Investigations into Howard Fetner leave big questions unanswered

In response to the July 9 South Florida Sun-Sentinel editorial, “Patronis’ Zeal for Toothless Case Raises Serious Questions,” my clients wanted to raise some important questions.

Contrary to the Sun-Sentinel’s claim that Dr. Howard Fetner did nothing wrong, my clients – all dentists – reported fraud in their dental practices. Fetner fired them, even though he testified under oath that he had never set foot in the practices.

This is important because Florida state law requires a practicing, licensed dentist to operate a dental practice.

The Sun-Sentinel ignored the fact that my clients believe Fetner, ACPDO and Boyne Capital harassed them. So I contacted the District Attorney Melissa Nelson earlier this year to investigate his involvement.

To be clear: neither I nor my clients work for CFO Jimmy Patronis or the Division of Financial Services. This was an independent effort to do more investigative work in this case.

Fortunately, the governor Ron DeSantis’ Reassignment of Fetner case to prosecutor Brian Kramer has brought to light some new information that raises serious questions about the Miami District Attorney’s Office and its involvement in this matter, which resulted in five arrests for Medicaid fraud and the subsequent suspension of law enforcement efforts.

Kramer’s investigation revealed that Fetner had a previously undisclosed immunity agreement with the Miami SAO and therefore cannot be prosecuted for any crimes he may have committed.

As these employees are likely aware, an immunity agreement, by definition, requires that someone has disclosed something regarding criminal activity in order to receive a free pass for a potential crime they may have committed.

This new evidence confirms that the Kramer investigation did not exonerate Fetner, as this newspaper’s editorial suggested.

But your article ignored the biggest question raised by the Kramer investigation into Fetner.

Why did Miami SAO have no record of what Fetner gave them in exchange for his immunity deal?

It is outrageous that the prosecution refuses to accept testimony given in exchange for immunity.

Even more troubling, the Miami SAO appears to have effectively granted immunity to Fetner by failing to produce or maintain proof of the immunity granted. This means that Kramer and others believe they cannot bring charges against Fetner because a lost immunity agreement could potentially protect him.

Between the missing immunity certificate and ASA Michael Spivacks My clients believe that the justice system was unfair in this case, even though they gave a statement indicating that he believed it was fraudulent but later dropped the case.

If the Sun Sentinel is serious about asking the “serious questions” as its editorial states, then we expect it to ask the Miami SAO what happened to the lost immunity agreement with Jacksonville dentist Dr. Howard Fetner, who operated a practice in Miami that he never visited.

___

William N. Spicola is a Tallahassee-based attorney.

Post views: 0