Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Lutz

Stalking charge dries up after spittle does

Lawsuits over a tree led to a strange morning ritual in Crystal Lakes Manors.

By BILL COATS
Published March 4, 2005

LUTZ - The protest was silent and solitary, but a protest nonetheless.

On 15 mornings, David Clark took a dawn walk down a cul-de-sac near his house and spit on the driver's window of a white Ford Crown Victoria.

Clark knew that the car's driver, Mike Conigliaro, was suing their homeowners association, and the suit threatened to cost residents of Crystal Lakes Manors tens of thousands of dollars.

But Clark did not know other crucial facts.

He didn't know that he was spitting on an unmarked car belonging to the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office; that Conigliaro is a sheriff's sergeant; and that as a former homicide detective, Conigliaro had jailed many dangerous people, giving him reason to live cautiously.

"I was really worried about an individual escalating this, and what could it be?" Conigliaro said. "I can take care of myself, but I was worried about my family."

This week, prosecutors dropped a misdemeanor stalking charge against Clark, 49. He admitted spitting, but legal details worked in his favor.

Dismissal of the stalking case presumably ends a three-year saga of surprises that began with cracks in Crystal Lakes Manors' entrance wall then morphed into a mysterious decision blaming Conigliaro's laurel oak, removal of the oak despite the county government's mandate to spare it, a snarl of lawsuits, sunrise surveillance of the Crown Victoria, and Clark's arrest.

The oak, 65 feet of foliage, shielded Conigliaro's back yard from a view of Lutz's busiest intersection at U.S. 41 and Sunset Lane. But homeowner leaders concluded in 2002 that its roots were pushing through the wall.

A series of communications lapses ensued. The homeowners association told Conigliaro that a tree outside his wall would be cut down. No problem, Conigliaro said. But unbeknownst to him, a tree company sought a permit to take down Conigliaro's laurel oak. The county denied the permit but notified Conigliaro, not the tree company. Conigliaro's wife told the homeowners association, which left word with the association's property manager, who was out of town and didn't get word to the tree company in time.

The oak disappeared on May 7, 2002, a day when the Conigliaro family was away.

Eventually, the county punished the tree service. Conigliaro sued the homeowners association, the property manager and the tree service. The homeowners association responded by suing the tree service, which sued the homeowners association and the property manager. The litigation began trudging through the courts.

A year ago, Conigliaro first noticed saliva on his window. He hosed it off.

It happened again and again.

"I got tired of pulling out the hose," Conigliaro said. He stocked the Crown Vic with paper towels and a bottle of spray disinfectant.

After the sixth spitting incident, the former detective reached for the evidence supplies. He took DNA swabs of the saliva for seven mornings last April. He mounted a video camera in the car.

Conigliaro's evidence persuaded the Sheriff's Office to assign a pair of detectives to the case. They began staking out the neighborhood. Last April 23, they videotaped Clark spitting on the car. A week later, they watched him walk past without spitting. The next day, Conigliaro's video camera captured another spitting.

On May 7, Clark's morning walk was interrupted by a detective. Clark denied the spitting until he was shown a photo of himself in the act. Then he told the detective about his protest.

By last summer, all the lawsuits were settled. A wayward driver walloped the cracking wall, and his insurance paid for its reconstruction.

But Clark's stalking case was delayed by a sequence of changing judges and prosecutors. Clark's attorney, Roger Mills, said he finally got his chance this month to move for dismissal.

Stalking, under Florida law, requires harassing the victim, Mills argued. The definition of "harassing" requires subjecting the victim to "substantial emotional distress." Mills asked: Did Conigliaro really suffer "substantial emotional distress"?

Assistant State Attorney Jill Hamel-Sieg called Conigliaro. No, he said.

Mills said Clark regretted all the spitting and conceded it was childish. He wanted to put the whole affair behind him.

On Monday, County Judge Gaston Fernandez closed the case with a warning for Clark.

"Even the conduct that was attributed to you could lead to felony battery involving a law enforcement officer."

"I don't want to comment," Clark said after the hearing. "I'm outta here."

[Last modified March 3, 2005, 09:12:11]