Charges against Rossy reduced to 91

By Deb Murphy

In a brief court session this morning, the 137 charges against Dawndee Rossy were reduced to 91 by appointed judge Philip Argento.

Argento anticipated the resumption of trial proceedings, but defense attorney David Evans opted to hold off until Tuesday morning.

Rossy was arrested in April 2013 with the primary charge being embezzlement of $1.5 million from Health and Human Services. Testimony in the trial started in late February. So, what’s one more day.

Following a defense motion, draft judgement and a round of responses, Argento ruled that the 500-plus pieces of evidence all stand.

The charges that have been dismissed include identity theft of those who did not testify in court as well as counts of conspiracy to commit forgery. Despite the latter ruling, the charges of forgery are still in play.


14 Responses to Charges against Rossy reduced to 91

  1. earl duran July 1, 2016 at 8:38 am #

    STD are you related to the criminal?

  2. Kauhlid El Daw June 29, 2016 at 10:37 am #

    They are going to get away with it !!

  3. Maddawg June 28, 2016 at 11:38 pm #

    Hasn’t this trial played itself out by now? Enough is enough the procequetion rested a long time ago so either charge her or let her go!

  4. earl duran June 28, 2016 at 7:42 am #

    Is she still in custody?

    • Rick O'Brien June 28, 2016 at 8:19 pm #

      Heck NO, she’s not in custody ! I know some people say the judge makes sure that bail money can’t come from stolen money, but when you are accused of embezzling 1.5 mil., where do you think the bail $$ came from ? (and attorney’s don’t take on a case like this without a HUGE retainer ) He’s been on the clock for what, OVER 3 years now ?
      If they had their own money for bail and an attorney, why are they accused of stealing more money than any of us will see in a lifetime (at once).

      • Show Don't Tell June 29, 2016 at 8:04 am #

        They say she took 1.5 doesn’t mean she did. And yes they check throughly where bail came from.
        Bail came from family.

        Thought you were smarter than that Rick. The court system moves at a snails pace.

        Some man just murdered his wife in chalfant Valley and the most of you are all freaked oUT over a an ALLEGED money crime.

        People in this world are losing their minds

        • Low Inyo June 29, 2016 at 4:45 pm #

          Show Don’t Tell…..with your thinking and posting about “alleged” money crime committed here,you have some double-talk going on,don’t you think ?….isn’t the man in Chalfant Valley ALLEGEDLY guilty of murdering his wife ?

        • Rick O'Brien June 29, 2016 at 6:16 pm #

          YES, I know they check and re-check and RE_CHECK where bail $$ comes from. Her bail was originally 500,000.00 dollars,and with a reduction, it was lowered to 250,000.00. If she (her family you say) went through a bondsman, that’s 25 grand you don’t get back. Add that with what her attorney is getting and it just doesn’t seem to me that if she and her husband had all these resources available, WHY are they accused of bilking the county out of a million + ? If she would have take the 8 years, she’d be more than halfway through her sentence already, and her family wouldn’t be out 25 thou.

  5. Low Inyo June 27, 2016 at 4:27 pm #

    By the looks of things,,if this trial even continues and all the charges aren’t dropped,her penalty is probably going to end up being probation and community service…

    • Presto June 28, 2016 at 4:34 pm #

      Beyond a Reasonable doubt!

      Does the standard somehow bother you low inyo?

      Should the standard be lower, or higher?

      • Low Inyo June 29, 2016 at 5:52 am #

        Well,Presto,unless the D.A. is on a personal vendetta and a witch-hunt,I’d have to think 91 charges… (NINETY-ONE)…..there’s got to be some good evidence against her….we’ll see how it turns out….if it’s all made up,or if that paper trail will lead to at least a few convictions….my bet is you probably think the right decision was made back in 1993 with the O.J. trial.

        • Pedro June 29, 2016 at 11:20 pm #

          The OJ jury probably did make the right decision. Being found not guilty means the prosecution didn’t prove their charges not that you are innocent. A racist cop who perjured himself on the stand gathered much of the evidence. There was no major evidence and the little, evidence they did have to prove the case was mishandled and some went missing, unaccounted for. The prosecution was cocky, overly technical without enough concern if the jury understood the evidence, AND they were the idiots that asked OJ to try on the glove. OJ didn’t win, the city of Los Angeles forfeited.

          That jury decision forced the city to become professional with evidence. How many guilty has that help punish and how many innocent has that set free in the last 20 years is a good question to ask. Plus OJ lost all his cases after that and got his. Sometimes you got to look at the long run.

  6. Trouble June 27, 2016 at 2:01 pm #

    Who’s paying for her attorney?

  7. Show Don't Tell June 27, 2016 at 12:59 pm #

    The D.A. is playing thee “let’s throw a bunch of mud on a wall and see what sticks game”

    Over 1/3 of the mud fell off. More to come I’m sure


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.