WARREN, Ohio - Over the weekend, 21 News reported on allegations from Trumbull County Commissioner Niki Frenchko that County Sheriff, Paul Monroe and fellow commissioners, Mauro Cantalamessa and Frank Fuda have responded to those allegations.

In a lawsuit filed in court last week, Frenchko's attorneys alleged that Sheriff Monroe orchestrated the arrest and he and the two deputies who arrested her during a meeting in July of 2022.

Furthermore, her attorneys allege that the two arresting deputies deleted text messages despite several notices asking them to preserve evidence.

However a response filed by Sheriff Monroe, the two arresting deputies and commissioners Cantalamessa and Fuda claims there is no evidence to back Frenchko's claims up and the arrest was perfectly legal.

"There was no grand conspiracy to arrest [Frenchko] on July 7, 2022. [Frenchko] was lawfully arrested after she continuously and purposefully interrupted the reading of a letter into the public record," the document read.

"The undisputed record also establishes that [Frenchko] does not have any viable basis for her destruction of evidence and destruction of public records claims against any defendant," the document continues.

The incident in question occurred during a meeting in which former clerk, Paula-Vivoda Klotz was reading a letter from Sheriff Monroe accusing Frenchko of dishonesty and demanding an apology from her.

According to Frenchko's attorneys this stems from Frenchko bringing up complaints from residents regarding inadequate medical care for inmates at the Trumbull County Jail.

The response from Monroe and the commissioners states that Frenchko continuously interrupted Vivoda-Klotz as she read the letter causing her to get increasingly upset causing commissioners and members of the public asked her to stop.

The document alleges that Frenchko continued to interrupt commissioners until the two deputies ordered her to leave the meeting and placed her under arrest for disturbing a lawful meeting.

The document claims that the arrest was lawful, citing a section of the Ohio Revised Code, which reads as follows:

"No person, with purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession or gathering shall ... do any act which obstructs or interferes with the due conduct of such meeting, procession or gathering [or] make any utterance, gesture or display which outrages the sensibilities of the group."

However, Frenchko's attorneys claim the arrest was unconstitutional and claims that the meetings are like the "Wild West" with commissioners interrupting each other regularly.

The document goes on to claim that Sheriff Monroe and his deputies are protected under qualified immunity.

"The Supreme Court directs that 'police officers may not be held liable for damages unless the officers were plainly incompetent or knowingly violate[d] clearly established law,'" the document read.

The document states that even if there was no probable cause to arrest Frenchko, the defendants are still entitled to qualified immunity because "a reasonable officer could believe the probable cause existed."

As for Frenchko's claims regarding the destruction of public records, the document claims that Frenchko filed a singular email to Sheriff Monroe requesting "all call logs between commissioners, Gedeon, Taylor, Blair Klotz & Monroe or staff & text messages for the same, from June 25-[August 8, 2022]."

"[Frenchko's] request does not identify any subject matter or topic. Instead she broadly requests the logs and the content of text messages over communications from eight individuals and staff from a one-and-a-half-month period," the document reads.

Furthermore, the document claims that Frenchko was unable to demonstrate that she was aggrieved by the alleged destruction of these records.

"A person is not aggrieved by the destruction of public records if clear and convincing evidence shows that the request for a record was contrived as a pretext to create potential liability," the document said, citing the Ohio Revised Code.

The document alleges that Frenchko did indeed make the request to as a pretext to create a potential liability stating that it's unclear why she waited until the current litigation to follow up on the request.

Furthermore, the document states that Frenchko did receive these call and text logs through the process of the litigation, so she cannot be aggrieved by any alleged destruction of public records.

This response also mentions a separate controversial incident involving Frenchko and Sheriff Monroe where Monroe is seen reaching for Frenchko's phone and knocking it over during a live stream of the meeting.

Frenchko alleges that Monroe attempted to seize her phone and put his hands on her, but Monroe previously told 21 News that Frenchko hit him causing the phone to go flying, but he did not want to press any charges against her.

The document claims that no seizure of the phone took place and that Sheriff Monroe was trying to move the phone stand away from him causing the phone to fall off the stand.

"Sheriff Monroe did not grab and throw [Frenchko's] phone, but even if he did, he did not damage her phone in any way, and [Frenchko] was able to record using her phone before, during and since the interaction. [Frenchko] did not need to demand the return of her phone, because Sheriff Monroe never exercised control over her phone," the document read.

The response in its entirety can be read below, and Frenchko's motion for summary judgement can be read in full in the related coverage below.

RELATED COVERAGE: