Sunday, March 23, 2014

Anderson-Jordet's family ask Klein to challenge district attorney's plea deal

DA, local expert weigh in on case -Will Houston/The Times-Standard

...Anderson-Jordet, a 50-year old chef and Arcata resident, was killed in the early morning hours of Nov. 25 after an altercation with Ferrer and two other Arcata residents. He was stabbed once in the heart....

After receiving a narrative from the autopsy report -- stating that the victim also received a puncture wound on his upper-left chest and a “'defense' injury” on his left index finger during the altercation -- Anderson-Jordet's sister Donna Johnson said her family felt an involuntary manslaughter charge did not represent the scope of the crime....

District Attorney Paul Gallegos recently reassigned Firpo from the case at her request. She said she did not want it to become “conflated with a political campaign.”

Gallegos -- who has since taken over the case -- said he will not be challenging the plea deal as requested by the family. He said claims that the case was not thoroughly investigated are “inaccurate,” and the courts will decide the next course of action.

”I am very familiar with the facts in the autopsy report,” Gallegos said. “The next course is what conclusion does one want to draw from the physical evidence? I am very familiar with deaths and injuries.”

37 comments:

  1. http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/21/da-clears-man-arrested-in-fatal-stabbing-of-dodgers-fan-after-giants-game/

    Interesting, and the precise language Firpo used. They would have had to "prove the defendant wasn't acting in self defense."

    BTW. No preliminary hearing this one either. I'm sure Cardoza is all over the blogs in San Francisco trying to get justice. I wonder if Klein has called the family of the victim yet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It could come down to what was said when the plea was entered. If the judge was not told there were three wounds, the judge could well consider that a falsehood by omission, in violation of the code of professional conduct (basically, don't lie to or mislead the court) More significantly, misleading the court on the dismissal would be a direct violation of law:
    1192.6. (a) In each felony case in which the charges contained in
    the original accusatory pleading are amended or dismissed, the record
    shall contain a statement explaining the reason for the amendment or
    dismissal.
    (b) In each felony case in which the prosecuting attorney seeks a
    dismissal of a charge in the complaint, indictment, or information,
    he or she shall state the specific reasons for the dismissal in open
    court, on the record.

    ReplyDelete
  3. From the North Coast Journal

    "Reached Tuesday, Ferrer’s attorney, Marek Reavis, disputed that version of events, saying he “would have loved” to take the case to trial. Reavis said his client, who identifies himself as a member of the LGBT community, Stoiber and Rocheleau were in the street when Anderson-Jordet approached. “All three individuals were relatively flamboyantly dressed — wearing makeup, nails painted, that sort of thing,” Reavis said. “Mr. Anderson-Jordet made some very homophobic statements, and that was immediately followed by him approaching them. He approached Mr. Ferrer in a very intense way, with his hand in his pocket, advancing in an aggressive fashion.”

    Frightened, Ferrer stepped back and drew a knife from his pocket, Reavis said. “Anderson-Jordet took a swing at Ferrer, missed and fell against Mr. Ferrer,” Reavis said, adding that Anderson-Jordet fell onto the knife. “It was not an intentional stabbing.”

    ReplyDelete
  4. Then, he got up and fell against the knife again. Then, he got up and fell against the knife a third time. Clumsy, just clumsy. So it was his own fault. Lovely.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You seem to have information about this that no one else does. How do you know there were three stab wounds or the characteristics of those wounds? The police and DA's office, who actually have seen these reports and spoken with the medical examiner agreed with the disposition. Have you spoken with the medical examiner?

    Why have you been silent on Fleming's plea deals to involuntary manslaughter?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The autopsy report is described in one of our local newspapers. You figure out which one. Here's a hint. The link is at the top of the page. Try to educate yourself on a topic before you jump in. And speaking of education, name which cases Klein, Dollison OR Fleming have pled to involuntary manslaughter. Any case, any of the three. For extra credit, name one that involved three stab wounds, three assailants?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The local papers have neither seen nor described the autopsy report, so that is also a lie.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ah, the old "he fell on the knife" defense?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm educated enough. I'm thinking Firpo has better things to do than have other attorney's drudge up information on Fleming or file FOI requests as Arnie did trying to find dirt on Firpo.

    None of these candidates seem to have anything to run on. Fleming can't defend telling HCSO to hide her endorsement as Dollison pointed out. She has to admit she was offered a bunch of money to run by these organizations because she has told too many people already. And she can't hide breaking the law in Fortuna. So she has her people dig up dirt on Firpo.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous 1:22 I second that comment! All in favor say aye!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Find a lawyer to say any one broke the law in Fortuna. You won't. Check the 460 forms on file with the State as to who got money from whom. And as for the papers and the autopsy report, it is "described" in the TS as follows: After receiving a narrative from the autopsy report -- stating that the victim also received a puncture wound on his upper-left chest and a “'defense' injury” on his left index finger during the altercation -- Anderson-Jordet's sister Donna Johnson said her family felt an involuntary manslaughter charge did not represent the scope of the crime.
    So, lots of shady unsupported opinions and allegations, versus the on the record goat rope Firpo made of a homicide case.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Maggie supporter you can say and do anything you want in the comment section. Your candidate has raised eyebrows, you can deflect the truth. People may be buying the Firpo distraction. Some will. But some will believe what they will about any of the candidates.

    Your candidate is getting hammered in the blogs.

    Her superior attitude, two faced campaign and supporters are being exposed. The People want a People's DA not a bought and paid for crony.

    Yes let the 460s come out. Then the people will see the truth. About all candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I found a lawyer who said she broke the law! His name is Dave Tranberg. City Attorney for Fortuna. And he said it on the record in the publicly televised meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  14. A. It happens. Supporters often put up signs, not thinking, or knowing about the rules. It's not always/usually/necessarily the candidate's fault.

    B. EVEN IF - these ordinances have NO TEETH, you can file a complaint and it will make a circuitous route right back to the beginning. Long after no one even remembers the race at all.

    C. There will be worse things to come, Next will be the sign vandals. And worse.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Rose knows, for sure. Been there, done that.
    There've been Firpo signs in Arcata for two weeks. So what?
    Make a big deal about it? Then maybe allege it was sabotage, claim someone set her up?
    Should we judge Firpo by the nasty ugly stuff that Salzman and friends come up with?
    Let's not.
    It makes my stomach hurt.
    And reading the comments in LOCO is kind of like watching a dog chase its tail.

    ReplyDelete
  16. No, it's more like staying at Michael Vick's house.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous 5:54:

    You making comments that you hope to be true do not make them true. We all, at some point, want wishes to be horses so we can ride.

    I guess you don't know Maggie. She can't be bought.

    I suppose when the "People" vote her in, then she will be the People's DA?

    Until then, I think a nicer more even handed tone will sell your nonsense better.

    Take care anonymous 5:54 and smile, as life is too short to make stuff up.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon 1:22PM

    "Dollison pointed out" ?! PLEASE, give me a break.

    I have no doubt that Maggie Fleming will be supported by all types of persons that are in some capacity associated with the criminal justice system; to include the deputies/correctional officers, defense attorneys, police officers, court personnel,public defenders, and people that have served on a jury where Fleming was the prosecutor. Persons with first hand knowledge of Flemings performance, abilities, and character.

    Maggie Fleming is the obvious choice for District Attorney.

    ReplyDelete
  19. At anonymous. 7:51. Pay attention. She already has been bought. She has already broken the law. She is the obvious choice to her blogging team and those who don't want an independent thinking candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  20. $61,287 says Maggie is bought and paid for.

    Dispute that Maggie supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ms. Bryson, you do realize that Ms. Fleming is the candidate and not YOU.

    This is not 2010. You are not running for DA.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kathleen ran for DA with out the bona fides of any other candidate in this race. Makes her statements about the qualifications of others extremely disingenuous.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 61 K from whom?
    The 460 form is 39 pages long, because there are so many small donors. The only big ones are family.

    The idea that a candidate is somehow invalidated because supporters send money is absurd. To the contrary, such a long list of small donors from this community shows a wide and diverse community support, the exact opposite of what you so sleazily try to imply.

    But you know that. You got that number off the 460 form, but you left out the meaningful data.

    Again.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous you keep clicking your heels and hoping you can fool voters. Amounts were mentioned.

    $1,500 and above are not small amounts. Individual donations of $300 are not small amounts.

    39 pages reveal a lot. You are just pissed your candidate is being shown for what she is. Would not run until Paul said no. Ran because she was promised support. To raise $61,000 plus in 2 months?


    I see Liberal Jon silent. Bonnie Neely and Linda Atkins and Milt Boyd's candidates get the pass huh Jon?

    ReplyDelete
  25. In the context which you raised, which, to refresh your memory, was "bought and paid for" the sums are indeed trivial, especially since there are 39 pages of them. A candidate is not "bought and paid for" by 39 pages of small donors, but by one page of big donors, which Ms. Fleming does not have.

    I am not vexed in the slightest. I am amused. Please do carry on demonstrating the intellectual and moral vacuity which so richly infuses your side of the issues.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous you sure know big words.

    If you not vexed, why do you keep responding and repeating the same argument.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Why miss an opportunity to highlight just how estranged some folks are from facts, and how utterly flabbergasted they are when facts appear.

    As for big words? So not only facts, but a reasonable grasp of the English language and a modest ability to use it make you uncomfortable? I think that's about the worst thing I've ever heard. How marvelous.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I'm not seeing the 'bought and paid for' in this race. It's always a favorite topic, every election, but really, guys.... come on.

    Unless you think the new DA is planning to take private special interest group's lawsuit and file it as a public prosecution - oh wait! The group that's screeching the loudest about 'developers' and money and influence is the SAME one who thought that was just hunky dory. So shut up.

    You've got a bunch of people who have worked long hard hours inside that DAs Office under the impossible conditions made possible by Ms. De Rooy/Salzman and the rest, and they are stepping up to the plate to try to fix it.

    Either own up to your mistake, or sit down.

    You've shown your colors.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Rose, you and others keep beating the on the Salzman issue. You refuse to accept that he is not involved and allow Elan to campaign on her own merits.

    Elan is not Paul.

    Money is an issue. Get the 460s, look at the names and occupations on Maggie's 460s. Maggie is being supported and the money is being poured into her campaign by attorneys, law enforcement and interested parties who stand to gain.

    This is fact, not personal opinion.

    The only people who do not want this brought out are people supporting Maggie or those that cannot allow their hatred of Paul to make them see clearly.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous with the above comment.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  31. My reference to De Rooy has to do with her constant letters to the editor dancing up and down about 'developer' money - yet she has been a vocal and direct supporter of the only truly bought and paid for candidate, the one who filed a lawsuit on his backer's behalf. By default Salzman is in there - and they brought you the absolute destruction of the office.

    I didn't say anything about Salzman and Elan - unless you think she, or any of the others, is going to take a 'ake private special interest group's lawsuit and file it as a public prosecution.'

    I don't think she is going to do that. I think she, like the others, is appalled at the mismanagement of that office.

    there;s a BIG DIFFERENCE between that and law enforcement supporting the person they think is best able to solve the PROBLEM. The PROBLEM, the mismanagement, the revolving door - affects them every single day. It hampers their ability to do their job. It frustrates them, and violates their sense of right and wrong. They've had it up to their eyeballs, and it is incredibly disrespectful of you to push Salzman's hate-filled meme about the cops wanting a 'bought-and-paid-for' DA, ESPECIALLY given that he is the one most responsible for just that in the past.

    FURTHER - if this was a bunch of teachers telling you Gary Eagles was the best man for the job, you would not be saying that, you would be saying, you know, they're the ones who know best, they're the feet on the ground, you better listen to them.

    So there's that.

    You can call it hatred of Paul if you want. Or you can accept that it is a clear-eyed assessment that his incompetence brings us all down. It's not hatred. It's honest.

    And it is crystal clear. Every DA candidate knows it and every single one is faced with how are they going to FIX IT.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Money is pouring in to Maggie from ordinary citizens in droves. Unsubstantiated and unverifiable claims of "persons who stand to gain" are, if not posted by Salzman, certainly Salzmane-esque, as he started that lame "old boys" thread in his original Redwood Progressive letter, and Firpo has run with it ever since.

    And you, Mr. Chiv, Firpo Fanboy, with your weaselly little "thank you" endorsement of this nonsense, have forfeited any claim to objectivity.

    Speaking of objectivity If you were objective, you would have researched the candidates' claims. And since Firpo claims to be a manager extraordinaire, you would have researched the only company Firpo ever admitted working for, Applied Magnetics. Well, she admitted it until she took down her LinkedIn page. But a screenshot shows that's where she said she "managed" and designed. How well did she do? She says she left in 1998. After a whole 5 years, 7 months (her figures). Tell folks how AM did in 1998. [Per SEC filings, really bad. Could not produce competitive products, stock crashed]. And after. [bankrupt, 2000, closed doors, gone]Tell folks what Maylaysia where Firpo says she worked, thinks of AM. [hint, when you search "applied magnetics" and "maylaysia" add "rogue" "predatory" and "blacklisted"].Tell folks how many thousands AM laid off in 1998. [[half the work force]. Tell folks if Firpo was one of them. Tell folks about how the laid off employees sued. Was Firpo one of them? Either you know, and have been sitting on it, in which case your claim to be an objective journalist is utterly hollow, or you do not know, because you did not check her claims. In which case you cannot claim either objectivity or competence.

    ReplyDelete
  33. It's only fair to point out that MANY very fine designers and project managers lose their jobs when a company closes - and have nothing whatsoever to do with how the company as a whole is run...or how it is portrayed in the press or perceived internationally.

    But look - WE HAVE PUBLIC FORUMS. DO NOT PASS THIS AROUND ANONYMOUSLY IN THE SHADOWS!

    As your questions in the open, honestly and forthrightly. If you think you have something, bring it out in the open.

    Haven't we had enough of that kind of campaign tactic?

    It's not negative campaigning if it is a valid criticism, and if you believe you have one, you are honor bound to be better than Richard Salzman, do not sneak around peddling assumptions to reporters. Bring it out in the open.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Well, to be fair, Ms. Firpo never mentions the name of the company she "managed" and instead took down her linked in page. And to be fair, if one claims to be have management expertise, one should make it possible, rather than more difficult, to verify that claim. The facts and how to google them are there. Not allegations, not implications. Facts. Do with them what you will.

    ReplyDelete
  35. How about this, 6:23. Go meditate for a few minutes. Gather your courage. Come back with your name and lay out your facts.

    You've already done the work.

    Don't sling this anonymously. It's serious. And this is how our democracy works, in the open, with absolute freedom of speech. Not by innuendo slung from an anonymous source..

    OR, have your candidate do it.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Identiy matters for unsubstantiated sleazy innuendoes. Facts are facts. The source is irrelevant. Like them or don't, ignore them or don't, there they are.



    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.