be approving policies outside of my own office where they may at the very least be defective and incompetently drafted to potentially create constitutional claims of civil liability against the county and those involved in delivering emergency medical care. This unfortunate incident was probably instrumental in the resignation of the Fayetteville Fire/EMS chief. I fail to understand why my own dilemma of personal legal concern had to be blown up into a "big news item" as the top story on the front page, where the whole article was presented in such a way to denigrate my reputation and that of the Coroner's Office. Nothing has changed in the way business is accomplished by the coroner, except that I, my deputy, or investigator, will be present at death scenes more frequently than that of the last administration. Dr. Judith A. Varnau Brown County Coroner

Do you smell what the coroner is cooking? Yep, more BS. She doesn't think questioning the qualifications and ability to serve of the main law enforcement officer of the county is a "big news item"? Is this woman incompetent, naive, or just a puppet of her vindictive husband? Who knows, but it makes the county look bad. The citizens of Brown County deserve better than a vindictive coroner who cares more for a vendetta that for serving the county.

Dennis the Menace Uses Wife's Office as Coroner to Further Vendetta Against County Sheriff

At WMD, we have highlighted the self important, arrogant, self righteous campaign by Dennis Varnau to be crowned Sheriff of Brown County. When he tried to run against Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger, he was humiliated with a huge margin of defeat. However, thinking himself too good to lose, and that the electorate is too ignorant, Dennis Varnau went through a myriad of complaints and court cases that eventually reached the United States Supreme Court. Varnau cited conspiracies between people and state officials, between judges even. This guy makes some of Tin Foil Dennis Kucinich's stuff seem plausible. And what happened each time Dennis tried to circumvent the will of the people of Brown County and have himself immaculated Sheriff? He got stomped and was told to quit wasting the government's time. One would think after the US Supreme Court gives you the STFU that you would go off and spout your conspiracy theories in your drink of choice. But not Dennis. No, he decided he would get his wife Judith into the act. Judith, you see, is a medical doctor. For some reason, she decided to run as a write-in candidate for coroner when no one from either party expressed an interest in filing a petition. So, all she needed were complimentary votes, just the type of slanted election Mr. Varnau would love. And what do you think Coroner Judith did on her first day in office? Did she get to know the staff, take a tour, meet with law enforcement? Nope. She continued her husband's psychotic vendetta against Sheriff Wenninger. Intrepid Editor Wayne Gates of the Brown County Press has the story:

On her first day as Interim Brown County Coroner, Dr. Judith Varnau sent a letter to Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine questioning the qualifications of Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger. That letter, along with ongoing discussions on policy and procedure at death scenes, have severely strained the working relationship between the Coroner's Office and the Sheriff's Department. "There is no trust here at all", said Brown County Sheriff's Office Chief Deputy John Schadle. Wenninger said when he learned of the letter that "I wasn't surprised because Mr. Varnau can't let (his legal fight with Wenninger) go. He's lost every court case and I feel like they are trying to do whatever they can to get back at me." Prior to the Press receiving copies of the letter to the Attorney General and the response, Dr. Varnau was asked about the relationship between the two parties. She said, "My only agenda is to take care of the deceased and their families." A telephone call requesting comment on the letter sent to the Attorney General was not returned.

If the only agenda is to take care of the deceased and families, then why did the letter basically engage in rehashing the entire court mess your husband was in, Dr. Varnau? Did you even really write the letter, or did you just take dictation for your husband? Back to the Press coverage:

In the letter to the Attorney General, Varnau lays out the legal case pursued by her husband, Dennis Varnau against Wenninger over the past several years. The letter begins "The mandatory duty to turn over firearms to the current sheriff of Brown County presents a legal dilemma for me where the sheriff's claim and legal credentials to hold office have...never been specifically addressed by any court of competent jurisdiction." The Varnau case against Wenninger ended last September when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take the case. Prior to that, Varnau lost in the Ohio Supreme Court.

Never been addressed by a court of "competent jurisdiction?" She just insulted the Ohio Supreme Court, the 12th district court of appeals, as well as the original court that issued decisions. Wow, the gall of this woman, and on her first day on the job! She has never held a governmental office before, to my knowledge. She has been an MD and I believe mostly in the field of women's health like gynecology and pregnancy. So, what would she know about jurisdiction, or for that matter competence, given her choice in lifemates? This shows you this woman did not want to serve the people of Brown County. She just wants to make Wenninger's job impossible. I guess she and Dennis hope Wenninger just quits or something. Pathetic that the people of Brown County are being served by a vindictive shrew who only wants to see her Dennis immaculated as sheriff. Maybe it's because he never shuts up about it and she wants some relief, I don't know. But this is just beyond the pale. And now she wants the state Attorney General to waste the people's time and money:

Varnau then asks the Attorney General to intervene in the case, writing "The history of concealment and complete failure to address Mr. Wenninger's legal qualifications is significantly suspect beyond probable cause, leaving only one individual left with the legal authority, duty and power, to take the case before a court of competent jurisdiction for a decision on the actual facts and merits present - the Attorney General." The letter then lays out the timeline of the case and legal arguments used by Mr. Varnau. On the last page, Varnau writes "My main concern is knowingly breaking the chain of custody on crime scene evidence by turning over confidential evidence to an unqualified "civilian" or one of his illegally-sworn deputies that are not legitimate Ohio peace officers-by law."

So, now she is insulting every member of the Sheriff's deputies. Wow, way to establish a solid relationship there, Judith! What did the AG's office say?

Kevin McIver, the Chief of the Opinions section of the Attorney General's office, sent a one page reply, dated January 15. He replied, "At the county government level Attorney General DeWine issues written opinions on questions of law to the prosecuting attorney only. We do not provide opinions to the other elected officials of county government, for which the prosecuting attorney is designated legal counsel." The letter continues, "Further, the decision of the Ohio Supreme Court in State ex rel. Varnau vs Wenninger...affirming the denial of a quo warranto writ to oust the Brown County Sheriff from office confirms the legality of his service as county sheriff." Regarding Varnau's concern about turning over firearms to Wenninger, McIver writes, "in fulfilling your responsibilities... to deliver firearms to the county sheriff, you will be insulated from charges of malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance."

In other words, SHUT UP AND DO YOUR JOB, JUDITH, AND QUIT USING YOUR OFFICE FOR A PERSONAL VENDETTA!!! Wenninger, to his credit, just wants to do the work he was elected to do and serve and protect Brown County:

Wenninger has requested that Varnau provide a written statement to his office that she agrees that the sheriff's office policy on death scene procedure meets with her approval. At press time, Varnau had declined to do so. Wenninger said in light of the letter to the Attorney General's office, he was requesting that an emergency meeting be held between himself, Schadle, Varnau, Brown County Prosecutor Jessica Little and Common Pleas Court Judge Scott Gusweiler. "We can't move forward without written confirmation that we agree on procedure", said Wenninger. Regarding death scene policy, Wenninger said "We are still going to go by the law, but I want something from her in writing that we are all on the same page. Right now, her word isn't very good." When asked about the working relationship between the sheriff's office and the coroners's office, Wenninger said "No matter what her feelings are, I'm going to do whatever is in my power and legally right to give the citizens the best service possible."

Coroners in Ohio have broad powers over death scenes. Varnau could raise a stink and seriously limit the ability of the sheriff to do his job. Then, I wonder who would be screaming from the rooftops that Wenninger is ineffective? You betcha, Dennis the Menace. More on the issues and Dr. Judith's childish behavior and attitudes:

The coroner can decide how large the death scene is, what is contained in it and when it can be released to law enforcement for investigation. "We need a permissive order from the coroner to remove anything from the scene. I don't want my people afraid they are going to be charged with a crime for doing their jobs", Schadle said. If someone violates a death scene, they can be charged with a fourth degree misdemeanor. Little has examined the procedures that the sheriffs office has outlined for death scenes and determined that the policy is in compliance with state law. Schadle is still concerned about the working relationship between the two offices saying that without a written agreement to fall back on, Varnau could change her mind at any time at a death scene. "We don't need to be at these scenes nitpicking back and forth for political gain", Schadle said. "We need to work out a procedure that everyone agrees with and stick to it." Varnau has said that she is not required to approve the policies of another agency. "It's not my place to sign off on someone elses procedures", Varnau said. "I'm responsible for my office and they are responsible for theirs." With the assistance of Little, a Memorandum of Understanding on death scene procedure was signed between Varnau and Schadle on Dec. 30. The agreement attempted to address the need for a "permissive order" from the Coroner to allow law enforcement officers access to death scenes. It states in part "...both the Coroner and the Sheriff agree that this permissive order is given for these death scenes and the sheriff's investigation can proceed immediately, with the understanding that the "body" cannot be moved or disturbed other than a good-faith effort to render life-saving assistance. Both the Coroner and he Sheriff agree that no police officer, deputy sheriff, fireman, emergency medical tech or member of any emergency response team will be held accountable by criminal means or otherwise in the performance of their duties." Varnau withdrew from the Memorandum of Understanding on Jan. 1 after visiting a death scene.

And look at this email Dr. Varnau sent to the press regarding her Office:

She sent an e-mail to the Brown County Press regarding her office that states in part "The coroner's office is here to assist law enforcement, fire and EMS personnel while being supported through their efforts in return...My office is sincerely here to cooperate as a "team player" for any agency requesting our presence at death scenes."

I don't know what her definition of team player is, but most people's definition would not include backstabbing the sheriff on your first day in office because your husband is a loser....I'm just saying....

Again, why does Dennis have to be such a....

 I mean, take Bill's advice....

Dennis "The Menace" Varnau Goes to Washington on Sore Loser Tour

Dennis Varnau had his election day. He lost. Twice. He has had multiple days in court. His whining and carping has led Sheriff Wenninger to have to miss days on the job serving the people to fight off scurrilous and so far unproven charges about qualifications and such. But, Dennis wants to go to Washington, to the US Supreme Court. From the Brown County Press:

Dennis Varnau has appealed his case against Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger to the United States Supreme Court.

Varnau has been in a legal battle with Wenninger since 2008, claiming that Wenninger is not legally qualified to be Sheriff.

Varnau's petition was denied by the Ohio Supreme Court in January of this year and refused to reconsider its decision in April.

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to discuss the case in September, and decide whether to hear it.

The court decides to hear about one percent of the cases submitted in this manner. If the court refuses to take up the case, then the ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court will stand and the case will be over.

"It's just a shame that this case has to continue to take some of my time away from serving the people of Brown County", Wenninger said.

"We have prevailed in every court, every time, and we expect to win this round too."

Varnau did win a victory of sorts in 2009 when the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the 12th District Court of Ohio must rule on the merits of the case, instead of ruling against Varnau on technical issues.

The 12th District found in favor of Wenninger. Varnau appealed that ruling to the Ohio Supreme Court and was denied.

Varnau made the following statement to the Press regarding the case.

(Editors Note: Varnau's statement provides his representation of the legal background and history surrounding the case. Rather than publish it as a Letter to the Editor, I am including it in the story.)

"Every citizen is at least entitled to due process in court. As a Vietnam Veteran with one year and seven months in a combat zone, I too expect due process the same as anyone else. I have had NONE since 2008 in any of the three court forums handling my two cases.

On September 8, 2008, I was denied a writ of mandamus by Common Pleas Court to force the Board of Elections to accept my protest. The Court said I had another remedy in quo warranto, which was not true at that time. I could not file for a writ of quo warranto until after I had lost the election and the results certified on November 25, 2008. I appealed this decision to the 12th District Court of Appeals. It affirmed the Common Pleas ruling October 29, 2008, again denying me an instant remedy and thus, due process. (A quo warranto proceeding is a court action challenging one's legal credentials to hold an elected office.)

On February 27, 2009, in the 12th District Court of Appeals, I filed for that writ of quo warranto both courts already said I had as a future remedy, after I lost the election. The 12th District then completely avoided addressing the issue of whether or not Mr. Wenninger was qualified to be sheriff for the 2008 term of office. It held that since the Board of Elections put him on the ballot, he was automatically qualified as a valid candidate - which is not true. The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the 12th's judgment 7-0 and sent it back for a decision on the merits. On remand the 12th District again avoided addressing Mr. Wenninger's qualifications as a candidate for the 2008 election, this time holding I could not challenge former terms in office as they are past and now moot, deliberately confusing "terms in office" with "qualifications" that are required for every term of office, and by misstating my court briefs specifically aimed solely at Mr. Wenninger's lack of qualifications for the 2008 election and office term.

On appeal the second time, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld 7-0 the 12th's decision, reasoning that I should have brought my petition for quo warranto in 2001 or 2004, during Mr. Wenninger's first two terms in office. Here, the Ohio Supreme Court, with seven justices, having over 150-200 years of cumulative legal experience, said that I should have brought my case in 2001 - three years before I became a Brown County resident, or in 2004 before I had standing to file suit - not being a losing candidate for sheriff until 2008. Not one member of that Court could have read my case to make such a glaring error devoid of any common sense in light of the fact in the record that I moved to Brown County December 4, 2003.

So, for more than four years in court, plus $50-60K in court costs and attorney fees, not one forum, Brown County Board of Elections, Common Pleas Court, 12th District Court of Appeals, or the Ohio Supreme Court ever looked at the facts presented in my court briefs that clearly dictate Mr. Wenninger was never qualified by law as a valid candidate for any election cycle since 2000. And to this day, no one dares or even cares to challenge Mr. Wenninger to unseal his criminal court case record that found him not guilty of "knowingly" falsifying his election filings for the 2000 election.

What is difficult for most to understand is that the criminal trial in October 2003 was only concerned whether or not Mr. Wenninger "knowingly" violated the law by falsifying his election paperwork that stated he WAS qualified to be a valid candidate. He WAS NOT. If he were a valid candidate, then there never would have been an indictment for falsification; the case would never have gone to court; and/or it would have been dismissed prior to going to a jury for a decision. Just because Mr. Wenninger was found "not guilty" of criminal falsification, that did not change the underlying fact that he still was not qualified to be a valid candidate. The record is extremely clear, which is why no one wants to "touch" the merits in court.

So, in my opinion, reviewing all the facts and history, it is obvious to me that Mr. Wenninger had his criminal case sealed to keep the public from realizing he was not qualified to be a candidate for sheriff in 2000. Judge (Robert) Ringland stated in the trial record that Mr. Wenninger was NOT the sheriff. The sealing of criminal records is prohibited where the public's interest and right, or need to know, about Mr. Wenninger's qualifications or lack thereof to hold office, clearly outweigh any privacy interests he would have as an elected public official. The sealing coupled with an obvious concerted effort to deliberately hide the fact that Mr. Wenninger is currently a civilian, wearing a gun, making arrests, and is not a valid peace officer, by operation of law, defrauds county taxpayers and disenfranchises county voters.

By not allowing me to challenge the legal title to the office Mr. Wenninger claims, after I was first denied the right to protest to the Board of Elections because of party affiliation; and then denied a writ of mandamus to compel the Board of Elections to hear my protest, all as stated because I had a future remedy in quo warranto, and then deny the quo warranto remedy, not on the merits but because of time, the lower Court decisions deny me Federal due process of law and deny my right to pursue an elected office I was otherwise entitled to. It is also not just a question of an unexpired term of office, but the unconstitutional taking of my entitlement to the years of service, salary, benefits, and seniority, that I would have had if the law had been applied when demanded - due process under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution."
The story goes on to get quotes from Wenninger and Varnau. Dennis uses every card, the Veteran card, the lawyer card, the woe is me victim card. Seriously, Dennis....it is time to suck it up and admit that you are a ....hmmmm...well, let me put it this way....



And, you know, maybe you should....um...

Dennis the Menace Update: Turns Cult on Jessica Little

Dennis the Menace Just can't stay out of politics. The multi-time loser, not just in elections but in court battles, has filed papers to run as an Independent for Prosecutor in November. He will be going against incumbent Republican Jessica Little and former Democrat (whose term was known for corruption and cronyism and slow wheels of justice) Tom Grennan.

So now, rather than going after Wenninger, his long time nemesis, Varnau figures to sharpen the knives against someone he tried to ruin when they were first running for office. You may recall that Dennis, without permission of Little, used her campaign colors and a picture of her on a sign for his own campaign for sheriff (which by the way, EPICLY FAILED! in getting Dennis elected and EPICLY FAILED! in stymieing Little). This must be payback, because Dennis thinks they were supposed to be a new dynamic duo, with him as batman and Jessica as Robin. Well, Dennis got his sidekicked, and Jessica has gone on to have a good run so far as prosecutor. Wonder what will Dennis's platform be? "I couldn't beat the guy, so now I'll try a woman"? Or "I can't arrest people, but I sure can try em"? Or how about "I'm just a pathetic egomaniac who can't stop with conspiracies and tin foil hat stories to keep myself in the news"? I like that one best.

Dennis the Menace Update: Ohio Supreme Court Says, YOU LOSE!

Dennis "the Menace" Varnau has lost his final battle (unless he wants to go to the US Supreme Court) regarding his quixotic and egotistical war against Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger. They have denied his appeal and whining...so the issue is finally done. More to come, but here is the initial story found online at newsdemocrat.com:

Varnau had initially filed a protest in 2008 against Wenninger's candidacy for sheriff when the two ran against each other in the November elections. In February of 2009, following a victory from Wenninger, Varnau filed a complaint in the court of appeals for a writ of quo warrant to oust Wenninger from office and to place Varnau in his stead, claiming he was the only qualified candidate for sheriff in the 2008 election. Varnau claimed Wenninger was not qualified since he initially took office in 2000.

Last year, the Ohio Court of Appeals decided that Wenninger's candidacy for sheriff in 2000 is irrelevant, and that due to serving as sheriff, Wenninger was qualified to run in 2008. On Jan. 18, Varnau filed an appeal asserting that the court of appeals erred in denying the writ of quo warranto. The Ohio Supreme Court disagreed with the appeal, according to court documents, stating that for Wenninger's qualifications to be debated, the issue should have been presented during his first term as sheriff.

More to follow...the Brown County Press story in print (not yet up online...grrr)gave more detail and had this gem..."Varnau did not return phone calls and could not be reached for comment." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAH!

Look, I have no personal affection or bias toward Dwayne Wenninger. Yes, we are both Republicans, but I don't know the man beyond a few interactions over the years and by his record. Some good, some bad. But what I do know is that justice is finally served in that this egotistical elitist has been told that he cannot circumvent the will of the people retroactively and cannot be crowned sheriff. Guess Dennis and his cult will have to go hunt for the man in the grassy knoll or the book of secrets or Bigfoot.....

Matt, I think this calls for some dancing Snoopys:





Oh yeah, and this too: