Sunday, April 29, 2007

"Justice for All"?

"Joi died on March 19, 2002, probably bent into the bathtub of a condemned trailer in Orick, her body weighing only 60 pounds and swathed in a soiled disposable diaper.

A medical examiner determined that Joi, 42 years old and long rendered helpless by multiple sclerosis, died from lobar pneumonia with a variety of contributing factors.

These included MS, malnutrition, a urinary tract infection from a catheter that hadn’t been cleaned in several months and 20 or more feces-infected bedsores, two of which gaped so wide and deep that the bones beneath were exposed."

Joseph Pierre Rollin "was convicted only of the enhanced abuse of a dependent adult and was sentenced to eight years in prison.

But in December, the conviction was reversed on appeal because, court documents show, Gallegos repeatedly used Pierre’s non-Mirandized denial of responsibility for Joi’s death — later refuted by a Mirandized confession — as evidence of his guilt.

Joseph Pierre Rollin was returned to the Humboldt County jail last week and is scheduled to appear Monday (April 30, 2007) for a new pre-trial hearing."

Joi's mother, Betty "has tried repeatedly to contact the DA" but he has not spoken to her.

I just don't get it. Why? Why hasn't he called her back?

Why did Paul Gallegos run for the job of District Attorney? He made alot of pronouncements about what he thought doing the job meant.

Well, talking to victim's families is part of that job, and in fact, helping victim's families find justice ought to be the most pleasurable and rewarding part of his job.

Instead he says (in an e-mail to the Eureka Reporter) "“As with all cases, we operate on the assumption that they will be tried. We are also obligated to listen and evaluate all evidence related to any possible legal, factual and equitable issues and we will. I am under the assumption that Ms. Henderson is being assisted by one (of) our most experienced victim witness advocates. I believe she will confirm that. Any possible pre-trial resolution would be discussed with the family prior to being agreed to. Of course, the ultimate decision rests entirely with me and I will exercise that authority vested in me with an eye toward balancing the duty to impose an appropriate consequence while tempering that with compassion.”"

What happened to "Justice for all!"?

It's not Palco - but what about justice for Joi Henderson Wright and her family?

Rollin, Kesser appear in court to handle retrial issues 5/1/07
ER - A mother's last chance for justice 4/28/07
Previous post: Rollins Case Overturned 12/14/06
The history:
ER - Ruling of man accused of causing the death of Orick woman overturned 12/13/2006
ER - Appeal Likely In Caregiver Case; Families Await Sentencing Hearing 10/1/04
ER - Abuse Case Weak Against Brother, Trial Of Caregiver To Begin 8/6/04
ER - Caregiver Found Guilty Of Dependent Abuse, Death 9/2/04
ER - Brother of caregiver sentenced to five years supervised probation 11/10/04
ER - Caregiver Trial Heads To Jury Later This Week 8/31/04
ER - Bench Warrant Issued For Man Who Was Recently Given Plea Bargain 8/31/04
ER - Caregiver Gets Eight Years For Causing Woman’s Death 10/6/04
ER - Jury Deliberating Caregiver Case 8/31/04
There are also twelve stories in the Times Standard, but they are not freely available online.
Brother of convicted dependent adult abuser sentenced on embezzlement charges 11/10/04
Brother of recently sentenced dependent abuser arrested 10/9/04
Dependent adult abuser sentenced to three years 10/6/04
Former caregiver found guilty in woman's death 9/3/04
Dependent abuse trial goes to jury 9/1/04
Closing arguments begin in dependent abuse trial 8/31/04
Manslaughter trial finishes first week of testimony 8/21/04
Deputy briefly takes the stand in manslaughter trail 8/20/04
Nurse only witness Wednesday in manslaughter trial 8/19/04
Dependent adult abuse trial enters second day 8/18/04
Dependent adult death trial begins 8/17, 2004
Grand jury probes death of disabled woman 7/8/04

A witch hunt

She was my brother's teacher. She was creative, and innovative, and something of a radical. She talked about saving the forests long before the treesitters and Redwood Summer. She introduced the concept of organic food, and had the kids making (and drinking) carrot juice, brought in xeroxed sheets of information on the formaldehyde in ice cream. She exemplified the back to the land, grow your own, live off the grid lifestyle. And we loved her.

One day, a kid brought a Playboy Magazine into class. When she discovered it in his desk, she did something very unusual. She took it out, and hung it on the bulletin board. And the class had a discussion about what it represented.

The kids knew it to be the right reaction. It was just. It wasn't over-reactive. It was real and it was honest. And they loved her.

But the parents didn't. She was far too radical. And soon she was gone.

And the kids knew - she was the victim of a witch hunt.

It seems ironic to me that her son is now becoming a victim of the same sort of narrow minded thinking - but with a major twist.

Her name was Irene Riley.

Her son's name is Scott Riley.

His proposal for an "eco-groovy" development in Manila has brought out the lynch mob.

Salzman and his "eco-groovy" cohorts kicked into full gear, sounding the clarion call for warm bodies to kill the proposal, promising all kinds of dire consequences if Riley is successful - calling it "a very dense subdivision," stating that The development could be precedent-setting county-wide in a number of harmful ways. They "organized a publicized walk ... so local residents could see for themselves how d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-v-e this will be. They hope that dozens of concerned residents across the Humboldt Bay area will recognize the i-m-p-o-r-t-a-n-c-e of this meeting, and that we're able to pack the chambers with articulate voices of opposition. They claim "None of us are opposed to this property being "developed" as long as it matches the existing neighborhood's low density, and doesn't destroy any of the existing dunes.,, Aryay Kalaki said it would irretrievably change the community's rustic attributes that residents cherish. ”We would permanently lose the rural character,” said Kalaki." (Don't laugh!) (Channel 3 they claim, ran the "publicized walk" as a lead story that night. The Times Standard and The Lumberjack covered it as well - Guys, you might wanna check your sources.)

As Hank Sims details in his recent column, there are some problems with their story.

"...Pine trees. In his letter, (Michael) Fennell stated that Riley was "caught cutting mature beach pines on [his] property prior to submitting [his] development plan." The implication was that this was an illegal act, and in a follow-up call Fennell asserted that it was.

In fact, it was not. The tree-cutting incident was covered in the Arcata Eye at the time. The story from that paper described how officers from the county's code enforcement unit had been called to the scene and had issued a stop-work permit for "possible" violations, but had later determined that no law had been broken. The trees were not, in fact, "mature," at least by the definition adopted by the county. In our phone conversation, Fennell insisted that code enforcement had simply been too busy to prosecute Riley, but this is not the case. No law was broken.

Sand. In his letter, Fennell mentioned that the Riley plan involves "bulldoz[ing] the dunes (about 650 large dump-truck loads)." In fact, the great majority of the sand removed from building sites in the Riley proposal will be used to restore historic dunes on the property, according to engineering plans that have been submitted to the county. Only one "large dump-truck load" of sand is scheduled to be removed from the site.

Density. Fennell, speaking for the community, said: "We welcome any new housing that ... maintains the half-acre minimum standard." (Half-acre-minimum lots are standard for the area's zoning.)

Riley's plan calls for 17 homes on 8.5 acres, which pencils out to one home per half-acre. However, those proposed homes will be scrunched into one corner of the property so that the rest of the parcel, which consists of sensitive wetlands, may be protected as open space. This kind of thing is the purpose behind "planned unit developments." Trevor Eslow, a planner with the county's Community Development Services division, assured us Tuesday that these kind of trade-offs -- smaller lot sizes for preserved open space -- are not entirely uncommon.

In fact, just last year there was another Manila developer who did a somewhat analogous deal with the county. His name is Michael Fennell. Last year, Fennell wanted to subdivide 3.7 acres, 3 acres of which was wetlands or pine forest. Fennell built three homes on the other seven-tenths of an acre, with the county's blessing. According to Eslow, the lead planner on the project, one of the lots was only 15,000 square feet in size -- about .35 acres, well below the standard he sets for Riley's development..."

Riley's development is "green" - the kind of thing that should make these guys happy.

And, there's more to the story. Kalaki has a longstanding grudge against Riley (reportedly he wanted Riley's piece of property, but offered less than Riley, and so did not get it, and has been on a vendetta ever since. There's also some evidence that he uses the "Dunes Forum" to harass Riley.)

Another neighbor is Salzman's buddy, extremist, Paul Cienfuegos.

Why is Salzman suddenly so interested in all proposed development? It's not just that he likes to meddle in other people's business. It appears that he's an active force in Mark Lovelace's "Healthy Humboldt." You can expect activist tactics to be employed, viral email alerts, plaintive "My Word's" penned by people other than him, and Salzman's Orks armed with talking points attending community meetings and speaking against Riley. Riley's only real sin appears to be that he doesn't belong to the Club.

It tells you that these guys are not really in it for "green" reasons. It's about power and control and you can't appease these guys.

The Humboldt County Planning Commission will consider Riley's development at its regular meeting on Thursday, May 3.

Paul Cienfuegos wants you to "share YOUR concerns with the various public officials who will be involved in this decision.
* Michael Wheeler, Humboldt County Planner
* Bob Merrill, CA Coastal Commission
* CA Dept of Fish and Game
* Your local Board of Supes, especially John Woolley"

Will they take the time to check their sources?

Manila takes second look at Riley development, fluoride
Manila rejects wetland donation from developer

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Houston Chronicle - Loren Steffy's Blog

"Humboldt Watershed Council" is very busy lobbying against Hurwitz in every possible forum.

Even on Loren Steffy's Blog
(Photo: Houston Chronicle Reporter Loren Steffy)

January 24, 2007
Sound Off: Pacific Lumber's bankruptcy

If you've followed the Charles Hurwitz saga for a while, you probably know that Pacific Lumber was flirting with bankruptcy for several years. I discuss the bankruptcy in my column today.

One thing I didn't mention in the column, though, is the theory among environmental groups that Hurwitz has purposely kept Palco near bankruptcy.

He did this, the theory goes, because he was siphoning money out of the company. Now first of all, no executive purposely keeps a company near bankruptcy. That's especially true if you're wanting to siphon money out of a company, because when the company goes bankrupt the first thing the creditors will do is look at where the money went.

The environmental groups, though, can't be bothered with such business basics. Here's another one they frequently flub: they want to stop logging on private land, yet they are unwilling to pay to preserve the trees.

If these guys cared so much about nature, why don't they simply buy up the bonds of Palco's Scotia Pacific division? That's the unit that owns the timber land. Then, they could control the trees. They could refuse to sell the trees to Palco or any other lumber company. They could retire the debt and set up a preserve. They could, in other words, put their money where their mouths are.

Why don't they?

He invites readers: Please discuss.

Asked why he doesn't rake Hurwitz over the coals, (Steffy is a reporter for the Houston Chronicle) Steffy responds:

"Actually, I've taken quite a bit of time to study this issue. I've read several books on the Timber Wars, I've reviewed thousands of pages of documents and interviewed quite a few people on both sides of the issue. I have written thousands of words on the topic. It's a remarkable story, but one that's steeped in myth. To portray the "old" Palco as an idyllic, paternalistic company, for example, ignores the changes that were happening before Hurwitz came on the scene. (Tax benefits for selective cut, for example, had been eliminated. Palco was going to have to start clear-cutting to remain competitive.) To imply that Hurwitz's timber harvest rates have remained double or triple those of the old Palco is inaccurate. To say that he destroyed the pension is wrong. Palco still has a defined benefit pension plan, something few companies in America still offer. But none of this matters because the rhetoric has been driving the debate for more than a decade. Hurwitz's biggest mistake was not recognizing the cost of alienating the environmentalists, and for that, he has paid dearly. They will not rest until he is gone. The irony is that their protests and legal challenges have kept him from selling.

Posted by: Loren at January 25, 2007 08:11 AM"

Another excerpt: (from Josh Reiss)
This is in response to the several postings from the Humboldt Watershed Council. In the interest of full disclosure I served as the spokesperson of Maxxam from 1999-2002. I have not worked for the corporation in any capacity since 2004.

Anyone who ever worked at worked at Maxxam in any capacity knows that the bankruptcy of ScoPac was a painful and sad decision, not taken lightly. Nor was it ever a part of a plan as the Council and others have recklessly suggested over the last week and in the post above. Indeed, one need only look at the 10Qs over the past several years at the $ that has moved downstream (no pun intended) to make bond payments as proof that bankruptcy was never planned nor desired. Moreover, if it was planned or desired why on earth would a significant capital contribution be made for Project Scotia to revitalize and modernize the mill. It simply makes no sense to suggest that the intent was to bankrupt.

I have never met Mr. Lovelace (who I assumed posted the above note from the Council). In fairness to him I do believe that he really does care about the Humboldt Community. And I think he has toned down some of the Council's rhetoric and tactics from the past. (For instance,who can ever forget Bob Martel -- Mr. Lovelace's predecessor at the Council -- suing Maxxam in the FDIC case and losing more than 110K of his own money in the process because his suit was frivilous. Or Darryl Cherney declaring on the radio in 2001 that he hoped PL would go bankrupt.)However, I also cannot help but note the irony of several groups such as the Humboldt Watershed Council and others over the last week declaring that they intend to press for the HCP to stay in place. These are the same individuals and groups that did not like the HCP to begin with. Remember the placards HCP=Huge Corporate Profits. Showing up at community meeting to reckle and give a tough time to PALCO scientists who were dedicated 100% to watershed management based on science. Perhaps now these groups can finally acknowledge what PALCO declared accurately for years -- that the HCP was the most environmenatlly senstitive HCP plan ever. Unfortunately no one ever gave the plan a chance to work because the goal of the headwaters movement was never fully met -- acquisition of 200K acres without having to pay a dime for it. That the HCP failed is a true tragedy right up there with the bankruptcy; perhaps ever sadder.

Posted by: Josh Reiss at January 28, 2007 08:26 PM

"O.C.: Sorry if I overlooked a respone to your earlier question. The short answer is that companies filing for bankruptcy have a lot of latitude in choosing a venue. Basically anything that can be considered an operation of the company allows it to file in that jurisdiction. That's the reason that Enron could file in Manhattan, for example. It's also the reason many companies file in Delware -- simply because they're incorporated there. Debtor companies do this all the time, looking for a venue they believe will be more favorable to them.

Posted by: Loren at February 11, 2007 02:17 PM

This week's Cases to Watch

TS - Contested interview halts molest prelim
ER - Toomey hearing interrupted
"Jacob Charles Toomey, 28, was arrested earlier this month and has been charged with a count of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 and two counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child 14 or 15 with the suspect being more than 10 years older." ER At issue, "an April 11 recorded interview of Toomey by Humboldt County Sheriff’s Detective Rich Schlesiger... (Humboldt County Chief Conflict Counsel Glenn) Brown, asked for the continuance because, Brown told Humboldt County Superior Judge W. Bruce Watson, he needed time to research a “messiah issue” — “that once a person has been appointed counsel, police may not interview” the defendant without his/her counsel present.

ER - Judge grants third continuance for felony assault case
Charged with "four felonies — false imprisonment/person used as a shield; false imprisonment; threatening crime with intent to terrorize; and assault with a deadly weapon or great bodily injury force with a kitchen knife — and the misdemeanor of resisting arrest or obstructing a public officer." Mark Christopher McClung, apparently considering whether to take an "unspecified plea offer or opt instead for a preliminary hearing... the first continuance was requested so that McClung’s Arcata-based attorney Russ Clanton could go over the offer further with his client." ER

Earlier information: Judge continues McClung hearing

...McClung could get up to two strikes if convicted, past reports indicate, making any future felony a third strike...

McClung is currently on a probation hold from a case that stems from a January 2003 case, in which he pleaded guilty to possessing chemicals to manufacture methamphetamine, as well as to a firearm enhancement.

With the probation penalty and fresh charges combined, McClung faces a maximum prison term of 17 years and eight months, past reports indicate...

“...We have begun a real thorough investigation and it’s put us in a position that we’ve been able to have some discussions with the District Attorney’s Office in regard to reaching an agreement in how we should proceed in this case,” (Russ) Clanton said. “There are many issues in regard to the factual aspects of this case..."

What will the deal be?

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Board commends Victim Witness Office

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors Tuesday commended the District Attorney Victim Witness Office for 25 years of service in the community.

Victim Witness assists victims of crimes in coping with trauma, accompanying them to court and connecting victims with community resources.

Victim Witness sees about 1,000 victims and family members per year.

Twenty-year volunteer Audrey Pacheco was awarded with a surprise when the board adopted an additional resolution commending her for her years of service in the community.

“It’s been 20 wonderful years, very much rewarding,” she said.

full story - Board commends Victim Witness Office
Well deserved praise for some amazing people and a great program.

And luckily, though he should have been there, District Attorney Paul Gallegos was nowhere to be seen.


Wednesday, April 25, 2007

A finding of Factual Innocence

"... Humboldt County Superior Court Judge John T. Feeney found good cause Tuesday — “due to the facts of the case” — to grant a motion that finds (Carol Ann) Yunque “factually innocent” of the charges she was acquitted of following a jury trial in January.

In addition, Feeney found good cause for the “sealing and ultimate destruction of the records in (the) Yunque case.”...:
Yunque trial records to be 'destroyed'

It is a rare thing for a prosecutor to say that a defendant is INNOCENT of all charges, as Roy Cooper did in the Duke Lacrosse case. But those cases were stopped before they went to trial

It is also a rare thing for a motion for FACTUAL INNOCENCE to be applied for and even more rare than that for it to be granted after a full trial.

But that is what just happened in the Yunque case.

This can only happen if the judge finds that there was NO EVIDENCE worthy of going to trial. According to one of my anons "This means there was no factual basis to have charged her to begin with and not that there was not enough evidence to get the conviction."

It means the District Attorney's Office abused it's prosecutorial discretion and brought a case to trial that never should have been pursued.

Since it also means, apparently, that Yunque can sue, we'll have to put this one on the list of cases to watch. After the fact.

Question is, though - who will be sued, and does Paul Gallegos have absolute immunity?

(Thanks for the heads up, anon 2:17)
Addtl info:
Cal Pen Code § 851.8

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Open thread on Cotchett's PL filing

I'm paraphrasing, but back when Tim Stoen stood before the Board of Supervisors asking to bring Cotchett's law firm in to do the PL suit, he said this was a slam dunk case - that all he needed was 4 pieces of paper and two expert witnesses and this case would be over in two days...

Typical Stoen histrionics.

"...Gallegos' complaint, Cotchett said, is legally sound... "This is an extremely well-written complaint," Cotchett said. "The district attorney (and his staff) did a full and complete investigation
before they filed..."

Oh really?

Much has been revealed since that first day about how the PL suit came about, with Ken Miller in Stoen's office helping draft the suit, and of course it was laughed out of court. Didn't even pass demurrer, didn't even go to trial.

There were big numbers being thrown around back then - "... In the lawsuit, Gallegos is asking PL pay damages of up to $2,500 per tree for every one cut as a result of its alleged deception surrounding the Headwaters deal. The district attorney's office has estimated the company cut 30,000 trees it shouldn't have been allowed to cut, which appears to mean the damages the district attorney is seeking are in the neighborhood of $75 million. Of that, the Bay area firm would want more than $10 million plus expenses...."

But, somehow, I don't think this is about money, and I don't think we know all there is to know about who is behind this effort. There is a big story here waiting to be told.

There are questions that have to be answered. How did Cotchett come to be involved in the first place? How did Stoen get brought in? Was John Burton involved? How about Pete McCloskey? What are his links to Burton? How did Ken Miller pull this off?

And why is Cotchett "jonesing" after this suit to this day? Is it the money?

I'm starting to wonder if Cotchett is all that smart. His statement that Miller's suit was well-drafted is ludicrous.

And if some of the points which have been brought up in the discussion on the Humboldt Herald are true, he has really screwed up this time.

That being that the Statute of Limitations has long since expired since the "whistleblowers" objections were discovered while the Headwaters deal was being finalized, if I read it correctly.

My opinion has been and remains that Hurwitz ought to sue Ken Miller and his dedicated cronies (including Fenton Communications and Michael Shellenberger) for their decade long effort to destroy Pacific Lumber Company, to use the power of government offices to steal his land, for their ongoing and vicious defamation of him and his company. It would be a groundbreaking thing. The activists and their power are a new and untested thing, and the use of the internet to spread the defamation is a new thing.

Consider this an open thread on the latest Cotchett/Palco filing.

And would the person who posted that information at Heraldo, please email me with information. I see you have also drawn the connection between Burton and this whole sorry mess. Help us understand this process.

Sidenote: Cotchett also gave Gallegos' campaign three grand, if I remember correctly. It's high time I posted those 460s.

More on heraldo - besides the rhetoric, check the comments, though he seems to be deleting them as fast as they come in.

Monday, April 23, 2007

And Walin makes five... w/update

Walin filing latest in recent rash of gag order requests

A motion for the protective order request, filed by the Humboldt County Public Defender’s Office, will be heard before Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Christopher Wilson on Monday.

If the request for the protective order — also known as a gag order — is granted, it will prevent trial attorneys, court officials and other trial participants from talking to media about the case.

On Friday, Walin’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender Jennifer D. Dixon, declined to comment on why the gag order request was filed....

Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Arnie Klein said a judge found sufficient evidence — following an April 3 preliminary hearing — to hold Walin to answer to all charges listed on the complaint against him: felon in possession of a firearm, a sawed-off shotgun; felon in possession of ammunition; possession of a sawed-off shotgun; assault with a firearm; felon in possession of a short-barreled shotgun; and grand theft auto, with a special allegation that Walin allegedly did so with a sawed-off shotgun and another special allegation that Walin has a prior felony vehicle theft conviction.

Mr. Schwartz called us
"Gag" Orders
California Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct
California Bar Association Rule 5-120. Trial Publicity
American Bar Association Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor

Judge denies protective order request in Michael Walin case "without prejudice."

Saturday, April 21, 2007

In case you missed it...

This letter to the editor is worth repeating, and needs to be part of the permanent record:

Humboldt Baykeeper seems to have lost its way as a positive force
by Ron Fritzsche, 2/10/2006

Dear Editor,
As a marine biologist and member of Humboldt Baykeeper, I continue to be disappointed in the actions of Humboldt Baykeeper as reported in the local media.

I was duped into thinking that it was an organization that would be a positive force for Humboldt Bay. I soon found out that Humboldt Baykeeper is willing to collect money but does not involve the “members” in any way. The director does have a self-appointed advisory board that is “available for us to consult with from time to time,” according to the Humboldt Baykeeper.

Interestingly, there isn’t a single Humboldt State University faculty member on the board. One would think that faculty from disciplines such as chemistry, oceanography, and environmental resources engineering would be important to an organization concerned about water quality and contamination issues. Scientific input and peer review is the key to providing validity and credibility to statements and positions taken by the organization.

Additionally, Humboldt Baykeeper has acted in a manner opposite to what was indicated would be the case. Rather than being an organization that would help facilitate the identification, cleanup, and remediation of possible contamination, Humboldt Baykeeper seems intent on hindering the process by threatening lawsuits or making grandstand statements that appear to serve a need to gain publicity. The Humboldt Baykeeper had stated publicly that litigation would be the last resort after all attempts to work with the landowner to resolve identified problems had failed.

I have decided not to renew my membership in Humboldt Baykeeper. I recommend that others consider doing the same.

Ron Fritzsche

Friday, April 20, 2007

Here we go again w/update

Suit against PALCO alleges fraud
'Whistleblower' suit against Palco moves ahead
Akron Beacon Journal

The never-ending story.

I'm sure Ken Miller is "stunned."

Is "whistleblower" just a buzzword? Another carefully constructed linguistic device concocted by a PR firm? More of that easy rhetoric that sells your story in under 3 seconds?

UPDATE on the Palco bankruptcy proceedings
Texas judge keeps bankruptcy case in Texas
Maybe this case was written by Ken Miller, too. Or maybe the Texas judge looked at the shenanigans here and decided not to trust anyone in California.

And, from ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ "...forests in the northern hemisphere are contributing significantly to the global warming "emergency".... according to Researchers from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

"Mr. Schwartz called us" w/update

Apparently, Jeff "" Schwartz isn't happy with all the requests for gag orders that have occurred lately. If the quote below is accurate, he called the Times Standard to alert them to his concerns.

Perhaps he doesn't realize it is the DA's job to talk to the media, not his. Or perhaps he realizes Gallegos isn't up to the job. Perhaps he can't break his 'defense attorney' habits.

I have mixed feelings because I certainly appreciate the more-informative coverage of late. It seems Schwartz, Dollison and Klein all enjoy talking to reporter Kara Machado, filling her in on all the details, and more power to her. She's been doing a great job.

But, though none of these men are trained prosecutors, they should know that talking about their cases potentially prejudices the public, and the jury pool, they should know that doing so may irreparably damage a (possibly) innocent man's reputation, and they should be aware that excessive publicity, particularly in a child abuse case, may make it more difficult for the victim, and the victim's family, may prevent other witnesses from coming forward for fear of being dragged thorugh the mud.

It's going to be tough enough on the victims and their families, made even tougher by the virtual loss of the Victim/Witness program advocates, and the virtual dismantling of the Child Abuse Services Team, and the loss of an experienced child interview specialist.

Given Gallegos' deteriorated relationship with the media follwing his plagiarism debacle and other slips, you can see why he doesn't want to talk to the press. But he needs to do his job. He was quick to say what a DA should do, crowed about his prowess, bragged about doing both the DA's job AND trying cases himself. He was the one issuing "gag orders" when he took office, but his reasons for not wanting his attorneys to talk to the press had more to do with protecting himself and his handlers than anything else. It seem he doesn't care when it is only affecting defendants, and victims.

At this rate, look for him to try hiring a "public relations" person for the office, so he can further abdicate his responsibilty.

"...Schwartz said he is disappointed that gag order requests have been routine lately on the part of the Public Defender’s Office.

“I think the Public Defender’s Office is filing gag order requests without a basis and as a matter of routine, which is offensive to the freedom of speech clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution,” Schwartz said. “Other (potential) lawyers (in the Davis case) may be more respectful of it and may decide not to request a gag order.

“I’m disappointed in the media for not taking an aggressive stance on the issue.”

When asked if the The Eureka Reporter is going to address the recent multiple gag orders on various cases, Managing Editor Glenn Franco Simmons said, “We are looking into the matter.”

“I agree with Mr. Schwartz’s criticism regarding the Public Defender’s Office’s requests for gag orders; I also have grave concerns about those orders’ effects on our First Amendment right,” Franco Simmons said. “As for his criticism of local media, I can’t speak for other media, but we are attempting to determine our options at this point and we will know more soon.”

Rich Somerville, managing editor for The Times-Standard, said the issue of gag orders can be serious; if the requests are becoming routine, they can be dangerous; and that The Times-Standard is “not afraid to challenge First Amendment issues in court.”

“Gag orders should only be used in the most extreme circumstances and when they get to be routine, it’s encroaching upon a serious threat to the First Amendment right, which is the public’s right to know the functioning of its government,” Somerville said. “Indeed, it’s true that Mr. Schwartz called us and alerted us to his concerns, but, really it’s only been a relative few days ago, and we’re in the process of seeing how serious this is and pursuing it either as a story or perhaps also sitting down and talking with the judges about this issue.”

Oh, this could get really interesting.


California Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct

Rule 5-120. Trial Publicity

(A) A member who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the member knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.

(B) Notwithstanding paragraph (A), a member may state:
(1) the claim, offense or defense involved and, except when prohibited by law, the identity of the persons involved;
(2) the information contained in a public record;
(3) that an investigation of the matter is in progress;
(4) the scheduling or result of any step in litigation;
(5) a request for assistance in obtaining evidence and information necessary thereto;
(6) a warning of danger concerning the behavior of a person involved, when there is reason to believe that there exists the likelihood of substantial harm to an individual or the public interest; and
(7) in a criminal case, in addition to subparagraphs (1) through (6):
(a) the identity, residence, occupation, and family status of the accused;
(b) if the accused has not been apprehended, the information necessary to aid in apprehension of that person;
(c) the fact, time, and place of arrest; and
(d) the identity of investigating and arresting officers or agencies and the length of the investigation.
(C) Notwithstanding paragraph (A), a member may make a statement that a reasonable member would believe is required to protect a client from the substantial undue prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the member or the member's client. A statement made pursuant to this paragraph shall be limited to such information as is necessary to mitigate the recent adverse publicity.
The American Bar Association Rule 3.6 reads the same.

Then there's the American Bar Association - Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor

The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:
(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;
(b) make reasonable efforts to assure that the accused has been advised of the right to, and the procedure for obtaining, counsel and has been given reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel;
(c) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important pretrial rights, such as the right to a preliminary hearing;
(d) make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense, and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal;
(e) not subpoena a lawyer in a grand jury or other criminal proceeding to present evidence about a past or present client unless the prosecutor reasonably believes:
(i) the information sought is not protected from disclosure by any applicable privilege;
(ii) the evidence sought is essential to the successful completion of an ongoing investigation or prosecution; and
(iii) there is no other feasible alternative to obtain the information;
(f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.
Thanks for the tip, Anon 8:AM

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Doomsday Called Off

The Great Global Warming Swindle is not as slick as Al Gore's propaganda, and the video segments below are even less so. But when Al Gore said ALL of the world's scientists agree with him, that was not the truth...check out what these scientists have to say. These really should be running on the Public Access Channel and on HBO, if only for balance.
Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (1/5)

Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (2/5)
Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (3/5)
Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (4/5)
Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off (5/5)
and these:
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled (1/5)
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled (2/5)
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled (3/5)
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled (4/5)
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled (5/5)

Check out The Reference Frame, a blog

Blogger has a new feature that allows posting YouTube videos in the sidebar, so these are also posted there as a test. It looks like Blogger selects 4 of the videos, so it may not work, but we'll see. Share these with friends. The links for all 10 are included above.

Amen, Bear.

Baykeepers should guard bay against folks who don't have money
Dear Editor,

I know that these folks, the Baykeepers, will be on my butt for saying this, but it makes no difference in reality: They need to get a grip on stuff that matters and quit hassling Security National about a road and potholes.

SN has done its job in checking with folks about doing what is right about roads, potholes and cleaning up the area to help all and better things.

Now the Baykeepers want to take SN to court over lame stuff. If they want to do some good in reality, watch over the bay and go after folks who are messing up the bay who don’t have money. Yep, folks who trash the rocks, beaches and life in and around the bay.

Go after folks who dump crap in and around the bay, not folks who are trying to help make things better.

No, I do not work for, get paid by, nor know anyone from SN that I am aware of or even The Eureka Reporter. Oops, my mistake; I have met some of the reporters when being in court to make sure abused children are protected and with clients. Get a good grip, Baykeepers!

J. Bear Marler
Rio Dell

(Security National owns The Eureka Reporter.)
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.


The trouble is, Bear, for these new age con men, it is all about money and deep pockets. And Rob Arkley/Security National and Red Emmerson/Sierra Pacific look like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow to them. No need to get a real job, just get some local kayakers to go out and take some samples for you, put up signs along the estuary asking people to call in complaints, and you are armed, pay for a couple of lab tests and threaten a lawsuit, then walk away with millions in go-away money.

That's not to say that there aren't problems. There are. And good people have, for many many years set about solving the problem. The trouble is, the well-meaning laws and regulations that were put in place set the stage for these predatory litigious groups to adopt the grass-roots citizen mantle and operate with impunity.

Think I am overstating the case? Check out Richard Salzman's latest listserve email... It isn't about Palco/Maxxam and Hurwitz, it is about money, and with Palco on its knees, it is very clear who the next targets are. You're already seeing the NEC sounding the drumroll against Simpson/Green Diamond. But that's not where the real money is - and this message says it very clearly:

"Quick, name the largest private landowner in California.

Need some clues? The company owns more than 1.5million acres, mainly in the Sierra Nevada. Each year it clear-cuts thousands of acres of forest. Its logging techniques damage watersheds throughout the Sierra. And most Californians have never heard of it.

Meet Sierra Pacific Industries, a privately owned company led by billionaire timber baron Red Emmerson..."

Notice the author lays the groundwork for demonizing Emmerson with the buzzwords "billionaire timber baron." Class warfare is a big card in the activist deck, makes it easy to upset well intentioned people.

Then they bring up the spectre of political donations to people they do not approve of and end with the ominous statement "SPI's vision is a checkerboard of moonscapes and plantations. Its corporate values are destroying Sierra forests. What are your values?

Well? It's a good question. But the answer may not be what they intended.

Saturday, April 14, 2007

He can't

His handlers, especially Ken Miller, howl for him to press charges against the officers involved in the Cheri Moore shooting.

With all of the evidence in, Gallegos knows that the right thing to do goes against their wishes. So he is paralyzed, and has been for a year now.

There is no magic rabbit to be pulled out of the hat by Salzman and the high-priced PR firm that has given him his talking points through recent elections. No one to construct the "right to lie" rhetoric.

Regardless - he has an easy out. This case cannot be handled by Paul Gallegos. He has to send this one up to the AG because with his demonstrated antipathy towards the law enforcement community and their vote of no confidence in him, any charges he files will be highly suspect.

He has a chance to do the right thing. Let's see if he can do it.

ER - A grim anniversary passes without resolution
ER Editorial - Closure necessary in Cheri Moore shooting
TS - Questions lingering in Moore case
TS Editorial - Silence deafening as shooting anniversary nears

Friday, April 13, 2007

"GAG" Orders w/update(s) (NOTATION ADDED)

Bowie, Canfield, Dinsmore and now Davis...

It is the D.A.'s job to talk to the press. He is supposed to shield his prosecutors from having to talk to the media in order to avoid exactly what is happening here. Apparently Paul Gallegos has abdicated this responsibility resulting in at least three Protective Orders (Gag Orders) being issued on three different cases recently.

Judge considering gag order

Humboldt County Deputy Public Defender Blair Angus argued for a protective order Thursday with regard to any information regarding her client, Duane Bowie Jr.

Following the arguments of Angus and Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Allan Dollison, who is prosecuting Bowie’s case, Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Dale A. Reinholtsen said he would take the order under consideration.

When a judge approves a protective order — commonly referred to as a gag order — court officials, including attorneys, are prohibited from talking about the case to media.

The arguments Angus gave in court Thursday for the protective order are based upon recent Eureka Reporter articles written about Bowie’s case and statements made by Dollison to The Eureka Reporter.

“Such detailed” accounts in the articles — such as information from a police report — creates problems for Angus, she argued. She said the pre-trial publicity could prejudice a potential jury, thereby making it “increasingly difficult” for her to pick from a jury pool someone who has not read the articles.

Also, Angus argued, “frank discussions” about plea negotiations “suggest to people in the community” that Bowie, 33, of Cutten, could possibly be considering pleading guilty.

Angus added that details of the plea offer — which were not specified in past articles — were read by Bowie prior to her being able to discuss them with him.

More: Bowie preliminary hearing continued

Judge places protective order on Canfield case

A protective order has been placed on the Robert Charles Canfield case after a Eureka Reporter article detailed the incident in which Canfield has been charged.

The protective order — commonly referred to as a gag order — prevents court officials and attorneys from speaking about the case.

Canfield, 40 — whose last known address was in Manila — has been charged with first-degree robbery; residential burglary, habitant present; and two special allegations, which concern a strike and four prior prison terms, Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Allan Dollison said prior to the protective order.

Canfield’s attorney, Humboldt County Public Defender Kevin Robinson, has previously said Canfield has pleaded not guilty and is “going to put on a vigorous defense.”

During open court Tuesday, Robinson said it was he who requested the protective order.

Judge in Dinsmore case issues 'protective order'

Humboldt County Superior Court Judge John T. Feeney granted a “protective order” Thursday that prohibits officials from making comments to media about the Steve Gary Dinsmore case.

“Court personnel, counsel, (counsels’) offices, witnesses, investigators ..., be admonished to not discuss this case with (the) media or make any public (comments) regarding this matter (until the case is concluded),” Feeney said. Dinsmore, 32, of Eureka, is accused of a slew of felony charges including the November 2005 attempted murder of a Humboldt County Sheriff’s deputy.

Dinsmore’s attorney, Marek I. Reavis, an attorney with the County of Humboldt Conflict Counsel, said his client has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Reavis requested the protective order Thursday. Included in his request paperwork was a copy of a Eureka Reporter article, published Wednesday, about the Dinsmore case.

The article contained a comment by Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Arnie Klein, who is prosecuting the case.

In court, Reavis requested the protective order to prevent future comments from potentially biasing the jury.

Before Feeney had made a decision on Reavis’ request, Klein voiced his objection in open court.

“I would like to talk to the press (at any) time I choose,” Klein said, “this being (the United States of) America.”

Klein added that he would limit his comments just to matters concerning evidence brought up in open court and not talks or communications made outside the presence of the jury.

Shades of Nifong

Of course Gallegos has been a little too talkative himself when it comes to his pet lawsuit:

Interviewed not long after hearing of the bankruptcy, District Attorney Paul Gallegos said he isn't surprised. "That's what we're saying in our lawsuit - their whole plan is to carry out an unsustainable harvest rate to fund that debt," he continued.

The lawsuit was dismissed due to legal conditions unrelated to the D.A.'s allegation that Palco knowingly submitted false information during the 1998 Headwaters Deal process. Gallegos' appeal of the dismissal is being considered by the state's Supreme Court. He thinks the company's huge and lingering debt pressured it to push for higher cutting rates - and to commit fraud.

"There was one thing on their minds and that was having a set harvest rate - they were going to make sure they got it and that was the reason they submitted false information," said Gallegos....

...Mention of the company's litigation against the state has been included in Palco's recent financial filings to the Securities Exchange Commission. Gallegos thinks Palco's management needs to take responsibility for the economic shortfall. "They've blamed it on everyone except themselves from day one," he said.
Palco's bankruptcy ignites debate, speculation McKinleyville Press, January 2007

UPDATE: Yet another one:
Gag order requested in child molestation case
Humboldt County Deputy Public Defender Jonathan McCrone had represented (Matthew Christopher) Davis as of last Tuesday — and was the one to file the request for the protective order. But, on Friday, McCrone announced in court that his office has a conflict in representing Davis.

Humboldt County Superior Court Judge W. Bruce Watson further clarified to Davis in court Friday that “for some reasons, (McCrone’s) office has a conflict based on, I assume, a dual representation type of situation.”

Watson then relieved the Public Defender’s Office from representing Davis and Arcata-based attorney Russ Clanton announced that he has been requested to represent Davis.

Add this one to the list of cases to watch.

Potential Davis gag order
Third attorney opts not to defend Davis
Davis may be represented by Humboldt County Conflict Counsel's Office

Another Update:
Add another one to the list:
Walin filing latest in recent rash of gag order requests

ADDED: Allan Dollison served Humboldt County's DA's office for 6 years and 4 months. He details his record, and his reasons for leaving here - ◼ My record at the DA's Office - Allan Dollison/for the Times-Standard

NOTATION: 7/13/2013 - It's an interesting aspect of this blog that other people often get caught in the net, based on their entrance into the Gallegos saga. And so their names live online, to be unearthed whenever they apply for a job. Sometimes the searches that lead people here are for other reasons, but it usually has to do with a job search.

And, so it is that Allan Dollison appears here. His time with the DA's office has come and gone, he rose through Gallegos' ranks, and was slated, some said, to become Assistant DA. He was a loyal player, and, I believe, a true believer.

Through my work here, I am often kept informed about cases, how they're handled, how the various Deputy DA's do their job, interact with victims, and so forth.

And I feel it necessary to say this. I have come to the conclusion, that, for all his past mistake, Allan Dollison turned out to be one of the best and most honest of the bunch, far surpassing his boss, Paul Gallegos.

He has since left the DA's office, and, as is often the case when people leave, I get the chance to talk to them. I have talked with Allan Dollison. And, to his credit, he never once asked me to remove any of this info, as damaging as it is to him. I respect that, and I think it's noteworthy.

If you're looking to hire him, it's worthy of consideration.

I'm not pulling anything down, as that would be a disservice to the facts as they have unfolded, but I am adding this, to mitigate that online-lives-forever reality.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

100% Committed

So said CANDIDATE Paul Gallegos..."“We are absolutely committed to the success of CAST and the discovery and prosecution of child abusers,” in May of 2006.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Warning: Objectionable content

What does it mean when you say that the Child Abuse Services Team (CAST) has been decimated? It means that the office is closed. It means when someone calls the office, they get a recording. It means Gallegos does not permit the office to be staffed.

When the CAST office is locked up tight, and people who call get an answering machine - when kids are being sent back into abusive homes because of a lack of will and ability to prosecute the abusers, this is what you are sending them back into:

(WARNING! The language and descriptions that follow are hard to take, and are offensive. This is text from an actual case prosecuted in Humboldt County. I thought about posting the entire file, but decided not to. I have also XXX'd any names. What's important is to remember that this is only one case. Child abuse prosecution has dropped precipitously in Humboldt County under Gallegos, but this kind of thing, and worse, goes on.)

The victim, Jane Doe, was born in XXX 1994, to defendant and X.X. At the time of trial Jane was nine years old. Jane testified that when she was younger she used the term "front butt" to refer to her vagina, "back butt" to refer to buttocks, and "pyramid" to refer to a penis. Jane shared a bed with her mother and her father, and Jane would sleep in the middle. Defendant would put his hands around her back, and his "pyramid" would touch her "front butt" or "back butt." When defendant touched her this way he was wearing underwear and Jane wore pajamas. The way her father touched her felt good but her "stomach said it wasn't okay. I had some stomach burns."

Her mother was not always in bed with them. Once when her mother went to San Francisco, Jane "got a stomach burn because my body knew . . . that I was not protected from my dad." This kind of touching and stomach burn happened "more than one night."

Her father was arrested approximately a year and a half before trial, when she was in second grade. When asked whether she remembered whether her dad touched her in a way that made her stomach burn when she was in second grade, she responded: "He did it ever since I was born [*3] until he went to jail."

She demonstrated with stuffed animals how the touching occurred. Following the demonstration, Jane responded affirmatively when the district attorney asked her, "[W]hen your dad was doing this your stomach would burn?"

Jane tried to tell her mother, by saying, "I love you more than Dad," but her mother would not listen.

Jane testified she could tell that when her father put his body in position to touch her "front butt" or "back butt," he did it on purpose, not by accident.

Jane also testified that her dad touched her this way so often that she had developed a habit of masturbating, which she described as touching her own "front butt" in a way that "other people don't want to see." No one else ever touched her the way her father did, and no one else taught her to touch herself in that way.

Jane knew the difference between the way her father touched her and the way, for example, the doctors and nurses touched her. The doctors and nurses had "safe hands." She did not feel the same safety when she was in bed when her father was touching her.

On cross-examination, Jane stated that her father gave her "bad touches" every night when she was with him, "except for [*4] after he went to jail." She could not specifically remember when she did not sleep with him except on trips.

Her father sometimes gave her good touches like shaking hands, hugging, and kissing.

Besides her stomach hurting, "her heart too started to break" when she found out that he had been doing something wrong. She has since learned that her father also touched other children in bad ways. She testified that she was mad at her father about what he did, but she still loved him.

Jane's mother, X.X., testified that she married defendant three years after Jane was born. They moved from Oregon when Jane was a year and a half old. For a few years, starting when Jane was approximately two, X.X. and defendant had maintained separate residences, but defendant still stayed with them much of the time. When Jane was an infant defendant insisted, over X.X.'s objection, that Jane sleep in their bed. This practice continued until defendant was arrested. X.X. suffered from a progressive disease that caused her a lot of pain and she often got up in the night to sleep in a recliner. She also left approximately twice a month for overnight stays in San Francisco for medical treatment. Her condition [*5] made intercourse painful, and by 1999 she stopped having sexual relations with defendant.

X.X. noticed, starting at age four, that Jane had a habit of touching her vaginal area to sexually stimulate herself. After defendant's arrest, this habit increased to the point that she did it "almost everywhere" and did not seem to be aware she was doing it. Jane's counselor at the child abuse center was helping her with this problem, and she was doing it much less.

Before defendant's arrest, Jane would sometimes tell her mother that she loved her more than her father. When X.X. would dismiss this by saying, "[Y]ou just love me different," Jane would respond, " 'No, Mom, it's not scary with you,' " but she would not say what was scary.

This child was interviewed by the Child Abuse Services Team (CAST). Jane told the CAST interviewer that defendant had "touched her when she was in her pajamas or half naked when they were snuggling at night." She demonstrated by rubbing her hand across her chest. She also said defendant's "butt tube" touched her "front butt" and "back butt" more than once when they were both naked.

The defendant told the Detective "that Jane had "come on" to him on one or two occasions.

Defendant stated that Jane had tried to put his hand between her legs, but defendant pulled away, and she had briefly touched his penis.

In response to more pointed questions, defendant ended the interview, stating he was not going to admit to molesting his daughter. Thereafter, Defendant tried to interrupt (the Detective's) interview with X.X. and was arrested.

The child was treated for "posttraumatic stress disorder and depression sometime after defendant's arrest. Jane suffered, among other things, from insomnia and nightmares, and sexualized acting out behavior.

In therapy Jane told XXXXXXXX that since before [*7] she went to nursery school defendant would rub up against her when they were in bed. Jane said: "He touched me in places he shouldn't have because he is my daddy. He kept touching my vagina and my front butt and my back butt whenever I went to bed. He made me feel bad."

She told XXXXXXXX that defendant touched her "private parts, her breasts, her vagina and her butt." He touched her with his penis and genital area. Jane told XXXXXXXX that, as a result of defendant touching her, she would get stomachaches before defendant came to bed.

When her mother went for medical treatment, and Jane was alone with defendant, the stomachaches were much worse. Defendant also convinced Jane that her mother was "so fragile that she couldn't handle anything negative." His behavior gave Jane "sexual feelings" and resulted in her masturbation. In one therapy session Jane picked up a doll and said: "She is lucky. She never has to have sex."

That's what you are sending her back to - and worse.

Last May the Eureka Reporter ran a series of articles on an alarming drop in child abuse prosecutions under Gallegos. None of the other papers looked into it.

Last September, Gallegos pulled veteran prosecutor Maggie Fleming off her duties as child abuse prosecutor and put Jeffrey "" Schwartz in charge, claiming it is his practice to "cross-train" his felony attorneys. He recently gave Schwartz a raise, based in part on the fact that he "now is assigned to the Child Abuse Services Team. This entails working with high intensity cases, participating in child abuse interviews and contributing as a member of the Child Abuse Services Team."

"When asked about declining prosecution rates... (5/12/2006), Gallegos said, “As for a decline in prosecutions, if there are declining prosecutions, that’s because there are declining cases. If there are declining cases, we have certainly looked into that."

“... We broke it down and looked at the numbers and saw that where the decrease has been is in the stranger offenders,” he said. “So the next question is why, and we don’t have a good answer for that yet..."

ER - Former deputy DA speaks out
ER - Candidates spar over child abuse team
ER - DA's Office yet to respond to request for child abuse records
ER - CAST established with child victims in mind
ER - CAST needs support Gallegos is not providing
A matter of priorities

Real Justice.

Text of North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper's speech: N.C. attorney general: Duke players 'innocent'
POSTED: 0030 GMT (0830 HKT), April 11, 2007

All sexual assault, kidnapping and other charges have been dropped against the three Duke University lacrosse players indicted for raping an exotic dancer, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced Wednesday.

"The result of our review and investigation shows clearly that there is insufficient evidence to proceed on any of the charges," Cooper said. "Today we are filing notices of dismissal for all charges."
He added: "We believe these cases were a result of a tragic rush to accuse and failure to verify serious allegations. Based on these significant inconsistencies of evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges."

...The players and Cooper blasted District Attorney Mike Nifong — who originally indicted the players for rape — for overreaching his power as a district attorney, saying the "rogue" prosecutor "pushed ahead unchecked" in this case.

"There were many points in this case where caution would have served justice better than bravado," Cooper said. "This case shows the enormous consequences of overreaching by a prosecutor. What has been learned here is the internal checks on a criminal charge — sworn statements, criminal grounds, proper suspect photo lineups, accurate discovery — all are critically important."

...Cooper's office next week will release the results of its investigation. He also proposed a state law that would give the North Carolina Supreme Court the power to remove a prosecutor from a case in limited circumstances.

Let's not limit it to North Carolina.

ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ - Lynch mobs - one win one loss

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

So much for hopes

for a kinder, gentler NEC...

Former Earth First Activist, Greg King, the new head of the 'North Coast Environmental Center' has apparently decided that going on the attack is the best way to bring in money. So much for the NEC being a big tent - it is just another partisan, extreme fringe activist attack group...

In his opening salvo he attacks Rob Arkley, then turns his sights on Simpson/Green Diamond.

It's obvious that now, with Palco on its knees, Simpson/Green Diamond is the next big target. This is something they should have known was coming. King claims that they are seeking an amendment to their 1992 Habitat Conservation Plan that would allow the company to kill eight pairs of spotted owls, and that they have "destroyed" 45 pairs of spotted owls. He delivers his threat "...Though litigation is always a last-resort measure, we will not hesitate to stand in the way of a plan that threatens to kill the last owls and salmon."

And, like Salzman, he asks for money after bringing up the Klamath Dam removal... It's almost as if he, Salzman and Nichols were acting in concert...

How much do they want?

The predatory litigious "Baykeeper" is threatening another lawsuit. That means they want "go-away" money. How many millions do they want? How many "environmental" ambulance chasers do they have working on this?

Where does "Baykeeper's" money come from? Go-away money from another predatory lawsuit filed by the predatory parent, the "Ecological Rights Foundation." How much of the money they extorted is actually going back into cleaning up the Bay? Oh, they bought Pete Nichols a new boat so that he could patrol the Bay looking out for "v-i-o-l-a-t-i-o-n-s." And take possible donors out on Bay "tours." Nice. Got a nice phonebooth office in Old Town, too. Must be time for a new cash infusion.

Baykeeper to sue over SN project
Baykeeper threatens suit over Balloon Tract road work

The agenda - Richard's List

Monday, April 09, 2007

Saturday, April 07, 2007

February 2004

In a 2/23/04 Letter to the Editor, Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee (HCDCC) Chairman Patrick Riggs said: "As a second-grade teacher, I am deeply concerned with children's safety in our community. My children and yours are better protected now, with Paul Gallegos as district attorney, than they have ever been before."

Ya think?

Who is safer right now, Patrick? The children? Or the child molesters?

Last April...

Last April the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee Member Greg Conners argued in favor of endorsing Paul Gallegos for District Attorney, portraying "the D.A. as an anti-corruption crusader who deserves another term.

A former Eureka city planning commissioner, Conners said he's "seen corruption at the local level as if it were a sewer I was walking through up to my waist" and "you couldn't get the local district attorney to touch those issues with a ten-foot pole."

But it's different now, Conners continued. "Paul Gallegos is the first district attorney that I know of, in my lifetime - and this a courthouse brat who's been involved in local politics talking - who's had the balls to go after corporate corruption and political corruption," he said.

Think about that.

Tuesday, September 19, 1972


The third exposé by Les Kinsolving - originally published in the San Francisco Examiner in 1972 - Tim Stoen, front and center - an illegal Temple marriage, welfare fraud, and phony faith healing... you begin to see Stoen's duplicity.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Return of Garza & ANOTHER plea deal

Garza jailed on sex charges
Almost one year after being arrested in the March 2006 Whitethorn kidnapping/rape case, one of the defendants was arrested on numerous felony charges involving his alleged sexual relations with a 16-year-old girl....

...As of Wednesday, court documents indicate that Garza is currently charged with — and has pleaded not guilty to — nine counts of felony sodomy with a person under 18; eight counts of felony unlawful sexual intercourse; and two counts of oral copulation with a person under 18....

...On Wednesday, Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Jeffrey Schwartz, who is prosecuting the case, said, “Basically, the charges (against Garza) are based on statutory rape” and that Garza and the alleged victim “were kind of going out.”...

...“The classic term (for having sex with a minor) has been jail bait and if you’re having sex with a minor, you go to jail.”...

But not if you tie her to a tree for three days, and rape her repeatedly. Then you get a "GET OUT OF JAIL FREE" card.

Which is what got us here in the first place...

Yeah, this is yet another one to watch. Along with the case in Fortuna.
Garza accepts plea agreement
On the day he was to confirm his trial date, Nate Robin Garza accepted a plea agreement.

Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney Jeffrey Schwartz said Garza, 22, pleaded guilty Monday to one count of unlawful sex with a minor — “which is commonly known as statutory rape” — one count of unlawful oral sex with a minor and also admitted to a probation violation.

Garza’s probation stems from a March 2006 Whitethorn kidnapping/rape case.

Schwartz said Monday’s agreement is “an open plea,” which means a judge will determine whether to sentence Garza to the maximum prison sentence of “four years, four months” or to the “minimum penalty of probation.”

Garza’s case stems from “consensual” sexual relations with a then-16-year-old girl between Dec. 20 and Jan. 5, Schwartz said.

Initially, Schwartz said, Garza was charged with — and pleaded not guilty to — nine counts of felony sodomy with a person under 18, eight counts of felony unlawful sexual intercourse and two counts of oral copulation with a person under 18.

Garza was arrested Feb. 19, almost one year after being arrested in connection with the Whitethorn kidnapping/rape case.

In September, Garza was sentenced to three years of formal, supervised probation for a plea agreement of false imprisonment he accepted with two other defendants with regard to the Whitethorn kidnapping/rape case.

Garza’s twin brother was sentenced to eight years in state prison for a plea agreement of false imprisonment, kidnapping and marijuana trafficking he accepted in connection to his involvement in the Whitethorn case.

The four men were initially accused of kidnapping and raping a woman in Whitethorn in March after a debt to Garza’s brother was not paid.

According to past testimony, the Whitethorn victim claimed she was kidnapped for two days and tied to a tree in Whitethorn for 24 hours.

Sentencing continued in statutory rape trial 5/21/2007

Another one to watch:

Man arrested in Texas on molest charges returned to Humboldt County
Chris Durant The Times-Standard
Article Launched: 04/05/2007 04:24:22 AM PDT

A 34-year-old Eureka man who authorities have been looking for in connection with a 2006 child molestation case was returned to Humboldt County Tuesday after being arrested in Texas.

Humboldt County Sheriff's Detective Ben Nord said Todd William Gonsalves was arrested about three weeks ago by U.S. Marshals in Texas.

Gonsalves was booked into the Humboldt County Jail Tuesday on warrants out connected to 2003 cases alleging making threats and interfering with a police officer, a 2005 case alleging illegal use of a credit card and a 2006 case alleging continuous sexual abuse of a child.

Nord said the sexual abuse allegedly occurred against a single female victim over the course of three years.

Taking bets. Whaddya say he's dismissed or plea bargained by his preliminary hearing?

For a little fun - Go to court every Monday for the master trial calendar call, which is now referred to by the defense bar as "the dismissal calendar"

Sunday, April 01, 2007

This may surprise you

Earth First! has a listserve, too, and Shunka Wakan sends out regular e-mails. They are very innocent compared to the virulent dedication of Salzman's AEB and its many aka's. There's an occasional plea for money for rent and stuff (Shunka sells Earth First! T-shirts on ebay, and doesn't like 'tabling' in the cold rainy winter weather), some of the others post their poetry. There's the occasional call for warm bodies at one protest or another. I've come to kinda like Shunka. May not agree with him, but he is honest in his dedication.

One of his more interesting series of posts included his emails to and from Gallegos regarding the David "Gypsy" Chain case, and he's been pretty vocal about his disillusionment with Paul. But he was tired of getting what he sees as the runaround. See, Shunka believed in Paul. But when he voiced his frustration one night on KMUD, people heard him. Gallegos was on KMUD the next day. When a woman called in and said, "Man, Paul, Shunka was on last night, and he's really unhappy with you..." Paul stumbled up a response. Something about talking to Shunka regularly.

But, anyway, this latest post from Shunka is really interesting. You know, there are a few things we can agree on:

"Ever wonder why Al Gore and others all suddenly (care) all about global warming?

Of course toxic pollution is bad for the environment; the point here is that the science behind global warming is just bad science. The threat of global warming is being used by corrupt politicians, such as Al Gore, to win over the progressive movement, and their ultimate solution will most likely be a new tax and more fascistic laws.

Don't be fooled into thinking that Al Gore is a real environmentalist, any more than Arnold Schwarzenegger; these are big-business men and politicians who are trying to make their way up the ladder/pyramid, and they know that real environmental awareness is growing amongst the people, so they are pretending to be enviros in order to win over that sector of society.

These are dangerous people, war-mongering types, so don't be fooled by their phony attempts at being environmentalists."

Forever Wild,
Shunka Wakan

Powerful Documentary Trounces Man-Made Warming Hoax
Climate change is natural and has been happening since the Earth began

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, March 9, 2007
An astounding documentary that was broadcast in the UK last night completely trounced the man-made explanation for global warming, not with emotionally- laden propaganda or by attacking the messenger as its adherants resort to, but by presenting carefully considered and rational science.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
Prison The Premier Multimedia Subscription Package: Download and Share the Truth!