What is MISSING from this report is disgraceful.
And there is no excuse for it. None.
◼ Crime rates in Humboldt County increase; statewide numbers dropping The Times Standard/Matt Drange
◼ http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1940m Attorney General report
Awwww, it's nothing. Just the DA lying again. Nothing to see here.
But not everyone is asleep at the wheel:
◼ Crime and Politics The Journal
So you can expect this particular plank to vanish from Gallegos campaign literature as we move into the November runoff. Again, all’s fair in love and politics.
What doesn’t seem quite so seemly is Gallegos sloughing off last year’s big bump to the Times-Standard‘s Matt Drange.
”Humboldt County got hit hard last year — there was a lot of stress,” said Gallegos, who added that the economy was a key issue. “You tend to see that stress reflected in the courts.”
Yellow flag! You don’t get to claim sole credit for lowering crime rates if, when they rise, you say that it’s all someone or something else’s fault. You do the crime, you do the time (as it were).
◼ Fact Checkin’ Crime Stats The Reporta
But who FIRST called him out on it? The answer is - Allison Jackson called him out on it during the KHUM/Northcoast Journal debate.
◼ podcast here - DA Debate Video
Hank followed up with a Blogthing blog post:
◼ Crime Rates in Humboldt County
...As recently as last night, though, Gallegos himself demonstrated that he takes the numbers very seriously indeed. Both Allison Jackson and Paul Hagen called him on this in different ways. Jackson asserted that the violent crime rate has in fact gone up, not down, during his tenure. Hagen, ready with that yellow flag, wryly quizzed Gallegos about what exactly he had done to bring the crime rate down....
And a mention in the paper:
◼ Notes from the Hustings - Crime Stats
Gallegos' distortions were not challenged in the pre-election article in the Journal (DA Trials), nor did any other paper pick it up or take the time to examine his claims.
Love how he uses the year BEFORE he took office - technically saying "since he was elected" is accurate, he was elected in March of 2002, but did NOT TAKE OFFICE until January of 2003. It's a sleight of hand - it's why they say "Lies, damned lies and statistics." He cannot seriously expect to be allowed to use the 9 months that he was not in office, but he knows reporters like Matt Drange will not know to even question his statistics, or his choice of time periods. If he says it, it must be true. And since they like him, the report will read, "Gallegos stated" whereas they will slant the challenger's response, "So and so claims" - thus they always give him the upper hand.
Here's the Journal's chart(s):