(Updated) While watching the video on this page of a debate between Robert Brewer and Terri Wyatt, candidates for San Diego District Attorney, I heard Ms. Wyatt say this:
"This is a very specialized office. It has a certain culture and Mr. Brewer has not worked in it."
What exactly is this "certain culture"?
Is it something we want to maintain?
Shouldn't the district attorney's office be staffed by professionals who aren't guided by a "culture"?
Then Ms. Wyatt attacked Bonnie for accepting illegal campaign contributions, and I decided that Wyatt probably wasn't planted in the race by Dumanis.
When Wyatt said that Donna Frye endorsed Bob Brewer. I'm guessing that Frye is appalled at the way Bonnie Dumanis' Public Integrity Unit has targeted women, Mexicans and Democrats. Bonnie has focused on political opponents of her boss's wife, Cheryl Cox, and other South Bay officials. (Bonnie's boss is County Supervisor Greg Cox.)
I'm pretty sure that there will be virtually NO public integrity prosecutions under Bob Brewer. He owes his livelihood largely to white collar miscreants. They pay well when they get in trouble.
WHICH IS WORSE: GREEN LIGHT FOR THE BIG FISH OR POLITICALLY-TARGETED PROSECUTIONS OF THE MINNOWS?
I'm trying to decide which is worse: a green light for the big-time corrupt officials, the ones with real power, who subvert entire government agencies to their own purposes, or politically-motivated prosecutions for very small-time misbehavior of people who occupy the lower echelons of the San Diego power structure.
We've had the green light for the very powerful for long time. They serve the needs of themselves and other powerful people rather than the public that bankrolls the whole endeavor. Mike Aguirre found that you can't change that.
DID BONNIE DUMANIS EXPOSE ONE BIG FISH?
I am pleased that Bonnie Dumanis seems to have inadvertently exposed one big fish when she was chasing the minnows who have dinner with contractors: high profile school attorney Dan Shinoff. Mr. Shinoff was discovered during FBI surveillance having a meeting with Manuel Paul and a prospective witness to discuss testimony in the Ecobusiness v. San Ysidro School District case. During one of several meetings with the witness, only one of which was attended by Mr. Shinoff, Manuel Paul had offered a reward to the witness for his testimony.
I have been trying for years to expose disregard for the law and criminal cover-ups at San Diego County Office of Education's Risk Management Department, which pays Dan Shinoff close to $1 million a year to try lawsuits against school districts. Voice of San Diego reporter Emily Alpert started asking questions about SDCOE and Shinoff a few years ago, but her investigation was stopped and she was fired.
Maybe now someone will do a real investigation. Both SDCOE and individual school districts need to be looked at.
So, Bonnie may have accomplished some good.
I believe that politically-targeted prosecutions aren't acceptable. It deeply damages the right of the people to choose their representatives when small-time crooks of one party are targeted while the district attorney looks the other way (as far as she is able) in the face big-time corruption of the other party.
I believe that Bob Brewer will handle white-collar criminals with kid gloves, and I think that's bad for the three million people in San Diego County. But I will probably vote for Bob Brewer.
Showing posts with label district attorney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label district attorney. Show all posts
Saturday, April 12, 2014
Monday, October 7, 2013
District Attorney candidate Robert Brewer basks in the admiration of Dan Shinoff and Leslie Devaney
Robert Brewer
Leslie Devaney's and Dan Shinoff's endorsements of Robert Brewer can be found HERE.
“I have had the great privilege of knowing Mr. Brewer for over 30 years. He is an outstanding individual who is the consummate professional who treats everyone he deals with with great respect and always is a person of tremendous integrity. The County would be most fortunate to have Robert Brewer as District Attorney.”
Daniel R. Shinoff
STUTZ ARTIANO sHINOFF & HOLTZ
I imagine Mr. Shinoff is quite incensed at Bonnie Dumanis for indicting his clients Manuel Paul, Bertha Lopez, and others at Southwestern College, Sweetwater Union High School District, and San Ysidro School District.
Of course, it's sort of strange that Dan Shinoff feels he has to muzzle a retired teacher in order to protect his own reputation as person of integrity. (See my San Diego Education Report blog posts re Stutz v. Larkins.) Does Mr. Shinoff really think that people who have known him for years will think his ethics are questionable just because of something I say? Most of the facts that I discuss have been published in newspapers, or at least in court documents, and few people read my websites, anyway. Why does Mr. Shinoff see me as a threat to his reputation?
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Texas DA murders: wife of former justice of peace says her husband killed DA McLelland and wife and prosecutor
"Could three people all be dead because someone stole a computer?"
Police: Wife says JP killed Kaufman County DA, spouse and prosecutor
Apr. 17, 2013
By Bill Hanna
star-telegram.com
The wife of a former Kaufman County justice of the peace told authorities that her husband shot and killed Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland, his wife, Cynthia, and Assistant District Attorney Mark Hasse, according to an arrest warrant affidavit.
In an interview Tuesday with an investigator, Kim Williams, 46, "confessed to her involvement to the scheme and course of conduct in the shooting deaths," according to the affidavit signed by Sgt. Matt Woodall of the Kaufman County Sheriff's Department.
The affidavit said "Kim Williams described in detail her role with that of her husband, Eric Williams, whom she reported to have shot to death Mark Hasse on January 31, 2013, and Michael and Cynthia McLelland on March 30, 2013."
Kim Williams also "gave details of both offenses which had not been made public," the affidavit said.
Kim Williams was booked into the Kaufman County Jail at 2:58 a.m. Wednesday. Her bond was set at $10 million.
Eric Lyle Williams remains in jail on a terroristic threat charge in connection with a threatening email sent March 31, the day after the McLellands were killed in their home near Forney.
The email threat said that "unless law enforcement officials responded to the demands of the writer, another attack would occur," according to his arrest warrant affidavit. The affidavit said Eric Williams used "unique identifiers" found at his home to send the message.
Eric Williams, 46, a 1985 graduate of Azle High School, also graduated from TCU and the Texas Wesleyan University law school. He was arrested Saturday and is being held on $3 million bond. He has not been charged with the slayings.
Eric Williams, while working as a justice of the peace in Kaufman County, was convicted last year of stealing county computers in a case prosecuted by McLelland and Hasse. As a result, he lost his peace officer's license and his law license was revoked.
He has appealed his theft conviction, and a day before the McLellands' bodies were found, a state appeals court in Dallas agreed to hear oral arguments in the case.
During the sentencing phase of Eric Williams' trial, Kim Williams testified in her husband’s defense. She said she suffers from several illnesses, including rheumatoid arthritis and chronic fatigue syndrome. She said her husband is her sole caregiver as well as the caregiver for her two ailing parents.
"Eric is a loving man," she testified. "He wouldn't do anything to hurt anybody. I'm standing by him 100 percent."
Kaufman County Judge Bruce Wood said Tuesday that McLelland was steadfast in his belief that Eric Williams was responsible for Hasse's death, something he reiterated on the Wednesday before he was killed.
"He thought that from Day One," Wood said. "He never wavered. ... He said he knew he did it, but he just couldn't get the evidence to prove he did it."
Both McLelland and Hasse began carrying handguns regularly after Williams' trial "because they believed Eric Williams to be a threat to their personal safety," according to Kim Williams' arrest affidavit.
Glenda Rand, a Kaufman native and owner of the Daisy’s clothing store on the town square, said on Tuesday that she has mixed feelings about the recent developments.
"But I don’t know how I feel that it might have been one of our own who did this," Rand said. "Could three people all be dead because someone stole a computer?"
Police: Wife says JP killed Kaufman County DA, spouse and prosecutor
Apr. 17, 2013
By Bill Hanna
star-telegram.com
The wife of a former Kaufman County justice of the peace told authorities that her husband shot and killed Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland, his wife, Cynthia, and Assistant District Attorney Mark Hasse, according to an arrest warrant affidavit.
In an interview Tuesday with an investigator, Kim Williams, 46, "confessed to her involvement to the scheme and course of conduct in the shooting deaths," according to the affidavit signed by Sgt. Matt Woodall of the Kaufman County Sheriff's Department.
The affidavit said "Kim Williams described in detail her role with that of her husband, Eric Williams, whom she reported to have shot to death Mark Hasse on January 31, 2013, and Michael and Cynthia McLelland on March 30, 2013."
Kim Williams also "gave details of both offenses which had not been made public," the affidavit said.
Kim Williams was booked into the Kaufman County Jail at 2:58 a.m. Wednesday. Her bond was set at $10 million.
Eric Lyle Williams remains in jail on a terroristic threat charge in connection with a threatening email sent March 31, the day after the McLellands were killed in their home near Forney.
The email threat said that "unless law enforcement officials responded to the demands of the writer, another attack would occur," according to his arrest warrant affidavit. The affidavit said Eric Williams used "unique identifiers" found at his home to send the message.
Eric Williams, 46, a 1985 graduate of Azle High School, also graduated from TCU and the Texas Wesleyan University law school. He was arrested Saturday and is being held on $3 million bond. He has not been charged with the slayings.
Eric Williams, while working as a justice of the peace in Kaufman County, was convicted last year of stealing county computers in a case prosecuted by McLelland and Hasse. As a result, he lost his peace officer's license and his law license was revoked.
He has appealed his theft conviction, and a day before the McLellands' bodies were found, a state appeals court in Dallas agreed to hear oral arguments in the case.
During the sentencing phase of Eric Williams' trial, Kim Williams testified in her husband’s defense. She said she suffers from several illnesses, including rheumatoid arthritis and chronic fatigue syndrome. She said her husband is her sole caregiver as well as the caregiver for her two ailing parents.
"Eric is a loving man," she testified. "He wouldn't do anything to hurt anybody. I'm standing by him 100 percent."
Kaufman County Judge Bruce Wood said Tuesday that McLelland was steadfast in his belief that Eric Williams was responsible for Hasse's death, something he reiterated on the Wednesday before he was killed.
"He thought that from Day One," Wood said. "He never wavered. ... He said he knew he did it, but he just couldn't get the evidence to prove he did it."
Both McLelland and Hasse began carrying handguns regularly after Williams' trial "because they believed Eric Williams to be a threat to their personal safety," according to Kim Williams' arrest affidavit.
Glenda Rand, a Kaufman native and owner of the Daisy’s clothing store on the town square, said on Tuesday that she has mixed feelings about the recent developments.
"But I don’t know how I feel that it might have been one of our own who did this," Rand said. "Could three people all be dead because someone stole a computer?"
Judge recommends disbarment for Del Norte DA
Judge recommends disbarment for Del Norte DA
By Amy Yarbrough
The California Bar Journal
Official Publication of the State Bar of California
May 2013
Noting that for 20 years he had “repeatedly violated his ethical and professional duties,” a State Bar Court hearing judge has recommended Del Norte County District Attorney Jon M. Alexander be stripped of his law license.
Alexander [bar # 129207], 64, was also placed on involuntary inactive status as a result of Judge Lucy Armendariz’s April 4 disbarment ruling.M Armendariz found Alexander culpable of communicating with a defendant without her attorney’s consent, withholding evidence from the defense and acts of moral turpitude. The disbarment does not go into effect until it is approved by the California Supreme Court.
It was the first time in recent memory that an elected district attorney was the subject of a disciplinary trial. According to published reports, Alexander was suspended without pay by the Del Norte County Board of Supervisors following the decision.
In her ruling, Armendariz wrote that Alexander’s misdeeds were aggravated by the fact he refused to acknowledge his wrongdoing, and that he had failed to uphold his duties as a district attorney.
“Respondent’s misconduct frustrated the administration of justice,” she wrote. “His abuse of his prosecutorial power has negatively impacted the reputation of the district attorney’s office and the public’s trust in the justice system.”
A controversial figure who overcame methamphetamine addiction and other personal struggles to win the district attorney election in 2010, Alexander had a string of State Bar disciplinary problems prior to the case that now threatens his law license. In 1996, he received a private reproval for failing to abide by agreements that were made in lieu of disciplinary prosecution, and for two misdemeanor convictions for driving with a suspended license. In 2003, he received a six-month actual suspension for failing to return unearned fees to a client and for the unauthorized practice of law while he was suspended for not paying his bar dues.
Alexander then received a 60-day actual suspension for misconduct in four matters, including failure to perform services competently, failure to communicate with clients, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law and engaging in an ex parte communication with a judge in a criminal case in order to influence the sentence. He was still on probation for this disciplinary action in 2011, when the conduct that triggered the current case against him occurred.
In the current case, Alexander was initially charged with seven counts of misconduct in three matters, although Armendariz found him culpable in only three of the charged counts. She found that he had talked with a defendant privately in his office about her drug case, despite knowing that the woman had an attorney. During the conversation the defendant recanted statements she made at the time of her arrest, in which she implicated her co-defendant and admitted to Alexander that the drugs at issue in the case actually belonged to her. Alexander failed to tell the defense attorneys about the conversation and did not share the woman’s incriminating statement with her co-defendant’s lawyer until after he learned their conversation had been tape-recorded.
During Alexander’s misconduct trial, 31 witnesses testified on Alexander’s behalf, attesting to his good moral character and extensive community service, much of it to help others struggling with substance abuse problems. Although Armendariz said that testimony carried some weight, she noted that Alexander’s community service had already been considered a mitigating factor in his third State Bar discipline case.
“The court finds that these character witnesses represent a demonstration of respondent’s good character attested to by a wide range of references in the legal and general communities. But they invariably dismissed respondent’s misconduct as either insignificant or not at all unethical,” she wrote. “Many did not comprehend its egregiousness.”
By Amy Yarbrough
The California Bar Journal
Official Publication of the State Bar of California
May 2013
Noting that for 20 years he had “repeatedly violated his ethical and professional duties,” a State Bar Court hearing judge has recommended Del Norte County District Attorney Jon M. Alexander be stripped of his law license.
Alexander [bar # 129207], 64, was also placed on involuntary inactive status as a result of Judge Lucy Armendariz’s April 4 disbarment ruling.M Armendariz found Alexander culpable of communicating with a defendant without her attorney’s consent, withholding evidence from the defense and acts of moral turpitude. The disbarment does not go into effect until it is approved by the California Supreme Court.
It was the first time in recent memory that an elected district attorney was the subject of a disciplinary trial. According to published reports, Alexander was suspended without pay by the Del Norte County Board of Supervisors following the decision.
In her ruling, Armendariz wrote that Alexander’s misdeeds were aggravated by the fact he refused to acknowledge his wrongdoing, and that he had failed to uphold his duties as a district attorney.
“Respondent’s misconduct frustrated the administration of justice,” she wrote. “His abuse of his prosecutorial power has negatively impacted the reputation of the district attorney’s office and the public’s trust in the justice system.”
A controversial figure who overcame methamphetamine addiction and other personal struggles to win the district attorney election in 2010, Alexander had a string of State Bar disciplinary problems prior to the case that now threatens his law license. In 1996, he received a private reproval for failing to abide by agreements that were made in lieu of disciplinary prosecution, and for two misdemeanor convictions for driving with a suspended license. In 2003, he received a six-month actual suspension for failing to return unearned fees to a client and for the unauthorized practice of law while he was suspended for not paying his bar dues.
Alexander then received a 60-day actual suspension for misconduct in four matters, including failure to perform services competently, failure to communicate with clients, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law and engaging in an ex parte communication with a judge in a criminal case in order to influence the sentence. He was still on probation for this disciplinary action in 2011, when the conduct that triggered the current case against him occurred.
In the current case, Alexander was initially charged with seven counts of misconduct in three matters, although Armendariz found him culpable in only three of the charged counts. She found that he had talked with a defendant privately in his office about her drug case, despite knowing that the woman had an attorney. During the conversation the defendant recanted statements she made at the time of her arrest, in which she implicated her co-defendant and admitted to Alexander that the drugs at issue in the case actually belonged to her. Alexander failed to tell the defense attorneys about the conversation and did not share the woman’s incriminating statement with her co-defendant’s lawyer until after he learned their conversation had been tape-recorded.
During Alexander’s misconduct trial, 31 witnesses testified on Alexander’s behalf, attesting to his good moral character and extensive community service, much of it to help others struggling with substance abuse problems. Although Armendariz said that testimony carried some weight, she noted that Alexander’s community service had already been considered a mitigating factor in his third State Bar discipline case.
“The court finds that these character witnesses represent a demonstration of respondent’s good character attested to by a wide range of references in the legal and general communities. But they invariably dismissed respondent’s misconduct as either insignificant or not at all unethical,” she wrote. “Many did not comprehend its egregiousness.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)