Tuesday, April 15, 2014

The airing...

Allan Dollison's Bar record is suddenly Humboldt County viral. Many of the same people who sat silent when he was hired by Gallegos - and when this record was aired here - are now incensed. It's been shopped around town, emailed, Rambo-style, to his supporters... Guess what? It's never been a secret. But anyway - here it is...

Allan Dollison Admits to Forgery, Ethical Screw-Ups but Says He’s a New Person Now - Ryan Burns/The Journal

When Allan Dollison launched his campaign for district attorney three months ago, he made a point of addressing what he called “a mistake” he’d made early in his career. He briefly explained what happened.

In 1997, only two years after establishing his own office, Dollison said, he closed his private practice to seek employment elsewhere.

“I made a serious error in judgment by not finishing the work in three cases and representing that I had filed a motion … when I hadn’t — to a client in another case,” he said. “I apologize — then and now — profusely for that mistake. It was an error in judgment but one I have learned from. I have learned to be extra careful and exceptionally honest and hardworking. I am a Christian and I ask for forgiveness.”

...Despite Dollison’s attempts to deal with this issue preemptively, questions have continued to dog him in the campaign. It was brought up during a recent interview on KHSU, and in the Outpost‘s own elections section, a question about his state bar record received more up votes than any other question posed to any other candidate. Dollison recently posted a response, again describing his past deeds as, simply, “a mistake.”

...In response to questions from the Outpost, Dollison sent a written statement explaining that he has changed.

“I have always said you learn more from your failures in life than you do from your successes, and this is especially true in my case,” the statement says.

As an example of how he’s changed, Dollison describes a case he handled while working for the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office. Dollison makes a serious allegation of misconduct within the DA’s office and says he was responsible for righting the wrong. (The Outpost won’t print Dollison’s full statement since the allegations have not been corroborated.)

“I learned from my mistakes,” Dollison says in his statement. “I have grown from my mistakes. In the [above referenced] case, no one ever got in trouble, because I did the exact and appropriate thing. I am 47 years old and I have one unfortunate small sad chapter in my life. All I ask is to be judged by my entire life and not one aspect. I also ask that people consider that you can and do learn from your mistakes, and that you can become a better person, and a better lawyer.” Read the whole article, at the link.
__________________

All Allan Dollison coverage on this blog
State Bar Association: Allan Lee Dollison - #177299

In re Allan Lee Dollison on Discipline

It is ordered that Allan Lee Dollison, State Bar No. 177299, be suspended from the practice of law for one year and until he makes restitution to Lynda Maisterra (or the Client Security Fund, if appropriate) in the amount of $837.00, plus 10% interest per annum from September 1, 1997; to Francisco and Flor Cruz (or the Client Security Fund, if appropriate) in the amount of $625.00, plus 10% interest per annum from September 24, 1997, and furnishes satisfactory proof thereof to the Probation Unit, State Bar Office of the Chief Trial Counsel; and until he has shown proof satisfactory to the State Bar Court of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice and learning and ability in the general law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, that execution of suspension be stayed, and that he be placed on probation for two years on condition that he be actually suspended for 60 days and until he makes the restitution described above and provides satisfactory proof thereof to the Probation Unit. If he is actually suspended for two years or more, he shall remain actually suspended until he provides proof to the satisfaction of the State Bar of California of his rehabilitation, fitness to practice and learning and ability in the general law pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct. Allan Lee Dollison is also ordered to comply with the other conditions of probation recommended by the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court in its Order Approving Stipulation filed March 31, 2000. It is further ordered that he take and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination within one year after the effective date of this order or during the period of his actual suspension, whichever is longer. (See Segretti v. State Bar (1976) 15 Cal.3d 878, 891, fn. 8.) It is further ordered that if he is actually suspended for 90 days or more, he shall comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court, and that he perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 120 and 130 calendar days, respectively, after the effective date of this order.* Costs are awarded to the State Bar and and one-half of said costs shall be added to and become part of the membership fee for the years 2001 and 2002. (Bus. & Prof. Code section 6086.10.)
*(See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6126, subd. (c).)

25 comments:

  1. Old news. Done and covered here and elsewhere.

    Where is the investigative reporting on unreported FPPC donations?

    Or the Baykeeper dragging it's heels reporting the sewage issue in Arcata?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Because this blog is full of Maggie supporters. The sole purpose is to take shots and slice up the other candidates. My guess is that Losey and Cardoza never posted here before Maggie started running. They are worse than Salzman. They'll overlook her blatantly breaking the law and stay on track.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymously saying someone broke the law is smart, because if you put your name on it, you will get called on it. If you want to reply that "truth is a defense" go for it. Put your name on it, and we'll see if it's a defense.
    In the meantime, you are just another anonymous liar.

    ReplyDelete
  4. First of all, nobody is worse than Salzman.

    Second of all, if Fleming broke the law, she will be dealt with by the authorities. I doubt it is true given she wont even drive while talking into a cellphone. She is a real stickler for the rules alright.

    Third of all, was anybody watching the last 12 years where Paul would just take the fines on all his political shenanigans? Growers used to bring him cash galore and it was never reported. All of a sudden, Salzman cares about the rules?

    And what is this nonsense that he is not working for Elan? Does anyone really believe that she is not accepting his genius to win at all costs? This chick is ambitious alright. Some day her skill may match her zeal to climb to the top...but she's not there yet.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The sign of a weak candidate. Her supporters constantly try to rip up whoever the threat is. Inability to run on merit so they go after the competition. A sad spectacle, actually.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is clear from reading this blog that Fleming has decided to employ Salzmanesque tactics. Drag Firpo through the mud and hope some of it sticks. Time will tell if that is a good long range plan.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fleming did break the law, which means the voters can deal with her as well.

    ReplyDelete
  8. IF she broke the law.

    Sign of weakness? You all are ripping up Maggie. Who is the weak one? Maggie did not drag Firpo through the mud. Allan started it and Arnie finished it. She made it too easy for them because she is frighteningly new to prosecution.

    Yes, Maggie can run on merit. Let the voters decide and in the meantime, take some time off Richard! You so deserve it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No? Maggie just hid under her desk for 10 years propping up Gallegos at the expense of the good people in this county. She wasn't young and inexperienced. ...she knew better but sold principle for a pay check

      Delete
  9. Hey, that Ryan Burns guy at the Outpost is really good at running down facts. Take your allegations to him, and let's all see what happens. Also, please send details to the FPPC and the AG. Also to the State Bar. Of course, you may have to identify yourself, and provide facts.

    http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2014/mar/26/behind-smear-campaign-against-mirandas-rescue/

    ReplyDelete
  10. As the President said, elections have consequences. The People of Humboldt County elected Paul, declined to recall Paul, and elected him twice more.
    The idea that the deputy district attorneys were supposed to somehow reverse that is just wrong headed in every way. You don't take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the State of California, and then try to overtun the People's choice.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh bull shit. Plenty of former deputies refused to go along with Gallegos' corruption and are practicing else where. Only the weak and unprincipled stayed. Same goes on the state and federal level too. Plenty of government employees leave their jobs when faced with dumping principles for a paycheck others take the check. That speaks loud and clear as to who those people really are.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You Anon 9:14 are the unprincipled, as we have pointed out before, your rhetoric and venom has been dealt with in this blog several times,so why don't you take it somewhere else, you might get someone to listen to you, but then again you have nothing new to add, just the same mud slinging viper venom that you spew! I've said it before you wouldn't know principle if it sat next to you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow losey....let's translate: anyone who disagrees with you spews hate and is the enemy. How Paul like. Did you learn this from him during the 10 years you have been working for him or does it come naturally? Inquiring minds want to know.

      Delete
  13. Okay, so all four of the DA candidates stayed at "Paul's" office. Never mind that it is really the People's office. Let's pretend it is Paul's.

    Arnie was forced to retire, Allan was forced to resign, and Maggie was not forced to do anything she freely walked into a position with County Counsel...the county had been trying to poach her from her passion - prosecution - for years before they finally succeeded. Being a DA is in her blood.

    Only Elan is still there and happily so. Paul is endorsing her and introducing her to loads of swell folks besides Salzman.

    Just the facts, ma'am.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just your spin is more like it.

      Your swell candidate Maggie cost the County 100s of thousands giving bad advice losing to HumCPR.

      The experienced team behind Maggie cannot even read FPPC basic rules.

      What about the people Bonnie Neely is introducing to Maggie?

      Salzman is probably working with Neely for Maggie.

      Union money and Sheriff donations buy a lot of BS.

      Delete
    2. Feming was not forced to leave because she had her head up Gallegos' ass for years. She enabled him at the cost to the community. Being a da in her blood?. Try sucking off the public teat at any price. A great many of us feel that way. Sold out. Can she stand up for what is right? No. Can she run an office? No. Does she have my or my wife's vote? No. Some of you here think she has the conservative vote locked up and you are very wrong.

      Delete
  14. Salzman working with Neely for Maggie? Do you ever pick up a newspaper...the NCJ letter to the editor is NOT him working for Maggie.

    As for HumCPR, that was not Maggie's advice. She has been at county counsel for two years and now everything that office has done is down to her. Who knew she had so much clout as a new deputy there.

    Fortuna is a storm in a teacup. Sour grapes...

    Get real. None of this matters. All that matters is who can do the job. Ms. Fleming is almost over qualified for the very difficult role of DA. None of the others are even close.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your opinion is not fact. Take off your Maggie blinders.

      Bonnie Neely, Joel Mielke, Linda Atkins and the HCDCC Dictocrats backing Maggie has lost her votes.

      No amount of spin is going to make Maggie more palatable. She wants to win at any cost.

      Delete
  15. Well, that does not hold water. All who really know what was going on know that Maggie challenged Paul, behind closed doors. She would never have challenged her boss openly as that is not dignified.

    Ask Jeff Schwarz's clients how they faired when Jeff tried to go over Maggie's head to Paul with a good ol' boy deal. Not very pretty.

    Firpo's got her head up his ass right now. Worst of all, he is her mentor. Talk about the blind leading the blind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not dignified? Translated: chicken shit and bought and paid for.

      Delete
  16. Bought and paid for by whom? Paul? You are delusional.

    Have you ever held a job? When you have a boss you do not attack him in public every chance you get. Join us in reality...but before you do, what is the color of the sky in your world?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. As a professional with a lawyer ticket you either get an honest boss or open your own business. It's actually a choice. If I remember correctly all the good lawyers that used to work there are elsewhere now and who remained? The unemployable who could not or would not go to other places. The morally corrupt?. The lazy part timers who wanted an easy ride with no accountability. The color of the sky is blue and the real world one that the ends do not justify the means.

      Delete
  17. Or, perhaps those who stayed cared enough about victims in this county to put aside politics and work hard.

    "Lazy part timers" ?!

    You really haven't seen Maggie in action, have you? She got PAID for 38 hours, but actually worked a lot more hours. It is called dedication and heart. She has a passion for criminal justice. She cares about the victims, not about opening her own practice and making money.

    If you look into it, a lot of the private attorneys would have stayed had they not been fired or forced to resign or forced to retire. Paul did not leave them a choice. To his credit, he saw a good deal in Maggie.

    ReplyDelete

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