Monday, May 29, 2006


One of the myths of the Recall was that Paul was an unknown quantity. This was used as the basis for arguing to "give him a chance."

As mentioned on Fred's Blog ( people in the legal and law enforcement community already knew a great deal about Paul. They had prosecuted cases in which he was a defense attorney. They knew his level of competence. They were aware of his reputation and character.

They also knew why he was reputedly no longer welcome in Del Norte County.

While representing inmates of Pelican Bay, Gallegos was apparently caught trying to illegally pass notes between inmates, which were confiscated "in full view of Paul Gallegos." after Gallegos stated that the notes, reading "hey there, how is it going? This is Deadeye" (from one inmate to another) were not personal but rather legal in nature and were for him. Later, the story goes, Gallegos admitted he knew he could not pass them on to the inmates they were addressed to.

During this discussion, Gallegos apparently illegally taped the conversation without the knowledge or consent of the two correctional officers involved, which, if true, would be in violation of California Penal Codes 134, 135 and 636, and possibly California Code of Regulations Title 15, Section 3175(n).

Gallegos' tape recorder and tapes were bagged into evidence, described in the documents.

The following documents describe the events.
Names of the people involved have been redacted. Private people do not need to be drawn into this politically charged arena, nor do they need to be put at risk.



Date: January 11, 1997

To: ______________
Correctional Captain
Central Services

From: Department of Corrections
Pelican Bay State Prison, P.O. Box 7000, Crescent City, CA 95531-7000


On January 11. 1997, at approximately 1215 hours, Inmate H____________, yelled to me, "Hey, _____, I need you to pass these papers to my attorney." I told Inmate H______ to stand by for a minute that I was busy and would be right there. I retrieved several pieces of yellow lined paper which had been folded over twice from Inmate H______ who was in attorney booth #1 and proceeded to the security door, unlocked the port and in full view of Attorney Gallegos, started to flip through the papers to insure that they were of a legal nature. I glanced at the heading of the first page and the first line of the page, then the second piece of paper and the third piece of paper, and etc. which all appeared to be personal notes to different inmates addressed as such and signed. I informed Attorney Gallegos that the papers in question did not appear to be of a legal nature and that the visiting sergeant would be called to review the papers.

I then folded the papers, returned to my station, tucked the papers under the left side of my open log book and called Correctional Sergeant (A) ________ and informed her of the situation. I then went back to filling out my log books and completing a report that I was in the middle of writing when Inmate H______ requested the passing of the papers. When Sgt. ________ arrived in the front of the Security Housing Unit Visiting she called me and I took the folded papers and handed them to her through a port in the security door.

The papers in question started out with a greeting such as "Hey there" then continued "This is Deadeye" and that is as far as I read as that was enough to raise question that this did not fall within the guidelines for legal material and that an Administrator needed to review those papers closer to make a determination.

After handing the papers to Sgt. _______, she began to discuss the matter with the Attorneys, to explain to them as to why there was a question in this matter. I then observed Attorney Gallegos snatch the paper from Sgt. ______'s hands, fold them and put them in his rear pocket. At this point I closed the port and returned to my station.

Submitted for your review.

Correctional Officer
Badge #________




Date: January 11, 1997

To: ___________
Correctional Lieutenant

From: Department of Corrections
Pelican Bay State Prison, P.O. Box 7000, Crescent City, CA 95531-7000


On January 11, 1997 at approximately 1220 pm, I responded to the Security Housing Unit (SHU) Visiting area at the request of Officer ________. She had concerns regarding hand written material given to her by Inmate H___________. ______ requested Officer _____ pass the hand written material to his attorney Paul Gallegos. _____, upon scanning the written material given to her by ______, per California Code of regulations Title 15, sections 3175(J) (K), observed the beginning words to a specific inmate and then something to the effect of "Hey there how is it going? this is dead eye". I talked with Attorney Gallegos in the presence of his Investigator, __________, explaining institutional concerns regarding legal mail and that personal letters could not be passed. Mr. Gallegos said the letters were for himself and were legal material. Mr. Gallegos also indicated he was aware he could not legally pass the materials to other inmates. Unknown to me, Mr. Gallegos placed a state issued tape recorder on the counter during this discussion. Mr. Gallegos stated he believed Officer _______ had read the written material provided by _____. Officer _____ was standing behind the security door between the front desk and back of SHU Visiting and stated no she just scanned not read the material. I gave the written materials to Gallegos explaining again that these "notes" could not be passed on to the various inmates. Mr. Gallegos stated something to the effect that he knew he could not legally pass them on. Mr. Gallegos went back to the Attorney Visiting Booth I with Mr. ______. About one minute later Mr. ______ came out to talk to me again regarding the written material from ______ and set the tape recorder on the counter. I noticed the red light on the tape recorder and asked Mr. ______ if he was taping the conversation. Mr. _____ stated "Yes, I am." I refused to say anything else and turned the tape recorder off. I informed Mr. ______ he could not tape our conversation. ______ stated something to the effect, "Well, you knew you were being taped earlier didn't you?" I said I most certainly did not know I was being taped and confiscated the tape recorder with the tape inside, although I am not sure it was the same tape with my and Officer _______'s voices. I phoned the Watch Commander, Lieutenant ____________, and informed him of the situation. I also phoned Captain _________ informing him of the situation.

Lieutenant ________ and Captain _________ responded to the area and spoke with Mr. Gallegos and Mr. _______. The tape recorder with the tape inside was placed into an evidence bag by Officer _________ per institutional procedures, observed by Mr. Gallegos and Mr. ______.

Correctional Sergeant (A)
Visitor Processing



Date: January 11, 1997

To: ____________
Correctional Captain
Central Services

From: Department of Corrections
Pelican Bay State Prison, P.O. Box 7000, Crescent City, CA 95531-7000


On January 11, 1997, at approximately 1220 hours, Private Investigator ________ came up to the Security Housing Unit Officer desk and informed me that inmate H_______ had some paper work for his Attorney Gallegos. I notified Correctional Officer _______. C/O _______ opened the port and started to scan the papers. She then stated this is not legal work. I'm going to call the Sergeant, ______ went to get Gallegos, C/O ______ then informed Gallegos that the paperwork did not appear to be legal.

Correctional Sergeant (A) ________ arrived and I resumed my duties as visitor processing. At approximately 1250 hours, Correctional Lieutenant _________ is notified and arrived. Then at approximately 1350 hours, Correctional Captain ________ arrived with Security & Investigations Officer ___________.

All the individuals mentioned above went to a separate area, then at 1415 hours Gallegos and ______ resumed their attorney visit with Inmate G__________, Captain _______, Lieutenant ________, Sgt. _______ and Officer ________ left the area at 1415 hours.

During their conversation Gallegos said Officer _______ knew about the recording. I then stated to him, "No, I did not, I wasn't paying attention, I was busy processing visitors and doing other duties."

Submitted for your review
Correctional Officer
Badge # __________

Monday, May 08, 2006

QUESTIONS ABOUT GRANT FUNDING for the DA's Office. Public Records Act Request

It took over a month to get information from Paul Gallegos. Information that legally should have been provided within 10 days.

When Paul Gallegos fired Gloria Albin Sheets, he said it was because he had "lost" a grant. When Nandor Vadas left the DA's office, Paul said it was because he had "lost" what sounded like the same grant.

Did he lose the grant? Did he lose two grants? Or was it the same grant? Had he lost the grant at all? Or is he still receiving the grant? And if he is, is he fulfilling the requirements of the grant?

Speaking on KINS/Talk Shop, Paul talked alot about grants - that using grants was to subsidize yourself, grants being the icing on the cake, he'd like to see more and more funding from the General Fund to reflect the community's commitment to the office, but that doesn't happen, which he blames on the Board of Supervisors... says when he came in the office was 60% grant funded, and that he has set about to "systematically wean" ourselves from that... "some we try to hold on to" says they are all so competitive... in other words he rambled around, but generally gave his new spin on why he lost the grants.

He says that the Domestic Violence/Victim Witness grant was held onto longer than they should have, "should've weaned ourselves long ago"... Speaking of the Victim Witness Advocates he had so callously thrown under the bus, they're "tough to come by," but said that "when they are grant funded you can't use them the way you want to.." said that Phil Crandall at HHS said he could "throw you something for a year... see what you can do..." and that "now we can use them as we need them..."

By his own account, his office is 60% funded by grants. It is incomprehensible to me that a department head would even consider "weaning" himself from 60% of his budget.

I have alot of friends who have applied for grants over the years, they faced a steep learning curve, but they learned the ins and outs of grant applications, and they were largely successful. Here, you have a man who took over a department that was SIXTY PERCENT FUNDED BY GRANTS, existing grants, grants the office had been receiving for 10 years, 12 years. It's not as if he HAD to go out and secure new sources of funding. But once your budget is cut at the County level, and once you have "lost" a grant, one would think you would go out looking for replacement money. Apply for new grants. Reapply for the ones you lost. Fix whatever you did wrong on your applications.

Any good department manager would fight for his people, fight to save his programs, work to ADD to what his office had. At the very least he should have worked to replace what he "lost."

It appears that he didn't do any of those things.

BUT - he DID spend an awful lot of time trying to come up with ways to fund his PL suit. Detailed elsewhere on this blog, he was given a plan of action by his campaign backers, Salzman's Plan (see read first on this blog), and he took that plan all the way to the Attorney General's office.

I wanted to know if he really lost the grant, I wanted to know how many grants he lost, if any.

So -

On April 3rd I filed a Public Records Act Request with Paul Gallegos' DA's Office.
By law, he had 10 days to give me the information I requested.

On April 14th, I was notified by his office that he was invoking his right to a 14 day extension, because the records I asked for were not readily available. "Due to the volume of records in your request and shortage of staff necessary to comply, we are invoking our right to an additional 14 days in which to respond to your request." This, even though the material I requested should be a simple matter of copying materials that were readily available in files, as they would have been prepared in order to apply for grants, and kept as records for the grantors. He failed to mention at that time that any of the records in question would be denied.

He failed to deliver those materials on April 28th.

On May 4th, I was notified by his office that part of what I asked for was available, but that he was withholding information on the Spousal Abuse grant and the Statutory Rape grant due to pending litigation. He claimed he had run it by County Counsel.

"The records do not contain documents from the Spousal Abuse Prosection Program or the Statutory Rape Vertical Prosecution Program. These documents are the subject of pending litigation and per advice of County Counsel and Government Code section 6254(b) we are not able to disclose at this time. We will be happy to provide them once the lawsuit has resolved. Please let us know if you wish them to be provided at that time."

Because the files I had requested were not prepared as a result of pending litigation, but rather for the granting agencies to which he was applying, he had no legal right to withhold any of the information I asked for. So, I asked again. This time I cc'd the Eureka Reporter.

On May 5th, Gallegos responded that he had turned it all over to County Counsel to decide.

County Counsel decided to give me all the information I asked for. All 1,664 pages.

My Public Records Act Request, and Gallegos' response is posted as the FIRST COMMENT on this post