| Probable cause affidavit: |
SUBMITTED BY: POLLARD, RANDALL 0677 (AR15-14243) did unlawfully and knowingly obtain, use or endeavor to obtain or use the property of MS ROSEMARIE MYS, to-wit: 2015 FORD MUSTANG, by exercising control over said property with the intent to either temporarily or permanently deprive MS ROSEMARIE MYS, of a right to the property or a benefit thereof, or did appropriate the property to HER own use or the use of any person not entitled thereto, and knew or should have known that said property was stolen, in violation of Florida Statute 812.014(2)(c)(6). ON 031415, I RESPONDED TO 3205 EAST GLADYS STREET, IN INVERNESS, IN REFERENCE TO A CALL FOR SERVICE. ACCORDING TO THE DISPATCH SCREEN A MS MANDI MYS BELIEVED SHE HAD AN OPEN WARRANT AND WISHED TO TURN HERSELF IN. AT THAT TIME, I RAN MS MANDI MYS AND FOUND HER NOT TO HAVE AN OPEN CITRUS COUNTY WARRANT. I THEN RAN HER NAME IN A GLOBAL SUBJECT SEARCH, WHERE I FOUND THAT SHE WAS THE SUSPECT IN A GRAND THEFT OF A MOTOR VEHICLE THAT BELONGED TO HER GRANDMOTHER/VICTIM, MS ROSEMARIE MYS. AT THAT TIME, I BEGAN REVIEWING THE REPORT AND LEARNED THAT ON 020915, THE VICTIM HAD REPORTED HER 2015 FORD MUSTANG STOLEN. DEPUTY ANSTEAD RESPONDED TO THE SCENE AND OBTAINED INFORMATION FOR HER REPORT THAT THE VICTIM HAD LET HER GRANDDAUGHTER/DEFENDANT, MS MANDI MYS, LIVE WITH HER AT 3498 EAST LAKE NINA DRIVE, IN INVERNESS. SHE ALSO ADVISED DEPUTY ANSTEAD THAT SHE HAD PURCHASED A 2015 FORD MUSTANG convertible AND HAD NEVER ALLOWED THE DEFENDANT TO DRIVE IT. THE VICTIM ADVISED SHE WENT TO LUNCH WITH SOME FRIENDS, WHO PICKED HER UP AT HER RESIDENCE. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS LEFT AT THE RESIDENCE ALONE AND SHE LEFT HER CAR KEYS ON A HOOK. THE VICTIM ADVISED THAT SHE RETURNED TO HER RESIDENCE AT APPROXIMATELY 1530 HOURS ON 020915, AND AS THEY WERE PULLING INTO THE DRIVEWAY SHE SAW HER NEW FORD MUSTANG DRIVING AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE. THE VICTIM INITIALLY DID NOT KNOW WHO WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE AND ENTERED HER RESIDENCE TO ASK THE DEFENDANT WHAT WAS GOING ON, AT WHICH TIME SHE NOTICED THE DEFENDANT WAS GONE AND HER CAR KEYS WERE MISSING FROM THE HOOK. ACCORDING TO DEPUTY ANSTEADâS REPORT, THE VICTIM CONTACTED HER DAUGHTER, MS PAMELA MYS (THE DEFENDANTâS MOTHER). MS PAMELA MYS ADVISED THAT SHE HAD SPOKEN TO MS MANDI MYS, WHO NEVER MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT TAKING THE VEHICLE. MS PAMELA MYS ADVISED THAT SHE BELIEVED THE DEFENDANT WAS ON HER WAY TO HER BOYFRIENDâS (MR CHRISTOPHER ADAMS) RESIDENCE IN LECANTO. WHILE DEPUTY ANSTEAD WAS ON SCENE, SHE OVERHEAD A CONVERSATION BETWEEN MS PAMELA MYS AND MR JAMES ADAMS (MR CHRISTOPHER ADAMSâ FATHER), WHERE MR ADAMS EXPLAINED TO MS PAMELA MYS THAT HIS YOUNGEST SON, MR JARED ADAMS, WHO IS MR CHRISTOPHER ADAMSâ BROTHER, WAS AT THE RESIDENCE ON EXPRESS LANE WHEN THE DEFENDANT PULLED UP IN THE DRIVEWAY IN A WHITE FORD MUSTANG. AT THAT TIME, MR JARED ADAMS TOLD THE DEFENDANT THAT HER MOTHER AND GRANDMOTHER WERE LOOKING FOR HER AND THEY HAD CALLED LAW ENFORCEMENT. MR JARED ADAMS STATED THAT THE DEFENDANT LAUGHED AND STATED, ââNO SHE WONâT.ââ SHORTLY AFTER, THE DEFENDANT AND MR CHRISTOPHER ADAMS GOT IN THE MUSTANG AND LEFT. DEPUTY ANSTEAD THEN ENTERED THE MUSTANG AS STOLEN IN NCIC/FCIC AND THE CASE WAS TURNED OVER TO DETECTIVE EMERICK (0104). ON 021015, DETECTIVE EMERICK MADE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM, VIA TELEPHONE, WHO STATED THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD NEVER DROVE HER MUSTANG. SHE ADVISED HIM THE SAME STORY THAT SHE HAD WENT TO LUNCH WITH FRIENDS AND UPON RETURNING SHE SAW HER VEHICLE DRIVING AWAY. AT THAT TIME, SHE STILL WISHED TO PURSUE CHARGES. ON 021915, DETECTIVE EMERICK MADE CONTACT WITH MR JARED ADAMS, WHO IS THE BROTHER OF MR CHRISTOPHER ADAMS, WHO WAS THE BOYFRIEND OF THE DEFENDANT. DETECTIVE EMERICK OBTAINED A RECORDED STATEMENT. MR JARED ADAMS ADVISED THAT ON THE DAY OF THE INCIDENT, HE OBSERVED THE DEFENDANT ARRIVE AT HIS RESIDENCE IN A WHITE MUSTANG convertible. HE ADVISED THAT HIS BROTHER LEFT IN THE VEHICLE WITH THE DEFENDANT. I THEN CALLED DETECTIVE EMERICK AFTER REVIEWING THE REPORT DETAILS, AT WHICH TIME HE STATED HE WAS PLANNING ON CLOSING THE CASE AND GETTING A WARRANT FOR THE DEFENDANTâS ARREST. AT THAT TIME, I ADVISED HIM THAT I FOUND PROBABLE CAUSE IN THE REPORT. I THEN SPOKE TO THE VICTIM, WHO WAS AT THE RESIDENCE ON GLADYS STREET. THE VICTIM ADVISED ME THAT SHE HAD ALLOWED HER GRANDDAUGHTER/DEFENDANT STAY AT THE RESIDENCE WITH HER DUE TO SOME PERSONAL PROBLEMS SHE WAS GOING THROUGH. SHE CONFIRMED THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD NEVER DRIVEN THE FORD MUSTANG, NOR DID SHE EVER HAVE PERMISSION TO DRIVE IT BECAUSE OF THE ISSUES SHE WAS DEALING WITH. SHE STATED THAT IT WAS CLEAR TO THE DEFENDANT AND AS OF TODAYâS DATE (031415), SHE STILL WISHED TO PURSUE CHARGES. AT THAT TIME, THE DEFENDANT WAS PLACED UNDER ARREST, HANDCUFFED (DOUBLE LOCKED) BEHIND HER BACK, SECURED IN THE REAR SEAT OF MY PATROL VEHICLE. i then read the DEFENDANT her miranda rights, via an agency issued preprinted card; however, the DEFENDANT did not wish to speak to me regarding the incident. the DEFENDANT was then TRANSPORTED TO THE CITRUS COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY for booking and processing. THE DEFENDANTâS BOND WAS SET AT $5,000.00 DUE TO THE VICTIM BEING OVER 65 YEARS OLD AND THE VALUE OF THE VEHICLE BEING $25,000.00 OR MORE. |
