Thursday, June 21, 2007

Day 434?

TS D.A. says he won't be pressured on Moore case

...Gallegos declined to be specific on the record about what key questions need answering before he'll release the Moore report.

But, he said, they involve two main issues: The lack of a decision-making process from the top down -- particularly regarding the timing of the raid on Moore's apartment, and whether he or the grand jury should decide if the shooting rises to the level of a criminal act.

Gallegos said he needed to go beyond the investigators' reports on some points and talk personally to experts “so that my mind can be resolved one way or the other.

...Gallegos said the primary reason for the delay is the “bottleneck” in his office which he said has not allowed him time for analysis of -- and deep reflection upon -- his investigators' findings.”


He doesn't need to feel pressured. He needs to send this case to the Attorney General where impartial officials can make a just determination.

And, boy, Cheri Moore's son's new lawyer doesn't have a clue about what is going on here: W. Gordon Kaupp, an attorney for Moore's son, David Moore of Medford, Ore., he's not surprised Gallegos hasn't made a decision, saying the district attorney and police are “on the same team.”

14 comments:

  1. Gee - so its a new thing that our elected DA doesn't want to do his job? This guy is incompetent and corrupt. Decisions made not in the name of justice but on how he may look at the end. No justice for the public, Ms. Moore's family or the police who are just doing their jobs.

    I am glad the the TS is getting the shaft from him on this. They deserve it after they supported this dishonest man in the last election.

    You catch it...you keep it.

    PS - the idiot isn't capable of deep reflection.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey - maybe his office wouldn't be so bottlenecked if he:

    1) did the job he was elected to do which is run that office instead of trying to play in court.

    2) had't cleaned house and got rid or driven off all his employees with competence and who actually worked.

    3) prioritized a bit. I do recall that he had plenty of time to personally go out on several occasions to Ferndale to go after Sean Marsh for accidently having his toddler break free from him. This guy was acquitted in a second for misdemeanor child abuse. I would say that a decision in the Cheri Moore case was a bit more important. But hek, I am rational and PG obviously is not.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gallegos has brought his problems on himself from day one.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Q: Why doesn't he stop all his trips to Hawaii and Mexico until he makes a decision?

    A: That would take work!

    ReplyDelete
  5. But don't you love the spin? "I will not be pressured". Right, it's evildoers pressuring the DA who are the real problem.

    Where is the use of force policy

    Where are the CAST documents

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I will not be pressured." means "I cannot make a decision."

    Ken Miller will kill me if I don't prosecute the cops, but I might end up like Nifong if I do.

    Almost time to go to the lake.

    ReplyDelete
  7. well put Rose !!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Gags reflect on anything except himself in the mirror...what a laugh.

    Anyone actually read the TS on this? How about this quote...

    "Yes, I have a responsibility to do it as quickly as I can,but it must be nailed down not only on the facts of the law, but the reasons for the final decision.”

    What the hell does this mean...what is the "facts of the law?" how the hell is that different thant the "reasons for the final decision?"

    What an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well, it's the Times Substandard. Who knows what he really said. Might have been "the facts and the law". Might have been "the fat in the coleslaw", might have been
    "the flat side of the saw". All of which would have made as much sense. The law hasn't changed, the facts are well known, he just hasnt figured out which way to jump. The problem he has is this. The cops committed no crime, but he doesn't dare say this. On the other hand, if he charges them, he paralyzes law enforcement in Eureka, if not the whole county, plus he loses embarassingly. The AG's office comes in, and finds out how totally screwed the DA's office is. People start having "off the record" conversations with assistant AG's.
    Assistant AG's start meeting people like Arnie and Yougo. Paul has to have regular conversations with people he can't control or walk away from. These things he does NOT want.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh, I think the TS left his words just as he said them. Any journalist who hears what he says and tries to find any real substance there isn't just baffled, the hairs on the back of their neck stand up. They know the meaning of words and they know when they are being spun and lied to.

    I'm curious, though, about his statement about sending this to a Grand Jury. Does this mean he is going to issue an "accusation" as he did to Debi August? Because the investigating has already been done. Right?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Regarding the Grand Jury remark - what a dumbass he is. If he means a criminal grand jury:

    1) He would have to present them an indictment which means he would have to come up with a charging decision and;

    2) By law it is a closed proceeding.

    god this man is stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  12. See, those are the ins and outs that most of us don't understand. We hear the words "Grand Jury" and we think we know what he means, but when you start asking questions, there is way more to it.

    The regular Grand Jury investigates complaints about government agencies and people (like Paul), and issues its own report.

    But a criminal Grand Jury is different.

    I'd say if you read between the lines, Paul is intending to charge people with crimes. Why not just say so.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The problem Rose is that he wants to charge them but can't because there is no statute that they have broken. If there was, he would have done so earlier. He would love to have the grand jury do it for him, but he would have present them with the charges and evidence. This is his problem. Also, even if he could get an indictment by misrepresenting things to the (shades of debi august) then the defense attorneys would take him apart piece by piece. Assuming of course, that if there are charges, the defense wouldn't move to recuse him for bias. At what point the AG would get it.

    What a cluster...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nifong proved you can indict a turnip if the Grand Jury is spun right. Is there a statute of limitations on charging the officers?

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.