Hahahaha! Hahahahahaahaa! Oh you really meant that as a serious question. Wouldn't need a defense attorney as I am perfect. Didn't vote for him at any time so that angle is covered. What again is the question?
A friend of mine recently went through a divorce settlement with a prominent SoHum businessman (in several ways) who was represented by Paul's wife. She got taken to the cleaners naively representing herself as lawyer Mrs. Paul successfully shielded the ex's hidden clandestine money from the court's consideration.
Glad to be residing in Riverside County where we hired a new DA in our recent hiring binge at the Ballot Box.
But if I lived in Humboldt County there would be a price on my head down at the DA's office on that silent and invisible WANTED DEAD OR DEAD poster.....Yep, that would be something to crow about, but not in Court as that would be Contempt. It's not that I would be chicken in Court, it would just be redundant to have another voice clucking for his scratch before the Bench.
Funny thing Joan was in the office not too long ago and she said the same thing; she wouldn't hir him for shit. Many of us put our heads down and laughed like hell.
I don't like the dude but you are a sick sucker. Go post crap on Heraldo because you demean this blog with such sick comments. Stick to the facts that he is a lying incompetent idiot. The other comments are wrong and belong to jerks like Mresquan and Salzman
Yeah - I don't mean it to slip into demeaning territory - I mean it seriously - would you hire him? Knowing what you know - not the hype, not the "oh he is so courageous..." bs - but especially if you are one of the ones that says that... would you SERIOUSLY hire him, and put him in charge of something important in your business? Could you rely on him? Would you put him in charge of other employees?
Now wait one goddamn minute. There are professional animal semen collectors, who collect their product by masturbating animals. Now, I will agree this is a lowly profession, but a necessary one, and one that has provided many families their meals both literally and metaphorically. Now what youre telling me is, connecting stud masterbators with Paul Gallegos is just too low, because, wait, we dont want to associate Paul with the semen collectors? Shouldn't the reasoning be the other way around? Shame on you Rose. This is a back handed slap to farmers across this country.
I'll just say, up front, that I like Paul. He hired me. He's never done anything that would lead me to believe he's anything other than honest. Not trying to pick a fight, just saying... Is he perfect? No. The thing that I like about him is that, if he makes a mistake, he owns it. His opponent is perfect, I guess--or at least would never admit otherwise.
Perhaps there were a number of seasoned prosecutors who left when Paul took office, but I think he's managed to replenish the well. There are very good prosecutors in the office now. I would ask anyone to find dirt on Ross, Bockelman, Renshaw, Mainzer, Firpo (who just won a PC288 trial today), Neel (won Larsen), et. al.
I'm not telling you to like him, but my partner and I decided to come to Humboldt because, in our interview, Paul said he'd just tried some misdemeanor cases, back-to-back. He did it because his other attorneys were in trial. That was a departure from what I knew, where the DA would cherry-pick his/her cases.
In my capacity as a DDA, I come across PC1203.4 motions. I review rap sheets. I see that the Farmer attorneys pled cases, as they should have, when doing so coincided with the interest of justice.
There's apparently some oddity in Humboldt, where there shouldn't be plea dispositions. Kidding. When I prosecute people, sometimes I get 969(b) packets. I see people, like Dikeman and Jackson, giving the low term as a plea. Go figure.
Say what you want about Paul, but this "plea deal" argument is really dumb. Debate the qualifications, but the "plea deal" thing can be debunked very quickly
Most of the attorneys in the DA's Office have tried more cases than Paul's challenge. I wonder what the victor would tell us about doing our job? Could I come to the victor for advice in a murder trial?
There's another issue Paul's challenger should address, namely: Why are the courts being reorganized? Well, it's because too many trials are going out. Not bad, for a bunch of plea-dealers. The courts are setting up a "early resolution" calendar, just for that reason. Again, plea deals....or not.
I always say, if anyone has a problem with any of my dispositions, please email me: bmclaughlin@co.humboldt.ca.us.
Rose your blog has become a haven for filth. You disgusting little woman, you need to clean your act up. This goes well beyond political disagreements. This has to do with your morals, or lack thereof. I think you owe PG an apology. Make it public Rose, to atone for you and your groupies actions here.
I call Bullshit on you 9:17. As a member of law enforcement for many years I am grateful for this blog. As for you McLaughlin start actually trying your cases, clean out your voicemail so we can reach you, return a call for a change and answer your damn emails for once. You are part of the problem. Now man up and quit apologizing for that train wreck of a "boss". There is a big reason why none of us is supporting Gallegos.
A haven for filth? Really? As someone who has been called every name in the book, and who has watched every filthy disgusting dirty trick that team Salzman/Gallegos/Nichols has perpetrated, I don't think you have an ounce of ground to stand on.
Do I like or agree with every statement that is made here? No, not necessarily. But I have made an effort to keep this an open forum, good, bad or indifferent, that brings with it good and bad comments.
There is alot more than you see here, frankly. Alot of information that never even gets put on the blog. Some of it is more damning than anything you see here, but in general I only put something up if I can verify it through multiple sources. Preferably sources who have the balls to stand up and speak out.
Anyway - while I appreciate Ben weighing in, if his was the predominant view of the situation, if even 2 out of 10 of the people who know, who work in and around the DAs Office held views such as his, I would not be doing this. The fact is there aren't 2 out of 100. I hear from alot of people, and the situation is dire. The evidence is there.
And most of it is in Gallegos (and his team's) own words.
When a city neighborhood wanted attention from the DA for a run amok named in the papers 'slumlord' for possible criminal prosecution....someone was assigned then left the office for greener pastures. After that time, the DA's office wouldn't return calls. Not even to highly placed city staff. Maybe Ben can try and cover Paul's ass on this.
I will be supporting Paul,despite many mistakes I have seen him make.I find him to be a much better choice than his opponent. I would like to know 2 things: 1) Did Ed Denson forge signatures like Jackson accused him of? 2)If Betty Chinn was indeed harassed into asking her name to be removed from Jackson's supporters list,why is her campaign team withholding that information from the public? Over the past 4 years Paul has grown and improved,and he has been effective at getting convictions,he has done with the budget constraints his office has had to deal with,and he has improved greatly at taking in aspects of cases and equally weighing in the importance of those aspects. Did he overprosecute Sean Marsh,yes.Kat Zimmerman,most certainly,was hiring Stoen a bad hire,probably so,despite my personal liking of Tim.But he has grown from these mistakes. Does he deserve to be taken to the woodshed for an appeared increase in crime rates,yes he does,as he never should have mentioned anything about any decrease being a result of his actions in office,as there is little co-relation there. But in the end,he deserves to be elected again as I believe he has learned from past mistakes,and as I was 4 years ago,I am dismayed greatly by tactics used by his opponent,which is why I would like a nice,detailed response to the 2 questions.
Mark. You continue to turn a deaf ear to everyone that has been part of the court process that says your Gags is lousy at the job. Dismiss what the witnesses say. Dismiss the victims stories of hell. Dismiss the cops. Dismiss everyone who has to deal with his stupidity on a daily basis. You don't give a shit do you? Don't give a damn who actually suffers because this idiot can't and won't do the job. People like you who intentionally turn your head and ignore others plight well you make me sick. Sick.
"Dismiss what the witnesses say. Dismiss the victims stories of hell. Dismiss the cops. Dismiss everyone who has to deal with his stupidity on a daily basis."
I have spoken with witnesses who were satisfied with Paul.I have spoken with victims who didn't have hellish stories.I have spoken to cops who think he does a good job given the resources he has to work with.I have spoken with people who deal with him on a regular basis who view him as quite intelligent and competent. Why do you dismiss them? I don't dismiss the claims you apparently hear and read others making,and because I do give a shit I weigh all sides and determine an opinion based on that.I hope at some point you will do the same.Paul is going to be re-elected in November,a large part of that will be because you and others with your mindset fail to do that.
I'm deleting that comment because there is no need to attack Mark.
That said Mark, I do not believe you are looking at the facts, nor are you listening to the people who, at great risk to themselves, speak out. You do not hear them, you do not want to hear it. Your mind is made up.
You see things from the other side of a great chasm.
Mark. Name them then and I will stake my life on the fact that my list makes yours look as small as a pin head. There is not one lE agency supporting him. Not one victim advocate or group. Victims and families are speaking out. Quigleys and Bradshaws. DV people. Rape crisis. Victim witness. You choose to look the other way and the rest of us choose to listen. I don't know you but you read like a close minded small ideologue who is simply clueles to others plight.
I beg to differ Rose. There are several reasons to attack Mark but I will refrain.
But I seriously doubt he (Mark or mresquan)has talked to "cops" that think Gallegos does a good job. To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point.
I can't imagine Mark has heard more from a cop than "press hard there are three copies".
Aside from the comments about Gallegos maybe learning from his previous blunders he is still an ineffective DA and a bad manager! I would submit that crime is up because of his mis-management. Voting for him is just throwing away your vote and wasting taxpayer money.
Gallegos tried and he has failed.
And to Ben, when Allison Jackson becomes DA she won't fire you just because she can. She will do what she can to make you a better prosecutor. Actually Ben I think you would like and respect Jackson if you got to know her and worked with her.
"Not one victim advocate or group. Victims and families are speaking out."?
Richard Dannemiller doesn't count for you?Why?
"To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point."
Wrongo....and it is quite foolish of you to assume there are no local cops who support the job Paul has grown into doing.But hey,it's your right to not believe me.
Hey anon 1:00pm said there were none.And trust me,Paul's penchant to almost pander to local law enforcement agencies impresses me none,and is the prime reason that both the Kat Zimmerman and Sean Marsh cases became what they became.Take a gander over to Paul's endorsement list to find the connections you are looking for.I find quite a few names there of people whom I disagree with on many issues,some related to law enforcement.
Other than his staff no law enforcement do I see on that site from humboldt. I don't see the folks in any of the categories you say konkler. Just admit you are making this shit up to justify your refusal to admit the truth.
The closest thing to law enforcement on Gallegos endorsement list are DA Office employees, they really don't count for obvious reasons.
I agree, you mresquan/mark made that up. It's apparent to anyone in the know and now it's obviously apparent to some that are not in the know.
Have a pleasant 4th of July MM (mresquan/mark). Have a hot dog, some ribs, a burger, and maybe a beer. And thank God you live in the greastest county in the world.
"I call Bullshit on you 9:17. As a member of law enforcement for many years I am grateful for this blog. As for you McLaughlin start actually trying your cases, clean out your voicemail so we can reach you, return a call for a change and answer your damn emails for once. You are part of the problem. Now man up and quit apologizing for that train wreck of a "boss". There is a big reason why none of us is supporting Gallegos."
Am I part of the problem? In the past three months, I've tried three felonies and put people in CDC for 23years.
I respect LE very much, but you're a coward. I'll admit that my voicemail is full, but your email missive is incorrect. Email me now. We'll see if I don't respond. Coward. Anonymous. At least post with your name. I'm part of the problem, eh?
In my 5 years as a prosecutor, I've had more trials than anyone you can name. Don't tell me my business. Call the POP police and ask how they feel about me. Call Cooper, Braud (both of them), Watson, Wilcox, Harpham, Starcher, Garey, Franco, Mowrey, Hass, and whomever. Get your shit together.
All I was trying to say is that the "plea deal" thing is a hackneyed platflorm. Every challenger says that the incumbent is a loser. That's an easy argument.
Anyhow, since you don't think I don't respond to my email, it's bmclaughlin@co.humboldt.ca.us. I look forward to hearing from you.
"I beg to differ Rose. There are several reasons to attack Mark but I will refrain.
But I seriously doubt he (Mark or mresquan)has talked to "cops" that think Gallegos does a good job. To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point.
I can't imagine Mark has heard more from a cop than "press hard there are three copies".
Aside from the comments about Gallegos maybe learning from his previous blunders he is still an ineffective DA and a bad manager! I would submit that crime is up because of his mis-management. Voting for him is just throwing away your vote and wasting taxpayer money.
Gallegos tried and he has failed.
And to Ben, when Allison Jackson becomes DA she won't fire you just because she can. She will do what she can to make you a better prosecutor. Actually Ben I think you would like and respect Jackson if you got to know her and worked with her."
I think I'm a good prosecutor. I know Allison. I like her. It's not about that. I just don't like being thrown under the bus in the election season.
I like Paul, and am loyal to him, because he hired me and Kelly. My posts aren't meant to be anti-Jackson, just that there should be a debate beyond "plea deals."
Ben, NO ONE is questioning YOUR competence. YOU have a good reputation, as do others you work with.
NO ONE is saying Terry Farmer was perfect, or that anyone should be deified.
The Deputy DA's are not running for election - but since you feel compelled to speak out perhaps you will have some compassion for those in your position who spoke out years ago:
This one ran as a letter to the editor, from the Arcata Eye, 2001
Gallegos is a phony
I am a Deputy District Attorney in the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office. I prosecute crimes against children. The views expressed below are my private ones, but obviously my role as a deputy d.a. is relevant here.
Terry Farmer has the whole-hearted support of every person in the District Attorney's office. He is physically, mentally and emotionally more than equal to the job, and his experience as well as judgment eclipse that of his young opponent.
The opponent's suggestion that the elected District Attorney should try cases shows that he does not understand the job, or how complex the office is. Do you hire Seiji Ozawa or Leonard Bernstein to conduct, or to play first violin? Anyone immersed a trial has no time to manage the office, and vice versa. It is impossible to do a good job as a trial lawyer and simultaneously run a complex office, and anyone serious about the job should know that.
Terry does a great job dealing with local, state and federal agencies, and in running the people who work here. And when he needs to, he does go to court. In fact, he goes farther afield than that. Recently he traveled to Vacaville Prison, attending a so-called "lifer" hearing, ensuring that the killer of a two year old girl stayed where he belonged.
The opponent has never been to a homicide scene and then watched the autopsy, drafted the search warrant, conducted a grand jury investigation, or attended weekly meetings with the police agencies of Humboldt County. He has never managed a budget as big as the District Attorney's Office budget. He has no understanding of how the office is funded, what grants we apply for, get and maintain to pay for people, technology and training. He has no relationship or experience with the numerous state, federal and local agencies the District Attorney works with, that support us and that we support. These are just a few of the things that go into the job of District Attorney, and this is the kind of experience Mr. Farmer has. The opponent does not.
The opponent's claim that he would go easy on marijuana growers is not thoughtful, and is not a promise he can keep. Remember the line from the Glenn Frye song – "You got to carry weapons, ‘cause you always carry cash"? Drug dealing means drug ripoffs. We had at least one such homicide last year. Juries are full of smart people, and when they see large amounts of cash, packaging materials, scales, records of who paid what, who owes what, and guns, they quickly figure out that it's not medical marijuana we go after-it's drug-dealing. Every dealer has a 215 card – they would be crazy not to; cards are easy to get; everyone knows that.
Whether they admit it or not, drug dealers put their neighbors at risk. Drug dealing kills, directly and indirectly. Cases are winnowed; many requests from police agencies are not prosecuted. But when the facts suggest dealing, even when the dealer tries to hide behind medical marijuana, the case goes to a jury. Of course, a lot of dealers plead guilty before trial.
Another thing – a 215 card is not a license to drive stoned, especially with kids in the car. Nor does it allow one to carry a little meth and a syringe. Or cash bad checks. Or shoplift. People who care about medical marijuana know that. Many of them, like the Humboldt Patient Resource Center, endorse Terry Farmer....
Another thing – a 215 card is not a license to drive stoned, especially with kids in the car. Nor does it allow one to carry a little meth and a syringe. Or cash bad checks. Or shoplift. People who care about medical marijuana know that. Many of them, like the Humboldt Patient Resource Center, endorse Terry Farmer.
One of the public defenders buttonholed me in the courthouse hall and asked me what I thought of the race, and we discussed it:
• Paul's only criminal experience is as a defender, yes? Yes.
• If Paul is qualified at all then, it is as a defense lawyer, certainly more than as a prosecutor, yes? Yes.
• Would you hire Paul to be your boss, to be The Public Defender? (VERY STRONG NEGATIVE RESPONSE.)
• OK then, don't send him to be my boss since he's not even ready to be yours. (The defender in question is supporting Mr. Farmer.)
It is nice that the opponent wants to "give back" to his community. But it is bold for him to assert that he should start at the top. Even the boss's kid is supposed to start in the mail room and learn the business. Where the D.A. is concerned, that's good for Humboldt County.
Five years ago I started here as a Deputy DA level one (out of four, four being the highest). When I did I already had 18 years experience as a trial lawyer – seven as a prosecutor, including four as a homicide prosecutor investigating and prosecuting from the death scene, the autopsy, through trial, and then to arguing appeals in the state Supreme Court and ultimately in Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. Then I spent 11 years as a defense lawyer and plaintiff's civil rights lawyer, doing mostly police misconduct cases. I have worked both sides of the street, and I can tell you there is a big difference. Another experienced lawyer was hired by Mr. Farmer a year after I was. He had 20 years experience, 10 as a deputy D.A.. in San Francisco, 10 as an assistant U. S. Attorney prosecuting drug cases. He too started at the bottom here. Everyone does. The opponent wants to start at the top. That's wrong, and it's not good for the people of this County.
The opponent claims he can "lead" the current deputies. He admits we are good at what we do, he says he respects us, he says we deserve civil service recognition, but he does not hear us when we endorse Mr. Farmer in this race. Most of the attorneys in the office have far more experience than the opponent does, in some cases as much as twice or even three times as much. One of us, Worth Dikeman, was chosen Prosecutor of the Year by the state's leading legal publication not long ago. Maggie Fleming was convicting killers of little girls when the opponent was barely out of law school. The office has specialized prosecutors for methamphetamine, domestic violence, juvenile justice, violence against women, child abuse, welfare fraud, to name a few. How can the opponent tell us how do to a job he has never done? Will he ask our advice? He is not listening to us now – is he supposed to be a better listener if he becomes our boss?
Five years ago I started here as a Deputy DA level one (out of four, four being the highest). When I did I already had 18 years experience as a trial lawyer – seven as a prosecutor, including four as a homicide prosecutor investigating and prosecuting from the death scene, the autopsy, through trial, and then to arguing appeals in the state Supreme Court and ultimately in Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. Then I spent 11 years as a defense lawyer and plaintiff's civil rights lawyer, doing mostly police misconduct cases. I have worked both sides of the street, and I can tell you there is a big difference. Another experienced lawyer was hired by Mr. Farmer a year after I was. He had 20 years experience, 10 as a deputy D.A.. in San Francisco, 10 as an assistant U. S. Attorney prosecuting drug cases. He too started at the bottom here. Everyone does. The opponent wants to start at the top. That's wrong, and it's not good for the people of this County.
The opponent claims he can "lead" the current deputies. He admits we are good at what we do, he says he respects us, he says we deserve civil service recognition, but he does not hear us when we endorse Mr. Farmer in this race. Most of the attorneys in the office have far more experience than the opponent does, in some cases as much as twice or even three times as much. One of us, Worth Dikeman, was chosen Prosecutor of the Year by the state's leading legal publication not long ago. Maggie Fleming was convicting killers of little girls when the opponent was barely out of law school. The office has specialized prosecutors for methamphetamine, domestic violence, juvenile justice, violence against women, child abuse, welfare fraud, to name a few. How can the opponent tell us how do to a job he has never done? Will he ask our advice? He is not listening to us now – is he supposed to be a better listener if he becomes our boss?
To make money, private lawyers pick and choose their cases, even dump clients after taking them on. The District Attorney has a broader responsibility to the community. In the public interest we must take and keep cases even when our witnesses and victims may be unsavory, or hard to understand, or unwilling to assist us. We can't just walk away when things get difficult, or expensive.
Mr.Gallegos has done just that, as described in the Eye. After taking the case, Mr. Gallegos had second thoughts about how tough it might be. Rather than carry the case, he decided the client should pay expenses. She could not, so he dropped her. That is not thinking like a public servant, even when the "public" is just one person.
The time will come for a new District Attorney. When it does, vote for one who knows the whole job, knows the County, knows the State. Pick one with the judgment, experience, and credibility to represent the County at all levels: in the office, in court, with local police, government, and business, with Sacramento, with the Federal government. Right now, that's Terry Farmer.
We are the attorneys and investigators in the District Attorney's Office. We write to urge the reelection of District Attorney Terry Farmer.
We are proud of what we do and the reputation that we have. It didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen without Terry Farmer. Terry's opponent has no prosecutorial or administrative background. Despite this, he aspires to go from being one-half of a two-person office to head of the largest law firm in Humboldt County supervising those who experience dwarfs his own.
The enforcement of our criminal law is a serious business. Platitudes and sound bites are no substitute for results. Terry Farmer gets results. He is an innovative leader who has earned our respect and support. We urge you to vote for him on March 5.
Max Cardoza, Worth Dikeman, Rob Wade, Elizabeth Norton, Maggie Fleming, Jim Kucharek, Allen Woodworth, John Wright, Peter Martin, Gloria Albin, Allison Jackson, Eamon Fitzgerald, Wes Keat, Andrew Isaac, Nandor Vadas, Heather Gimie, Murat Ozgur, Frank Dunnick, Stacey Johnson, Paul Hagen, Jim Dawson, Eric Olson, Kathy Philp, Mike Losey, Chris Cook, Paul Blake, Scott Smith, Chris Andrews, Dave Rybarczyk, Dave Walker, Mike Stone
Humboldt County District Attorney's Office Eureka
(Anyone care to count how many of them are left? Probably on the fingers of one hand.)
Because - whether you like Terry Farmer or not - he had assembled a strong team of prosecutors - and they had seen Paul Gallegos in action. They knew him for what he was. They knew his level of competence. They knew his reputation. They knew about his exploits in Pelican Bay.
But - DA is an elected position, and who holds that position is subject to the whims of the voters. That time, the voters decided it was time for a change.
Well, posting those letters was an exercise in frustration. Bloggers gives me error messages that it did not post because it was too long, then it turns out it did post, every time. Anyway. I have deleted the duplicates, with one overlapping paragraph.
At any rate, Ben, perhaps you will understand my point.
Ok Ben, lets talk about victims. Find me three victims families who complained, publicly, before, during and after resolution of their case, about Allison Jackson. Lets talk about expert witnesses. Find me one expert that Paul has disqualified before the jury ever heard about him. Before you start scratching your head, ask around about Lee Coleman. The office should still have the transcript, and you should have read it, if you want to know about how to rip a defense expert apart. Now, there's a question. Have you read that transcript? Do you know what to what I am referring? If you haven't that's a pity. AGJ's demolition of Lee Coleman is a classic, and is used by other offices. How many Gallegos transcripts are?
With all due respect to Mr. McLaughlin, he is not a replacement for prosecutors the caliber of Dikeman, Isaac, Wade, or indeed Jackson. He may have the potential to be, but that will take time and experience. The only thing between the DA's office and chaos is Wes Keat. He has run the office from day 1. Gallegos is a loose cannon. Look at the decisions we know are his - the PL suit, the Douglas/Zanotti case, Gunderson, his plagerized "My Words"... I could go on - half-ass disasters, all of them. He did not know what he was doing in 2002, and he does not know what he is doing now.
Take it easy on Ben. He's not a bad guy, and he's paddling like mad to stay afloat after agreeing to the dismissal motion in the Gunderson case. PVG wasn't best pleased by that,s because Ben did it on his own without checking with the elected, so Ben's in warm water. Which is pretty funny when you look at the overall picture.
Look, I've been a prosecutor for 4.5 years--a lawyer for 10 (civil/transactional). I'm not stupid. But, I'm obviously not yet of the same caliber--as a prosecutor--as Dikeman (who could be) or Issac. I don't know Mr. Wade, so I cannot opine. Ms. Jackon was a prosecutor for 10 years, more than 5 years longer than myself.
All I can say, in my defense, is that I've tried nearly 40 felony cases in 4.5 years, several of which were 8 weeks, or more. My conviction rate, at trial, is very good.
I feel bad for calling the person who criticized me (7/3 @9:30) a "coward." If he/she is in LE, then he/she is obvoiusly not that. I get defensive and take stuff personally, which I shouldn't. You can call me many things, but a liar is not among them; nor can you say I'm not responsive. That's why I called BS.
My co-workers are also a source of pride. Paul gets attacked for (1) plea deals and (2) not attracting good prosecutors to the office. I just think that's wrong. Say what you will, but we have good DDA's. They care; most work through lunch and don't back down.
And, I really have an issue with the plea deal argument. Say each felony DDA gets 200 new cases a year (a guess, just for example), beyond those cases they have to maintain (PRH, restitution, MDO, etc.)... If 10% of those went to trial, it would be a disaster.
If a felony trial takes, on the average, 2 weeks, that's 40 weeks in trial. I did 36 of my first 52 weeks in this office in trial, and I can say that I got almost nothing else done.
The three trials I had recently, convictions. I'd be lying if I said I didn't offer plea deals. The defendants, in those cases, declined the offers. Had they accepted, am I a weak prosecutor? That's the part I don't get...
Get a life-
ReplyDeleteNo, seriously
As a defense attorney if I got arrested for a marijuana grow, sure!
ReplyDeleteAs a Jeff Spicoli impersonator, maybe. Otherwise, not even to scrub my toilet.
ReplyDeleteHahahaha! Hahahahahaahaa! Oh you really meant that as a serious question. Wouldn't need a defense attorney as I am perfect. Didn't vote for him at any time so that angle is covered. What again is the question?
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine recently went through a divorce settlement with a prominent SoHum businessman (in several ways) who was represented by Paul's wife. She got taken to the cleaners naively representing herself as lawyer Mrs. Paul successfully shielded the ex's hidden clandestine money from the court's consideration.
ReplyDeleteGlad to be residing in Riverside County where we hired a new DA in our recent hiring binge at the Ballot Box.
ReplyDeleteBut if I lived in Humboldt County there would be a price on my head down at the DA's office on that silent and invisible WANTED DEAD OR DEAD poster.....Yep, that would be something to crow about, but not in Court as that would be Contempt. It's not that I would be chicken in Court, it would just be redundant to have another voice clucking for his scratch before the Bench.
Would I hire Gallegos to work for me? NO !
ReplyDeleteWhy? Because he's GALLEGOS!
Watch that six minute video on Measure "T" and then remind yourself that he is the District Attorney in a very high crime county. Holy Cow Batman!
Maybe he could get a job at a "dispensary" or clinic or whatever
I might hire him to clean my poopie septic system! HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH
ReplyDeleteThats all the good he can doo, poop scooper DA. Go scoop some poop!
Funny thing Joan was in the office not too long ago and she said the same thing; she wouldn't hir him for shit. Many of us put our heads down and laughed like hell.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the dude but you are a sick sucker. Go post crap on Heraldo because you demean this blog with such sick comments. Stick to the facts that he is a lying incompetent idiot. The other comments are wrong and belong to jerks like Mresquan and Salzman
ReplyDeleteYeah - I don't mean it to slip into demeaning territory - I mean it seriously - would you hire him? Knowing what you know - not the hype, not the "oh he is so courageous..." bs - but especially if you are one of the ones that says that... would you SERIOUSLY hire him, and put him in charge of something important in your business? Could you rely on him? Would you put him in charge of other employees?
ReplyDeleteNow wait one goddamn minute. There are professional animal semen collectors, who collect their product by masturbating animals. Now, I will agree this is a lowly profession, but a necessary one, and one that has provided many families their meals both literally and metaphorically. Now what youre telling me is, connecting stud masterbators with Paul Gallegos is just too low, because, wait, we dont want to associate Paul with the semen collectors? Shouldn't the reasoning be the other way around? Shame on you Rose. This is a back handed slap to farmers across this country.
ReplyDeleteSeriously! I was hoping to keep it clean.
ReplyDeleteI'll just say, up front, that I like Paul. He hired me. He's never done anything that would lead me to believe he's anything other than honest. Not trying to pick a fight, just saying... Is he perfect? No. The thing that I like about him is that, if he makes a mistake, he owns it. His opponent is perfect, I guess--or at least would never admit otherwise.
ReplyDeletePerhaps there were a number of seasoned prosecutors who left when Paul took office, but I think he's managed to replenish the well. There are very good prosecutors in the office now. I would ask anyone to find dirt on Ross, Bockelman, Renshaw, Mainzer, Firpo (who just won a PC288 trial today), Neel (won Larsen), et. al.
I'm not telling you to like him, but my partner and I decided to come to Humboldt because, in our interview, Paul said he'd just tried some misdemeanor cases, back-to-back. He did it because his other attorneys were in trial. That was a departure from what I knew, where the DA would cherry-pick his/her cases.
In my capacity as a DDA, I come across PC1203.4 motions. I review rap sheets. I see that the Farmer attorneys pled cases, as they should have, when doing so coincided with the interest of justice.
There's apparently some oddity in Humboldt, where there shouldn't be plea dispositions. Kidding. When I prosecute people, sometimes I get 969(b) packets. I see people, like Dikeman and Jackson, giving the low term as a plea. Go figure.
Say what you want about Paul, but this "plea deal" argument is really dumb. Debate the qualifications, but the "plea deal" thing can be debunked very quickly
Most of the attorneys in the DA's Office have tried more cases than Paul's challenge. I wonder what the victor would tell us about doing our job? Could I come to the victor for advice in a murder trial?
There's another issue Paul's challenger should address, namely: Why are the courts being reorganized? Well, it's because too many trials are going out. Not bad, for a bunch of plea-dealers. The courts are setting up a "early resolution" calendar, just for that reason. Again, plea deals....or not.
I always say, if anyone has a problem with any of my dispositions, please email me: bmclaughlin@co.humboldt.ca.us.
Thanks for weighing in, Ben.
ReplyDeleteRose your blog has become a haven for filth. You disgusting little woman, you need to clean your act up. This goes well beyond political disagreements. This has to do with your morals, or lack thereof. I think you owe PG an apology. Make it public Rose, to atone for you and your groupies actions here.
ReplyDeleteI call Bullshit on you 9:17. As a member of law enforcement for many years I am grateful for this blog. As for you McLaughlin start actually trying your cases, clean out your voicemail so we can reach you, return a call for a change and answer your damn emails for once. You are part of the problem. Now man up and quit apologizing for that train wreck of a "boss". There is a big reason why none of us is supporting Gallegos.
ReplyDeleteA haven for filth? Really? As someone who has been called every name in the book, and who has watched every filthy disgusting dirty trick that team Salzman/Gallegos/Nichols has perpetrated, I don't think you have an ounce of ground to stand on.
ReplyDeleteDo I like or agree with every statement that is made here? No, not necessarily. But I have made an effort to keep this an open forum, good, bad or indifferent, that brings with it good and bad comments.
There is alot more than you see here, frankly. Alot of information that never even gets put on the blog. Some of it is more damning than anything you see here, but in general I only put something up if I can verify it through multiple sources. Preferably sources who have the balls to stand up and speak out.
Anyway - while I appreciate Ben weighing in, if his was the predominant view of the situation, if even 2 out of 10 of the people who know, who work in and around the DAs Office held views such as his, I would not be doing this. The fact is there aren't 2 out of 100. I hear from alot of people, and the situation is dire. The evidence is there.
And most of it is in Gallegos (and his team's) own words.
When a city neighborhood wanted attention from the DA for a run amok named in the papers 'slumlord' for possible criminal prosecution....someone was assigned then left the office for greener pastures. After that time, the DA's office wouldn't return calls. Not even to highly placed city staff. Maybe Ben can try and cover Paul's ass on this.
ReplyDeleteI will be supporting Paul,despite many mistakes I have seen him make.I find him to be a much better choice than his opponent.
ReplyDeleteI would like to know 2 things:
1) Did Ed Denson forge signatures like Jackson accused him of?
2)If Betty Chinn was indeed harassed into asking her name to be removed from Jackson's supporters list,why is her campaign team withholding that information from the public?
Over the past 4 years Paul has grown and improved,and he has been effective at getting convictions,he has done with the budget constraints his office has had to deal with,and he has improved greatly at taking in aspects of cases and equally weighing in the importance of those aspects.
Did he overprosecute Sean Marsh,yes.Kat Zimmerman,most certainly,was hiring Stoen a bad hire,probably so,despite my personal liking of Tim.But he has grown from these mistakes.
Does he deserve to be taken to the woodshed for an appeared increase in crime rates,yes he does,as he never should have mentioned anything about any decrease being a result of his actions in office,as there is little co-relation there.
But in the end,he deserves to be elected again as I believe he has learned from past mistakes,and as I was 4 years ago,I am dismayed greatly by tactics used by his opponent,which is why I would like a nice,detailed response to the 2 questions.
Mark, it is impossible to answer your questions because you seem to read into things what you want to see.
ReplyDeleteFor example: NO ONE ever accused Ed Denson of forging documents. Go back and re-read the story in the Journal. THINK.
Mark. You continue to turn a deaf ear to everyone that has been part of the court process that says your Gags is lousy at the job. Dismiss what the witnesses say. Dismiss the victims stories of hell. Dismiss the cops. Dismiss everyone who has to deal with his stupidity on a daily basis. You don't give a shit do you? Don't give a damn who actually suffers because this idiot can't and won't do the job. People like you who intentionally turn your head and ignore others plight well you make me sick. Sick.
ReplyDelete"Dismiss what the witnesses say. Dismiss the victims stories of hell. Dismiss the cops. Dismiss everyone who has to deal with his stupidity on a daily basis."
ReplyDeleteI have spoken with witnesses who were satisfied with Paul.I have spoken with victims who didn't have hellish stories.I have spoken to cops who think he does a good job given the resources he has to work with.I have spoken with people who deal with him on a regular basis who view him as quite intelligent and competent.
Why do you dismiss them?
I don't dismiss the claims you apparently hear and read others making,and because I do give a shit I weigh all sides and determine an opinion based on that.I hope at some point you will do the same.Paul is going to be re-elected in November,a large part of that will be because you and others with your mindset fail to do that.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI'm deleting that comment because there is no need to attack Mark.
ReplyDeleteThat said Mark, I do not believe you are looking at the facts, nor are you listening to the people who, at great risk to themselves, speak out. You do not hear them, you do not want to hear it. Your mind is made up.
You see things from the other side of a great chasm.
Mark. Name them then and I will stake my life on the fact that my list makes yours look as small as a pin head. There is not one lE agency supporting him. Not one victim advocate or group. Victims and families are speaking out. Quigleys and Bradshaws. DV people. Rape crisis. Victim witness. You choose to look the other way and the rest of us choose to listen. I don't know you but you read like a close minded small ideologue who is simply clueles to others plight.
ReplyDeleteI beg to differ Rose. There are several reasons to attack Mark but I will refrain.
ReplyDeleteBut I seriously doubt he (Mark or mresquan)has talked to "cops" that think Gallegos does a good job. To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point.
I can't imagine Mark has heard more from a cop than "press hard there are three copies".
Aside from the comments about Gallegos maybe learning from his previous blunders he is still an ineffective DA and a bad manager! I would submit that crime is up because of his mis-management. Voting for him is just throwing away your vote and wasting taxpayer money.
Gallegos tried and he has failed.
And to Ben, when Allison Jackson becomes DA she won't fire you just because she can. She will do what she can to make you a better prosecutor. Actually Ben I think you would like and respect Jackson if you got to know her and worked with her.
"Not one victim advocate or group. Victims and families are speaking out."?
ReplyDeleteRichard Dannemiller doesn't count for you?Why?
"To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point."
Wrongo....and it is quite foolish of you to assume there are no local cops who support the job Paul has grown into doing.But hey,it's your right to not believe me.
One. Wow. Where are the others Mark? The cops? Advocates? Names Konkler and not bullshit. 1 in 7 years is pathetic.
ReplyDeleteHey anon 1:00pm said there were none.And trust me,Paul's penchant to almost pander to local law enforcement agencies impresses me none,and is the prime reason that both the Kat Zimmerman and Sean Marsh cases became what they became.Take a gander over to Paul's endorsement list to find the connections you are looking for.I find quite a few names there of people whom I disagree with on many issues,some related to law enforcement.
ReplyDeleteOther than his staff no law enforcement do I see on that site from humboldt. I don't see the folks in any of the categories you say konkler. Just admit you are making this shit up to justify your refusal to admit the truth.
ReplyDeleteThe closest thing to law enforcement on Gallegos endorsement list are DA Office employees, they really don't count for obvious reasons.
ReplyDeleteI agree, you mresquan/mark made that up. It's apparent to anyone in the know and now it's obviously apparent to some that are not in the know.
Have a pleasant 4th of July MM (mresquan/mark). Have a hot dog, some ribs, a burger, and maybe a beer. And thank God you live in the greastest county in the world.
"I call Bullshit on you 9:17. As a member of law enforcement for many years I am grateful for this blog. As for you McLaughlin start actually trying your cases, clean out your voicemail so we can reach you, return a call for a change and answer your damn emails for once. You are part of the problem. Now man up and quit apologizing for that train wreck of a "boss". There is a big reason why none of us is supporting Gallegos."
ReplyDeleteAm I part of the problem? In the past three months, I've tried three felonies and put people in CDC for 23years.
I respect LE very much, but you're a coward. I'll admit that my voicemail is full, but your email missive is incorrect. Email me now. We'll see if I don't respond. Coward. Anonymous. At least post with your name. I'm part of the problem, eh?
In my 5 years as a prosecutor, I've had more trials than anyone you can name. Don't tell me my business. Call the POP police and ask how they feel about me. Call Cooper, Braud (both of them), Watson, Wilcox, Harpham, Starcher, Garey, Franco, Mowrey, Hass, and whomever. Get your shit together.
All I was trying to say is that the "plea deal" thing is a hackneyed platflorm. Every challenger says that the incumbent is a loser. That's an easy argument.
Anyhow, since you don't think I don't respond to my email, it's bmclaughlin@co.humboldt.ca.us. I look forward to hearing from you.
"I beg to differ Rose. There are several reasons to attack Mark but I will refrain.
ReplyDeleteBut I seriously doubt he (Mark or mresquan)has talked to "cops" that think Gallegos does a good job. To be nice I would say Mark is pulling our leg on that one or maybe say he is phibbing or taking literary license or who knows. I just don't believe him on that point.
I can't imagine Mark has heard more from a cop than "press hard there are three copies".
Aside from the comments about Gallegos maybe learning from his previous blunders he is still an ineffective DA and a bad manager! I would submit that crime is up because of his mis-management. Voting for him is just throwing away your vote and wasting taxpayer money.
Gallegos tried and he has failed.
And to Ben, when Allison Jackson becomes DA she won't fire you just because she can. She will do what she can to make you a better prosecutor. Actually Ben I think you would like and respect Jackson if you got to know her and worked with her."
I think I'm a good prosecutor. I know Allison. I like her. It's not about that. I just don't like being thrown under the bus in the election season.
I like Paul, and am loyal to him, because he hired me and Kelly. My posts aren't meant to be anti-Jackson, just that there should be a debate beyond "plea deals."
Ben, NO ONE is questioning YOUR competence. YOU have a good reputation, as do others you work with.
ReplyDeleteNO ONE is saying Terry Farmer was perfect, or that anyone should be deified.
The Deputy DA's are not running for election - but since you feel compelled to speak out perhaps you will have some compassion for those in your position who spoke out years ago:
This one ran as a letter to the editor, from the Arcata Eye, 2001
Gallegos is a phony
I am a Deputy District Attorney in the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office. I prosecute crimes against children. The views expressed below are my private ones, but obviously my role as a deputy d.a. is relevant here.
Terry Farmer has the whole-hearted support of every person in the District Attorney's office. He is physically, mentally and emotionally more than equal to the job, and his experience as well as judgment eclipse that of his young opponent.
The opponent's suggestion that the elected District Attorney should try cases shows that he does not understand the job, or how complex the office is. Do you hire Seiji Ozawa or Leonard Bernstein to conduct, or to play first violin? Anyone immersed a trial has no time to manage the office, and vice versa. It is impossible to do a good job as a trial lawyer and simultaneously run a complex office, and anyone serious about the job should know that.
Terry does a great job dealing with local, state and federal agencies, and in running the people who work here. And when he needs to, he does go to court. In fact, he goes farther afield than that. Recently he traveled to Vacaville Prison, attending a so-called "lifer" hearing, ensuring that the killer of a two year old girl stayed where he belonged.
The opponent has never been to a homicide scene and then watched the autopsy, drafted the search warrant, conducted a grand jury investigation, or attended weekly meetings with the police agencies of Humboldt County. He has never managed a budget as big as the District Attorney's Office budget. He has no understanding of how the office is funded, what grants we apply for, get and maintain to pay for people, technology and training. He has no relationship or experience with the numerous state, federal and local agencies the District Attorney works with, that support us and that we support. These are just a few of the things that go into the job of District Attorney, and this is the kind of experience Mr. Farmer has. The opponent does not.
The opponent's claim that he would go easy on marijuana growers is not thoughtful, and is not a promise he can keep. Remember the line from the Glenn Frye song – "You got to carry weapons, ‘cause you always carry cash"? Drug dealing means drug ripoffs. We had at least one such homicide last year. Juries are full of smart people, and when they see large amounts of cash, packaging materials, scales, records of who paid what, who owes what, and guns, they quickly figure out that it's not medical marijuana we go after-it's drug-dealing. Every dealer has a 215 card – they would be crazy not to; cards are easy to get; everyone knows that.
Whether they admit it or not, drug dealers put their neighbors at risk. Drug dealing kills, directly and indirectly. Cases are winnowed; many requests from police agencies are not prosecuted. But when the facts suggest dealing, even when the dealer tries to hide behind medical marijuana, the case goes to a jury. Of course, a lot of dealers plead guilty before trial.
Another thing – a 215 card is not a license to drive stoned, especially with kids in the car. Nor does it allow one to carry a little meth and a syringe. Or cash bad checks. Or shoplift. People who care about medical marijuana know that. Many of them, like the Humboldt Patient Resource Center, endorse Terry Farmer....
Another thing – a 215 card is not a license to drive stoned, especially with kids in the car. Nor does it allow one to carry a little meth and a syringe. Or cash bad checks. Or shoplift. People who care about medical marijuana know that. Many of them, like the Humboldt Patient Resource Center, endorse Terry Farmer.
ReplyDeleteOne of the public defenders buttonholed me in the courthouse hall and asked me what I thought of the race, and we discussed it:
• Paul's only criminal experience is as a defender, yes? Yes.
• If Paul is qualified at all then, it is as a defense lawyer, certainly more than as a prosecutor, yes? Yes.
• Would you hire Paul to be your boss, to be The Public Defender? (VERY STRONG NEGATIVE RESPONSE.)
• OK then, don't send him to be my boss since he's not even ready to be yours. (The defender in question is supporting Mr. Farmer.)
It is nice that the opponent wants to "give back" to his community. But it is bold for him to assert that he should start at the top. Even the boss's kid is supposed to start in the mail room and learn the business. Where the D.A. is concerned, that's good for Humboldt County.
Five years ago I started here as a Deputy DA level one (out of four, four being the highest). When I did I already had 18 years experience as a trial lawyer – seven as a prosecutor, including four as a homicide prosecutor investigating and prosecuting from the death scene, the autopsy, through trial, and then to arguing appeals in the state Supreme Court and ultimately in Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. Then I spent 11 years as a defense lawyer and plaintiff's civil rights lawyer, doing mostly police misconduct cases. I have worked both sides of the street, and I can tell you there is a big difference. Another experienced lawyer was hired by Mr. Farmer a year after I was. He had 20 years experience, 10 as a deputy D.A.. in San Francisco, 10 as an assistant U. S. Attorney prosecuting drug cases. He too started at the bottom here. Everyone does. The opponent wants to start at the top. That's wrong, and it's not good for the people of this County.
ReplyDeleteThe opponent claims he can "lead" the current deputies. He admits we are good at what we do, he says he respects us, he says we deserve civil service recognition, but he does not hear us when we endorse Mr. Farmer in this race. Most of the attorneys in the office have far more experience than the opponent does, in some cases as much as twice or even three times as much. One of us, Worth Dikeman, was chosen Prosecutor of the Year by the state's leading legal publication not long ago. Maggie Fleming was convicting killers of little girls when the opponent was barely out of law school. The office has specialized prosecutors for methamphetamine, domestic violence, juvenile justice, violence against women, child abuse, welfare fraud, to name a few. How can the opponent tell us how do to a job he has never done? Will he ask our advice? He is not listening to us now – is he supposed to be a better listener if he becomes our boss?
Five years ago I started here as a Deputy DA level one (out of four, four being the highest). When I did I already had 18 years experience as a trial lawyer – seven as a prosecutor, including four as a homicide prosecutor investigating and prosecuting from the death scene, the autopsy, through trial, and then to arguing appeals in the state Supreme Court and ultimately in Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. Then I spent 11 years as a defense lawyer and plaintiff's civil rights lawyer, doing mostly police misconduct cases. I have worked both sides of the street, and I can tell you there is a big difference. Another experienced lawyer was hired by Mr. Farmer a year after I was. He had 20 years experience, 10 as a deputy D.A.. in San Francisco, 10 as an assistant U. S. Attorney prosecuting drug cases. He too started at the bottom here. Everyone does. The opponent wants to start at the top. That's wrong, and it's not good for the people of this County.
ReplyDeleteThe opponent claims he can "lead" the current deputies. He admits we are good at what we do, he says he respects us, he says we deserve civil service recognition, but he does not hear us when we endorse Mr. Farmer in this race. Most of the attorneys in the office have far more experience than the opponent does, in some cases as much as twice or even three times as much. One of us, Worth Dikeman, was chosen Prosecutor of the Year by the state's leading legal publication not long ago. Maggie Fleming was convicting killers of little girls when the opponent was barely out of law school. The office has specialized prosecutors for methamphetamine, domestic violence, juvenile justice, violence against women, child abuse, welfare fraud, to name a few. How can the opponent tell us how do to a job he has never done? Will he ask our advice? He is not listening to us now – is he supposed to be a better listener if he becomes our boss?
ReplyDeleteTo make money, private lawyers pick and choose their cases, even dump clients after taking them on. The District Attorney has a broader responsibility to the community. In the public interest we must take and keep cases even when our witnesses and victims may be unsavory, or hard to understand, or unwilling to assist us. We can't just walk away when things get difficult, or expensive.
ReplyDeleteMr.Gallegos has done just that, as described in the Eye. After taking the case, Mr. Gallegos had second thoughts about how tough it might be. Rather than carry the case, he decided the client should pay expenses. She could not, so he dropped her. That is not thinking like a public servant, even when the "public" is just one person.
The time will come for a new District Attorney. When it does, vote for one who knows the whole job, knows the County, knows the State. Pick one with the judgment, experience, and credibility to represent the County at all levels: in the office, in court, with local police, government, and business, with Sacramento, with the Federal government. Right now, that's Terry Farmer.
Andrew Isaac
Arcata
Bring back the boss
ReplyDeleteWe are the attorneys and investigators in the District Attorney's Office. We write to urge the reelection of District Attorney Terry Farmer.
We are proud of what we do and the reputation that we have. It didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen without Terry Farmer. Terry's opponent has no prosecutorial or administrative background. Despite this, he aspires to go from being one-half of a two-person office to head of the largest law firm in Humboldt County supervising those who experience dwarfs his own.
The enforcement of our criminal law is a serious business. Platitudes and sound bites are no substitute for results. Terry Farmer gets results. He is an innovative leader who has earned our respect and support. We urge you to vote for him on March 5.
Max Cardoza, Worth Dikeman, Rob Wade, Elizabeth Norton, Maggie Fleming, Jim Kucharek, Allen Woodworth, John Wright, Peter Martin, Gloria Albin, Allison Jackson, Eamon Fitzgerald, Wes Keat, Andrew Isaac, Nandor Vadas, Heather Gimie, Murat Ozgur, Frank Dunnick, Stacey Johnson, Paul Hagen, Jim Dawson, Eric Olson, Kathy Philp, Mike Losey, Chris Cook, Paul Blake, Scott Smith, Chris Andrews, Dave Rybarczyk, Dave Walker, Mike Stone
Humboldt County District Attorney's Office
Eureka
(Anyone care to count how many of them are left? Probably on the fingers of one hand.)
They tried to tell you
ReplyDeleteBecause - whether you like Terry Farmer or not - he had assembled a strong team of prosecutors - and they had seen Paul Gallegos in action. They knew him for what he was. They knew his level of competence. They knew his reputation. They knew about his exploits in Pelican Bay.
But - DA is an elected position, and who holds that position is subject to the whims of the voters. That time, the voters decided it was time for a change.
Voters don't even need a reason to vote a DA out.
This time, they have a good reason.
Well, posting those letters was an exercise in frustration. Bloggers gives me error messages that it did not post because it was too long, then it turns out it did post, every time. Anyway. I have deleted the duplicates, with one overlapping paragraph.
ReplyDeleteAt any rate, Ben, perhaps you will understand my point.
Ok Ben, lets talk about victims. Find me
ReplyDeletethree victims families who complained, publicly, before, during and after resolution of their case, about Allison Jackson.
Lets talk about expert witnesses. Find me one expert that Paul has disqualified
before the jury ever heard about him.
Before you start scratching your head, ask around about Lee Coleman. The office should still have the transcript, and you should have read it, if you want to know about how to rip a defense expert apart. Now, there's a question. Have you read that transcript? Do you know what to what I am referring? If you haven't that's a pity. AGJ's demolition of Lee Coleman is a classic, and is used by other offices. How many Gallegos transcripts are?
With all due respect to Mr. McLaughlin, he is not a replacement for prosecutors the caliber of Dikeman, Isaac, Wade, or indeed Jackson. He may have the potential to be, but that will take time and experience. The only thing between the DA's office and chaos is Wes Keat. He has run the office from day 1. Gallegos is a loose cannon. Look at the decisions we know are his - the PL suit, the Douglas/Zanotti case, Gunderson, his plagerized "My Words"... I could go on - half-ass disasters, all of them. He did not know what he was doing in 2002, and he does not know what he is doing now.
ReplyDeleteTake it easy on Ben. He's not a bad guy, and he's paddling like mad to stay afloat after agreeing to the dismissal motion in the Gunderson case. PVG wasn't best pleased by that,s because Ben did it on his own without checking with the elected, so Ben's in warm water. Which is pretty funny when you look at the overall picture.
ReplyDeleteJust like has been written and talked about, chaos with no leadership.
ReplyDeleteAs for Ben, he ought to stop blogging it just embarrassing to read.
To make money, private lawyers pick and choose their cases, even dump clients after taking them on.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of ethic, it's a little more complicated than that.
Look, I've been a prosecutor for 4.5 years--a lawyer for 10 (civil/transactional). I'm not stupid. But, I'm obviously not yet of the same caliber--as a prosecutor--as Dikeman (who could be) or Issac. I don't know Mr. Wade, so I cannot opine. Ms. Jackon was a prosecutor for 10 years, more than 5 years longer than myself.
ReplyDeleteAll I can say, in my defense, is that I've tried nearly 40 felony cases in 4.5 years, several of which were 8 weeks, or more. My conviction rate, at trial, is very good.
I feel bad for calling the person who criticized me (7/3 @9:30) a "coward." If he/she is in LE, then he/she is obvoiusly not that. I get defensive and take stuff personally, which I shouldn't. You can call me many things, but a liar is not among them; nor can you say I'm not responsive. That's why I called BS.
My co-workers are also a source of pride. Paul gets attacked for (1) plea deals and (2) not attracting good prosecutors to the office. I just think that's wrong. Say what you will, but we have good DDA's. They care; most work through lunch and don't back down.
And, I really have an issue with the plea deal argument. Say each felony DDA gets 200 new cases a year (a guess, just for example), beyond those cases they have to maintain (PRH, restitution, MDO, etc.)... If 10% of those went to trial, it would be a disaster.
If a felony trial takes, on the average, 2 weeks, that's 40 weeks in trial. I did 36 of my first 52 weeks in this office in trial, and I can say that I got almost nothing else done.
The three trials I had recently, convictions. I'd be lying if I said I didn't offer plea deals. The defendants, in those cases, declined the offers. Had they accepted, am I a weak prosecutor? That's the part I don't get...
PBM
Maybe we can all agree on this. For Ben Nord, on the anniversary of his death:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkLXOWimMY8
I really miss him.
It's beautiful, Ben. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteHe was the first friend I had here. Friends are hard to come by.
ReplyDeletePeople care, Ben. More than you know.
ReplyDelete