Saturday, January 12, 2008

It may not be over yet....

Surprise, surprise,

"The laws of California are the laws of California... and that's where we find ourselves," is the quote used on the Ch. 3 News.

Today's Eureka Reporter says...

At a news conference Friday, District Attorney Paul Gallegos adamantly defended his decision to pursue a fraud lawsuit against Pacific Lumber Co. that was dismissed twice because the court found it had no legal merit.

“I think it was right to file the case,” Gallegos said.

He acknowledged that a considerable amount of time and effort went into the legal battle that has spanned four years and the county was at risk to pay the legal fees and possibly PALCO’s attorney costs.

Gallegos hasn’t ruled out an appeal of the ruling to the California Supreme Court, but said he wanted to consult with his colleagues before deciding.

According to its Web site, the Supreme Court must have an appeal served and filed within 10 days after the appeal court’s decision is final.
Read the rest - Gallegos responds to appeal court ruling on fraud suit

The Times Standard says Gallegos is largely resigned to accept his defeat, and says, He said it was worth the cost, but did not have a figure on how much money or how many hours were spent pursuing the case.

Before considering a petition to the California Supreme Court, he said would consult with colleagues about it. But Gallegos said the issue may be something the Legislature should consider taking up.

Palco Vice President Frank Bacik said in a phone interview that the Supreme Court reviews only a small portion of significant or novel cases, and said the appellate court cited long-standing precedents in making its ruling.

”One would not expect them to be interested in reviewing this case,” Bacik said.
Read the rest - DA largely resigned to Palco ruling

Which colleagues is Gallegos planning to "consult" with? Would that be all the other DA's, who he begged for help a few days before his appeal brief was due? Or would that be Richard Salzman, Ken Miller, Michael Shellenberger? I'm betting on the latter.


  1. Maybe PVG should have consulted with his colleagues the first time around. And by colleagues I mean his senior Deputy DA's?

    It's his "OTHER" colleagues that got him into this mess. Of course initially he was compared to David (v. Goliath)and touted as some kind of champion for going after an evil corporation. It turns out he's just a dumbass who let this group use his office to further their personal agendas.

    Was PVG a go to lawyer for civil lawsuits when he was in private practice? I don'think so. As I understand it he did regular defense work (when he could get it), court appointed defense work, court appointed appeals, prison work (and he got into some trouble for double billing or something). so he decides to do his on the job civil suit training on the counties dime?

    PVG says he didn't know how mouch money and time this would take, but he thinks it was worth it! WORTH IT TO WHO? How many real criminals went free or got the PVG slap on the wrist while PVG and Tim Stoen chased Ken Miller's fantasy?

    I hope he appeals to the state Supreme Court. I read the entire ruling, they will send him packing too. They would probably get a laugh out of it too. The CALIFORNIA Supreme Court dumping this foley will be another public whipping, and he desrves it.

    I wish someone would ask Mr. Gallegos how much money this has cost the county ? Actual filing fees, travel, per diem, lawyer and staff salaries ???? It has to be ten's of thousands of dollars.

  2. "It turns out he's just a dumbass who let this group use his office to further their personal agendas."

    They bought the office for him. Why wouldn't he let them use it?

  3. Gags is great! I love the waste of taxpayer money and time, but don't worry, Ken Miller only has to write his name 20 times to give Paul another $5000 for his next campaign.

  4. As the "heraldo"/Miller camp is looking for spin - the poor freshman DA suffering abuse at the hands of the POWER, the inference that the judges are biased and corrupt, they're now falling back on blaming the Supervisors for not letting Gallegos bring in Cotchett to head up Ken Miller’s lawsuit.

    Go back and check the record - Gallegos/Stoen brought a faxed draft copy of a proposed contract with Cotchett before the Board.

    The Board expressed concern that this had not been reviewed by County Counsel. Among the questions asked (which then NCJ editor Keith Easthouse deemed irrelevant) was whether or not their decision that day to deny it precluded Gallegos from making the necessary corrections, and coming BACK in with a final (not a draft) proposal that addressed the questions.

    The answer was that nothing was stopping him from coming back. The answer was that he was free to come back.


  5. Where are Konkler and Heraldo? Isn't it obvious that the Court of Appeals has been bought by Arkley?

  6. Hey Ken, where's Moonbeam? Why isn't the AG handling the appeal? Why can't PVG get the AG's office interested? Is Jerry Brown now part of the old boy network?

    Can PVG find one single prosecutor
    ( a real one, not Stoen or Yougo) to back him on this? Apparently not. At least, not in his first three tries, to paraphrase the appellate hammer that hit PVG on the head the other day.

  7. 1:09

    They're still nursing their wounds while trying to find treatment for Larry Evans' chronic Tedium Verbosity.

    It's only January and I think Larry has a lock on 'Rant of the Year' (See Heralda's Blog) It's a classic.

  8. My God, Evans is a wonder. Smoke enough dope with the stary eyed kids while you talk endless crap about saving Humboldt from Maxanistan and he has really convinced himself he's not an idiot. After this ruling I'm sure his walnut of a brain is spinning at the speed of light inside his huge anti-everything head. That's really not fair. I'm sure he supports free money and dope for him and the tree huggers.

  9. One of the most important duties of a prosecutor is to evaluate cases and determine whether or not to file charges initially and how to dispo the case after it is filed. It is ABUNDANTLY clear that PVG cannot assess a case worth beans. The result here puts that beyond question; consider also the August case, whatever that case against the Blue Lakes C.O.P. was, the Marsh case (it was widely reported that he visited the scene in Ferndale with the deputy who took it to trial, so he clearly had some involvement), the one case that Mr. Schwartz took to trial and lost (indeed, wasn't there a subsequent finding of actual innocence by the court?), and other examples which I am sure will occur to those who are paying attention. PVG clearly has no idea what a case is worth. Therefore, his decisions, pardon me, his so-called "decisions" in the Moore case are crap. Based on his track record, PVG will never get this case in front of a jury, because, as argued above, he is apparently an idiot. On the other hand, you sea monkeys elected him twice (or thrice I suppose), and you have only yourselves to thank.

  10. I love how dumb-ass Gallegos doesn't know how much it cost to wage this war--but inisists it was worth it. That's a nuanced cost-benefit analysis if ever I heard one.


  11. Has Mr. Hurwitz ever let a child step off a sidewalk in Ferndale? A heinous crime, we are told, so much so that it was filed after it was originally rejected.
    How much was that fight worth?
    Aside from driving to Ferndale for lunch with the DDA who tried the case? Who is also gone, who was also hired by PVG.


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.