☛ TS Moore civil suit dismissed as plaintiffs agree to defense motion
A federal judge signed an order this week to dismiss the civil rights violation lawsuit brought against the city of Eureka by the son of Cheri Lyn Moore and, apparently, the plaintiffs agreed to the defense-requested dismissal.
”We appreciate the plaintiff's voluntary dismissal of the case,” said Eureka City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner. “It's just a relief for the city, Chief (David) Douglas and all the officers and staff involved to have this very sad and community-wrenching event finally put behind us.”
Defense attorney Nancy Delaney said the suit, which sought unspecified damages for the alleged civil rights violations against Moore, faced an uphill battle after the involuntary manslaughter indictments handed up against Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti by a criminal grand jury were thrown out by Humboldt County Superior Court Judge John Feeney in August.
”The ruling of Judge Feeney made it clear that there were indeed exigent circumstances,” Delaney said. “We ultimately expected (the suit) to be dismissed on motions without a trial -- this just short circuited that. It was already headed that way somewhat, but (Feeney's ruling) certainly sealed it.”
The plaintiff's attorneys, Dennis Cunningham and Gordon Kaupp, did not return numerous Times-Standard phone calls seeking comment for this story....
...Federal Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton's dismissal of the civil suit seems to signal the end of drawn-out legal saga after Moore's shooting shook the local community.
But District Attorney Paul Gallegos has yet to unequivocally say he won't file a criminal complaint against Douglas and Zanotti for their decision-making roles in Moore's death.
”The indictment that was issued by the grand jury has resulted in significant change,” Gallegos said in an e-mail to the Times-Standard. “I believe that the changes that have taken place since Ms. Moore's tragic death are such that I do not expect a recurrence of the events that took place in that incident. In light of those changes and the remoteness of any additional positive result for the community by moving forward, I have not seen a compelling reason to move forward with a complaint at this time.
”My hope is that the changes that have been made, and the resulting remoteness of a recurrence of events such as took place with Ms. Moore, provide some solace to the aggrieved, some comfort to the distressed and some positive resolution for the community,” Gallegos continued.
Local attorney Bill Bragg, who represented Douglas during the criminal case, said he doesn't anticipate Gallegos filing a complaint against his client.
”In my experience, prosecuting authorities rarely commit themselves,” Bragg said. “My feeling is there is certainly no present intent to move forward, but the district attorney did leave the door open.”
For his part, Garr Nielsen, current chief of the Eureka Police Department that was also named in the suit, said Hamilton's decision is welcome news for the department, and brings a close to another painful chapter.
”As with the criminal piece, every part of this that gets put to rest brings us closer to putting closure to what was a tragic incident both for the police department and the community,” Nielsen said. “I think this is very good news, and welcome news to us and to this organization.”
Delaney said she hopes the civil suit's demise sends a clear message to the local community.
”I don't think the public sometimes appreciates the emotional toll that these occurrences have on the officers, but the positive thing here is that each knew that he or she had done what they were supposed to do, what they were required to do (in the situation),” Delaney said. “My hope would be that now the public understands that the officers acted appropriately.”
Showing posts with label Douglas/Zanotti Indictments. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Douglas/Zanotti Indictments. Show all posts
Saturday, December 06, 2008
Friday, October 17, 2008
ER - Letter to the Editor - UPDATED
UPDATED:
◼ Former Blue Lake Police Chief David Gundersen has been cleared of all major charges first filed against him in 2008. - Arcata Eye MARCH 2012
****
Great letter in today's ER:
Dear Editor,
The tragic death of a 9-year-old girl on State Route 299 because of a drag race once again points out the deplorable judgment of our district attorney.
At the same time Paul Gallegos was prosecuting members of the Eureka Police Department (whose charges were dismissed), he was cutting deals and plea bargains with one of the drivers, who has 17 criminal cases on his record.
Yet this man was free to drive the streets and kill a child.
Susan Dodd
Eureka
h/t: The Mirror
***
Much as I tend to agree with the sentiment - valuable time and resources were spent going after good guys, Douglas and Zanotti, that could have been spent going after bad guys and Gallegos' record shows he doesn't know how to go after bad guys with the same zeal he goes after good guys; the list is long - starting with Martinez-Hernandez; giving the convicted murderers Kesser and Leahy plea deals, the horrific botch job on Gundersen, the unforgivable persecution of Sean Marsh - it is also true that Jason Bradley Whitmill was a parolee. He was sent to prison - a plea deal yes, but one that didn't make much difference in the amount of time he served.
There's alot to hold Gallegos accountable for - the point of this blog, actually. But to hold him accountable for this death? No.
For too many plea bargains? Yes. For prosecuting innocent people like Sean Marsh, and going easy on people like Kesser; for bizarre plea deals like we lower the charges or drop the charges if you pass a lie detector test, and then if you fail it we let you take it again... that kind of schizophrenic prosecution leaves every member of this community at risk. Yes. For that and much more.
One of Law Enforcement's primary beefs with Paul as DA is that bad guys are let out before they've even finished the paperwork on the case, and then they turn around and commit another offense. For that? Yes. Time and time again.
I believe there will be a case that can be laid at his feet. One that will make national attention. It's only a matter of time. But this one isn't it.
Whitmill will go back to prison, presumably, if Gallegos doesn't screw this one up. It won't be for long enough. No punishment will be harsh enough. And nothing will replace the life that has been lost.
The funeral is tomorrow.
UPDATED:
◼ Former Blue Lake Police Chief David Gundersen has been cleared of all major charges first filed against him in 2008. - Arcata Eye MARCH 2012
****
◼ Former Blue Lake Police Chief David Gundersen has been cleared of all major charges first filed against him in 2008. - Arcata Eye MARCH 2012
****
Great letter in today's ER:
Plea bargains, deals kept street racer on roads
Dear Editor,
The tragic death of a 9-year-old girl on State Route 299 because of a drag race once again points out the deplorable judgment of our district attorney.
At the same time Paul Gallegos was prosecuting members of the Eureka Police Department (whose charges were dismissed), he was cutting deals and plea bargains with one of the drivers, who has 17 criminal cases on his record.
Yet this man was free to drive the streets and kill a child.
Susan Dodd
Eureka
h/t: The Mirror
***
Much as I tend to agree with the sentiment - valuable time and resources were spent going after good guys, Douglas and Zanotti, that could have been spent going after bad guys and Gallegos' record shows he doesn't know how to go after bad guys with the same zeal he goes after good guys; the list is long - starting with Martinez-Hernandez; giving the convicted murderers Kesser and Leahy plea deals, the horrific botch job on Gundersen, the unforgivable persecution of Sean Marsh - it is also true that Jason Bradley Whitmill was a parolee. He was sent to prison - a plea deal yes, but one that didn't make much difference in the amount of time he served.
There's alot to hold Gallegos accountable for - the point of this blog, actually. But to hold him accountable for this death? No.
For too many plea bargains? Yes. For prosecuting innocent people like Sean Marsh, and going easy on people like Kesser; for bizarre plea deals like we lower the charges or drop the charges if you pass a lie detector test, and then if you fail it we let you take it again... that kind of schizophrenic prosecution leaves every member of this community at risk. Yes. For that and much more.
One of Law Enforcement's primary beefs with Paul as DA is that bad guys are let out before they've even finished the paperwork on the case, and then they turn around and commit another offense. For that? Yes. Time and time again.
I believe there will be a case that can be laid at his feet. One that will make national attention. It's only a matter of time. But this one isn't it.
Whitmill will go back to prison, presumably, if Gallegos doesn't screw this one up. It won't be for long enough. No punishment will be harsh enough. And nothing will replace the life that has been lost.
The funeral is tomorrow.
UPDATED:
◼ Former Blue Lake Police Chief David Gundersen has been cleared of all major charges first filed against him in 2008. - Arcata Eye MARCH 2012
****
Saturday, September 27, 2008
His own words...
★ "...Top on Gallegos' list is the proliferation of "garbage cases," small-time crimes and overcharged cases that he said are clogging up the court system.
Garbage cases, said Gallegos, come in two forms: Cases that would lose if actually brought to trial and cases that are overcharged for the crimes committed. The idea behind filing both kinds of garbage, he said, is to get the defendant to plead guilty, netting a conviction without having to go into court.
"Probably 95 percent of the cases that are filed plead guilty. In fact, there are a lot of cases that are filed on the assumption they will plead guilty, because of the time and expense involved in defending them. But these cases shouldn't even be filed in the first place, because if they were challenged, they would lose," Gallegos said. Better yet: If they weren't filed at all, it would save the county time and money...." North Coast Journal 2/21/02
Too bad he didn't take his own advice.
Garbage cases, said Gallegos, come in two forms: Cases that would lose if actually brought to trial and cases that are overcharged for the crimes committed. The idea behind filing both kinds of garbage, he said, is to get the defendant to plead guilty, netting a conviction without having to go into court.
"Probably 95 percent of the cases that are filed plead guilty. In fact, there are a lot of cases that are filed on the assumption they will plead guilty, because of the time and expense involved in defending them. But these cases shouldn't even be filed in the first place, because if they were challenged, they would lose," Gallegos said. Better yet: If they weren't filed at all, it would save the county time and money...." North Coast Journal 2/21/02
Too bad he didn't take his own advice.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Times-Standard editorial - Paul Gallegos
☛ TS Gallegos' case management
Humboldt County and its District Attorney Paul Gallegos have been through a lot together. When Humboldt County voters decided to oust longtime incumbent Terry Farmer in favor of the young surfer DA, it was with an eye on cultivating some fresh blood and adding an infusion of vigor and energy in the District Attorney's Office.
It was hoped that Gallegos would bring a new perspective, and challenge that status quo.
Gallegos has done that -- he's challenged entrenched powers, and he's certainly shaken up things in Humboldt County.
The problem, though, is that nearly every major undertaking by Gallegos has ended in failure, and with each of those has come a colossal waste of time and resources, as well as an increasingly divided community.
Whereas it was initially hoped that Gallegos would bring the community together by progressively representing the bulk of the county's voters, instead he has sponsored division and rancor in nearly everything he's touched.
The case against Pacific Lumber Co., which led to a huge battle in the community that included a recall effort against Gallegos? Dismissed. The case against Fortuna Councilwoman Debi August? The same.
The case against former Chief Dave Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti? Dismissed.
In hindsight, we fear that with each of these cases, Gallegos has tried to live up to his own progressive legend at the expense of critical thinking.
At times, Gallegos tries to hang major cases on legal minutiae, or rarely cited bits of law, that leave other legal scholars scratching their heads. Given the preeminence of his position, and the fact that he's gambling with public chips, he needs to proceed much more carefully in his remaining time in office.
He has wasted resources, directing attention away from his office's main task -- criminal cases -- and woefully divided the community with very little if anything to show.
This newspaper endorsed Gallegos in his last election, a decision we stand by given his competition at the time. But our support, and that of the public, will be much harder to earn the next time around, given that Gallegos sometimes appears too interested in attracting headlines for filing major cases that he almost invariably loses.
If he doesn't change his stripes and fast, a loss at the polls for Gallegos may be the only victory he can secure for the rest of us.
SoHum Parlance - Times Standard tears into Gallegos
heraldo - T-S gives Gallegos too much credit
Humboldt County and its District Attorney Paul Gallegos have been through a lot together. When Humboldt County voters decided to oust longtime incumbent Terry Farmer in favor of the young surfer DA, it was with an eye on cultivating some fresh blood and adding an infusion of vigor and energy in the District Attorney's Office.
It was hoped that Gallegos would bring a new perspective, and challenge that status quo.
Gallegos has done that -- he's challenged entrenched powers, and he's certainly shaken up things in Humboldt County.
The problem, though, is that nearly every major undertaking by Gallegos has ended in failure, and with each of those has come a colossal waste of time and resources, as well as an increasingly divided community.
Whereas it was initially hoped that Gallegos would bring the community together by progressively representing the bulk of the county's voters, instead he has sponsored division and rancor in nearly everything he's touched.
The case against Pacific Lumber Co., which led to a huge battle in the community that included a recall effort against Gallegos? Dismissed. The case against Fortuna Councilwoman Debi August? The same.
The case against former Chief Dave Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti? Dismissed.
In hindsight, we fear that with each of these cases, Gallegos has tried to live up to his own progressive legend at the expense of critical thinking.
At times, Gallegos tries to hang major cases on legal minutiae, or rarely cited bits of law, that leave other legal scholars scratching their heads. Given the preeminence of his position, and the fact that he's gambling with public chips, he needs to proceed much more carefully in his remaining time in office.
He has wasted resources, directing attention away from his office's main task -- criminal cases -- and woefully divided the community with very little if anything to show.
This newspaper endorsed Gallegos in his last election, a decision we stand by given his competition at the time. But our support, and that of the public, will be much harder to earn the next time around, given that Gallegos sometimes appears too interested in attracting headlines for filing major cases that he almost invariably loses.
If he doesn't change his stripes and fast, a loss at the polls for Gallegos may be the only victory he can secure for the rest of us.
SoHum Parlance - Times Standard tears into Gallegos
heraldo - T-S gives Gallegos too much credit
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Far reaching effects
☛ TS Law enforcement responds to dismissal of Douglas-Zanotti case
It drew an outburst of applause in the courtroom. And it's a safe bet that police chiefs around the county, state and nation slept a little easier after Feeney's ruling.
”This case had a chilling effect throughout California,” said Fresno Chief of Police Jerry Dyer, who also serves as president of the California Police Chiefs Association. “I can tell you that there were a number of law enforcement administrators across the United States watching this case very closely, and I'm sure they too will be relieved with the judge's decision because these types of actions on the part of the district attorney can, number one, set a bad precedent, and, number two, become contagious.”...
...Legal and police experts have called the indictments unprecedented, as they targeted the incident's commanders and not the officers who fired the fatal shots.
”Number one, this is unheard of in law enforcement for a police chief and a lieutenant to be indicted for a decision they made at a SWAT call,” Dyer said. “It was so shocking that, initially, I didn't believe it. I figured there had to be more to the story for them to be indicted. But, there wasn't.”
Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said he knows Douglas and Zanotti and that it's been difficult to watch them endure the last nine months.
”I know these guys well enough where I know it's been devastating for them -- living in a small community and hearing comments; having your good reputation smeared before the public,” Mendosa said. “It's terrible. It's not fair and it's not just.”
Mendosa said he was also relieved for himself and for his profession.
”It could easily have been me in there,” Mendosa said. “Being criminally indicted for basically being in charge of a high-risk operation is not something that police chiefs have ever encountered before, anywhere that I can find.”
Many said they felt it was only a matter of time before they were tossed out of court.
”I don't think any of us believed from day one that there was sufficient evidence to criminally indict either former Chief Douglas or Lt. Zanotti for their actions,” Eureka Police Chief Garr Nielsen said. “Their actions never came close to rising to the level of gross negligence.”
Many law enforcement officials have also said they feared the indictments could have a lasting effect on commanders in tactical situations, pushing them to either protect the officers serving under them by taking decisions out of their hands or to protect themselves by leaving the decisions to those underneath them, thus protecting themselves from criminal liability.
The result, many have said, would be decisions being handed off to people who are not the most qualified to make them.
Dyer said he has a more basic fear.
”To second guess law enforcement leaders in a criminal court can cause paralysis of the leaders in the future because folks are going to be hesitant to make quick decisions even in instances that necessitate quick decisions,” he said. “When hesitation occurs in law enforcement, officers can get seriously hurt or killed, and that's why you need decisive leaders at SWAT calls.”
It drew an outburst of applause in the courtroom. And it's a safe bet that police chiefs around the county, state and nation slept a little easier after Feeney's ruling.
”This case had a chilling effect throughout California,” said Fresno Chief of Police Jerry Dyer, who also serves as president of the California Police Chiefs Association. “I can tell you that there were a number of law enforcement administrators across the United States watching this case very closely, and I'm sure they too will be relieved with the judge's decision because these types of actions on the part of the district attorney can, number one, set a bad precedent, and, number two, become contagious.”...
...Legal and police experts have called the indictments unprecedented, as they targeted the incident's commanders and not the officers who fired the fatal shots.
”Number one, this is unheard of in law enforcement for a police chief and a lieutenant to be indicted for a decision they made at a SWAT call,” Dyer said. “It was so shocking that, initially, I didn't believe it. I figured there had to be more to the story for them to be indicted. But, there wasn't.”
Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said he knows Douglas and Zanotti and that it's been difficult to watch them endure the last nine months.
”I know these guys well enough where I know it's been devastating for them -- living in a small community and hearing comments; having your good reputation smeared before the public,” Mendosa said. “It's terrible. It's not fair and it's not just.”
Mendosa said he was also relieved for himself and for his profession.
”It could easily have been me in there,” Mendosa said. “Being criminally indicted for basically being in charge of a high-risk operation is not something that police chiefs have ever encountered before, anywhere that I can find.”
Many said they felt it was only a matter of time before they were tossed out of court.
”I don't think any of us believed from day one that there was sufficient evidence to criminally indict either former Chief Douglas or Lt. Zanotti for their actions,” Eureka Police Chief Garr Nielsen said. “Their actions never came close to rising to the level of gross negligence.”
Many law enforcement officials have also said they feared the indictments could have a lasting effect on commanders in tactical situations, pushing them to either protect the officers serving under them by taking decisions out of their hands or to protect themselves by leaving the decisions to those underneath them, thus protecting themselves from criminal liability.
The result, many have said, would be decisions being handed off to people who are not the most qualified to make them.
Dyer said he has a more basic fear.
”To second guess law enforcement leaders in a criminal court can cause paralysis of the leaders in the future because folks are going to be hesitant to make quick decisions even in instances that necessitate quick decisions,” he said. “When hesitation occurs in law enforcement, officers can get seriously hurt or killed, and that's why you need decisive leaders at SWAT calls.”
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
More on the Judge's ruling
☛ TS Judge tosses Douglas, Zanotti manslaughter charges
Legal and police experts have called the indictments unprecedented, as they targeted the incident's commanders and none of the officers who fired the fatal shots.
The case has captured the attention of law enforcement agencies across the nation, many of which worried a conviction of Douglas and Zanotti could set a precedent that would send shock waves throughout the law enforcement community.
Feeney began Tuesday's hearing by saying he believed the grand jury indicted without sufficient probable cause to establish that the defendants had committed an illegal act or a lawful act in a criminally negligent manner.
Feeney said he found Gallegos' jury instructions on exigent circumstances -- or the presence of an imminent threat necessitating prompt action -- to be inadequate....
”I do find the indictments were not supported by probable cause,” he said. “The entry into Ms. Moore's apartment, even without a warrant, was lawful given her brandishing a flare gun at officers and her threats to burn down the building.”
Feeney went on to say he felt there was no evidence to show that Douglas or Zanotti acted in an aggravated or reckless manner, that Gallegos presented insufficient evidence to show the defendants failed to adequately supervise the SWAT and negotiations teams, and that he never advised the grand jury that Moore had committed a felony in brandishing the flare gun at officers.
After the hearing, defense attorneys said they were pleased with the ruling.
”I'm satisfied with the result because it's the correct result -- the legally correct result,” said William Rapoport, who was representing Zanotti in the matter. “(This case has) destroyed a huge part of these men's lives for the last nine months, and it's time they got some relief. ... They've had a cloud hanging over their heads for no good reason other than someone's political aspirations.”
Gallegos said he respects the court's ruling in this difficult case but disagrees with it.
While he has the option of re-filing the charges in a criminal complaint and bringing them to a preliminary hearing, Gallegos said he would have to “digest” the court's ruling before determining how to proceed.
If he feels the heart of the court's decision was based on the facts of the case and the law, Gallegos said he would likely let Feeney's decision be the end of it. But, if he feels Feeney's decision had more to do with his errors instructing the grand jury, Gallegos said he would feel obligated to proceed with a criminal complaint.
”I think my position has to be, whether I like it or not, that if the facts are there and the law is there, I have to proceed,” Gallegos said. “I owe it to the family.”
UH, Paul - the Judge just told you. The facts ARE NOT there. The LAW is NOT there.
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said....
Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos argued that exigent circumstances, which allow law enforcement to legally enter a building or residence without a warrant if people are in imminent danger or threatened, didn’t exist, as the apartment building wasn’t evacuated, law enforcement’s command center was in the same building and the gas to the structure wasn’t shut off.
If the court says, as a matter of law, exigent circumstances were present, that’s different than the officers believing the situation fit the definition, Gallegos said. And, if faulty instructions on exigent circumstances were given to the grand jury, Gallegos said he may file charges against Douglas and Zanotti.
While he respects the court’s decision, Gallegos said he disagreed and pointed to the grand jury transcripts, which included interviews with negotiators, mental health officials, the officers involved in the shooting and others.
Attorney William Bragg, who along with William Rapaport and Greg Rael, represented Douglas and Zanotti, said he expected the dismissal, adding the case shouldn’t have been one in the first place. He cited overwhelming case evidence on the defense’s side and said Feeney made the decision based on the law.
The defense attorneys filed motions starting in June seeking to have the case dismissed. The motions stated Gallegos misrepresented the law to the grand jury and didn’t provide evidence that would have helped justify the men’s decisions in the standoff.
Gallegos said there’s no set timeline on when and if he’ll file charges against Douglas and Zanotti, as he used a group process to make such big decisions and would speak to other district attorneys. “There’s no reason to be hasty,” he said.
One can only imagine the last minute email that went out on this one!
Legal and police experts have called the indictments unprecedented, as they targeted the incident's commanders and none of the officers who fired the fatal shots.
The case has captured the attention of law enforcement agencies across the nation, many of which worried a conviction of Douglas and Zanotti could set a precedent that would send shock waves throughout the law enforcement community.
Feeney began Tuesday's hearing by saying he believed the grand jury indicted without sufficient probable cause to establish that the defendants had committed an illegal act or a lawful act in a criminally negligent manner.
Feeney said he found Gallegos' jury instructions on exigent circumstances -- or the presence of an imminent threat necessitating prompt action -- to be inadequate....
”I do find the indictments were not supported by probable cause,” he said. “The entry into Ms. Moore's apartment, even without a warrant, was lawful given her brandishing a flare gun at officers and her threats to burn down the building.”
Feeney went on to say he felt there was no evidence to show that Douglas or Zanotti acted in an aggravated or reckless manner, that Gallegos presented insufficient evidence to show the defendants failed to adequately supervise the SWAT and negotiations teams, and that he never advised the grand jury that Moore had committed a felony in brandishing the flare gun at officers.
After the hearing, defense attorneys said they were pleased with the ruling.
”I'm satisfied with the result because it's the correct result -- the legally correct result,” said William Rapoport, who was representing Zanotti in the matter. “(This case has) destroyed a huge part of these men's lives for the last nine months, and it's time they got some relief. ... They've had a cloud hanging over their heads for no good reason other than someone's political aspirations.”
Gallegos said he respects the court's ruling in this difficult case but disagrees with it.
While he has the option of re-filing the charges in a criminal complaint and bringing them to a preliminary hearing, Gallegos said he would have to “digest” the court's ruling before determining how to proceed.
If he feels the heart of the court's decision was based on the facts of the case and the law, Gallegos said he would likely let Feeney's decision be the end of it. But, if he feels Feeney's decision had more to do with his errors instructing the grand jury, Gallegos said he would feel obligated to proceed with a criminal complaint.
”I think my position has to be, whether I like it or not, that if the facts are there and the law is there, I have to proceed,” Gallegos said. “I owe it to the family.”
UH, Paul - the Judge just told you. The facts ARE NOT there. The LAW is NOT there.
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said....
Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos argued that exigent circumstances, which allow law enforcement to legally enter a building or residence without a warrant if people are in imminent danger or threatened, didn’t exist, as the apartment building wasn’t evacuated, law enforcement’s command center was in the same building and the gas to the structure wasn’t shut off.
If the court says, as a matter of law, exigent circumstances were present, that’s different than the officers believing the situation fit the definition, Gallegos said. And, if faulty instructions on exigent circumstances were given to the grand jury, Gallegos said he may file charges against Douglas and Zanotti.
While he respects the court’s decision, Gallegos said he disagreed and pointed to the grand jury transcripts, which included interviews with negotiators, mental health officials, the officers involved in the shooting and others.
Attorney William Bragg, who along with William Rapaport and Greg Rael, represented Douglas and Zanotti, said he expected the dismissal, adding the case shouldn’t have been one in the first place. He cited overwhelming case evidence on the defense’s side and said Feeney made the decision based on the law.
The defense attorneys filed motions starting in June seeking to have the case dismissed. The motions stated Gallegos misrepresented the law to the grand jury and didn’t provide evidence that would have helped justify the men’s decisions in the standoff.
Gallegos said there’s no set timeline on when and if he’ll file charges against Douglas and Zanotti, as he used a group process to make such big decisions and would speak to other district attorneys. “There’s no reason to be hasty,” he said.
One can only imagine the last minute email that went out on this one!
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Day 875 - Douglas-Zanotti case TOSSED by judge
DOWN ON EVERY COUNT.
He misrepresented the law.
He didn't provide exculpatory evidence.
The entry was legal.
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti case tossed by judge BREAKING NEWS!
Humboldt County Superior Court Judge John Feeney dismissed the criminal case against Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti this afternoon.
At a hearing on the motion to dismiss the involuntary manslaughter charges that stem from a grand jury inquiry into the 2006 death of Cheri Lyn Moore during a SWAT operation, Feeney ruled for the defense.
The defense argued that District Attorney Paul Gallegos misrepresented the law and didn't provide evidence of the commanding officers' innocence to the grand jury.
The criminal charges have been called unprecedented, in that they focused on the officers in charge of the SWAT operation. No charges were filed against the officers that stormed Moore's apartment and shot her after a standoff in which she brandished a flare gun and threatened to burn down the building.
☛ ER Douglas/Zanotti case dismissed
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.
The entire courtroom applauded.
JUSTICE IS SERVED.
While he respects the court’s decision, Gallegos said he disagreed ... Gallegos said there’s no set timeline on when and if he’ll file charges against Douglas and Zanotti, as he used a group process to make such big decisions and would speak to other district attorneys. “There’s no reason to be hasty,” he said.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Friday, August 22, 2008
DA (Paul Gallegos) misrepresented the law
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Gonna be a busy week - five days into the Gunderseen trial, Gallegos took off, that trial resumes Monday the 25th. And the oral arguments in the Douglas and Zanotti trial come the next day.
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti defense: DA misrepresented the law - The district attorney misrepresented the law and failed to provide evidence of former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas' and Lt. Tony Zanotti's innocence during a criminal grand jury inquiry into the 2006 shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore, defense attorneys argued in court documents filed Thursday.
The commanding officers were indicted on involuntary manslaughter charges in December, which the defense is asking a Humboldt County Superior Court judge to dismiss.
”Our judicial system stands as a real and necessary check on the grand jury indictment process,” one of the documents states. “This court has the authority and the means by which to halt this prosecution, which is justified neither by the undisputed facts, nor by the law.”
Superior Court Judge John Feeney is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the motions Aug. 26.
If Feeney denies the motion to dismiss, the defense has the opportunity to appeal that decision to another court.
Similarly, if Feeney dismisses the charges facing Douglas and Zanotti, District Attorney Paul Gallegos has said he would have the opportunity to refile the charges and allow a judge to determine if there is enough evidence for a trial.
The defense filed two separate motions for dismissal June 18, arguing Gallegos improperly represented the law to the criminal grand jury that handed up the indictments and that he failed to present the jury with evidence that would have backed up Douglas' and Zanotti's decisions that day.
”In this case, the proceeding resulted in a travesty of justice -- a due process violation -- that must be corrected by this court,” one motion states.
Gallegos countered in court papers that he fulfilled his duty to provide the grand jury with evidence that could have shown Douglas' and Zanotti's innocence. He claimed the defenses' legal citations don't apply, and that there was no immediate danger to justify the commanders ordering a warrantless entry into Moore's home.
”It was reasonable to conclude that, after reviewing the evidence, the grand jury determined that there was insufficient exigency to justify a warrantless arrest,” Gallegos wrote. “A review of the evidence presented to them will show that such a conclusion was supported by the evidence and was not an unreasonable conclusion for them to arrive at.”... ☛ TS ...read the rest
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Gonna be a busy week - five days into the Gunderseen trial, Gallegos took off, that trial resumes Monday the 25th. And the oral arguments in the Douglas and Zanotti trial come the next day.
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti defense: DA misrepresented the law - The district attorney misrepresented the law and failed to provide evidence of former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas' and Lt. Tony Zanotti's innocence during a criminal grand jury inquiry into the 2006 shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore, defense attorneys argued in court documents filed Thursday.
The commanding officers were indicted on involuntary manslaughter charges in December, which the defense is asking a Humboldt County Superior Court judge to dismiss.
”Our judicial system stands as a real and necessary check on the grand jury indictment process,” one of the documents states. “This court has the authority and the means by which to halt this prosecution, which is justified neither by the undisputed facts, nor by the law.”
Superior Court Judge John Feeney is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the motions Aug. 26.
If Feeney denies the motion to dismiss, the defense has the opportunity to appeal that decision to another court.
Similarly, if Feeney dismisses the charges facing Douglas and Zanotti, District Attorney Paul Gallegos has said he would have the opportunity to refile the charges and allow a judge to determine if there is enough evidence for a trial.
The defense filed two separate motions for dismissal June 18, arguing Gallegos improperly represented the law to the criminal grand jury that handed up the indictments and that he failed to present the jury with evidence that would have backed up Douglas' and Zanotti's decisions that day.
”In this case, the proceeding resulted in a travesty of justice -- a due process violation -- that must be corrected by this court,” one motion states.
Gallegos countered in court papers that he fulfilled his duty to provide the grand jury with evidence that could have shown Douglas' and Zanotti's innocence. He claimed the defenses' legal citations don't apply, and that there was no immediate danger to justify the commanders ordering a warrantless entry into Moore's home.
”It was reasonable to conclude that, after reviewing the evidence, the grand jury determined that there was insufficient exigency to justify a warrantless arrest,” Gallegos wrote. “A review of the evidence presented to them will show that such a conclusion was supported by the evidence and was not an unreasonable conclusion for them to arrive at.”... ☛ TS ...read the rest
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
Friday, August 01, 2008
DA opposes motions to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
☛ TS DA opposes motions to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges
District Attorney Paul Gallegos argued evidence was properly presented to a grand jury in his response to defense motions seeking the dismissal of the involuntary manslaughter case against former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti, stemming from the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore.
Superior Court Judge Timothy Cissna is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the motions for dismissal Aug. 26, at which point he can take the matter under submission or rule from the bench.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
☛ TS DA opposes motions to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges
District Attorney Paul Gallegos argued evidence was properly presented to a grand jury in his response to defense motions seeking the dismissal of the involuntary manslaughter case against former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti, stemming from the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore.
Superior Court Judge Timothy Cissna is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the motions for dismissal Aug. 26, at which point he can take the matter under submission or rule from the bench.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Links to CHERI MOORE - DOUGLAS & ZANOTTI Coverage
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
It's not like every detail of this case hasn't received intense scrutiny. Even Cheri Moore's diaries made the papers. The experts and witnesses testified during a Coroner's Inquest...
☛ April 27, 2006 SCENES FROM A SHOOTING - friends, bystanders, activists, police and the death of Cheri Moore
☛ September 21. 2006 CAUSE OF DEATH - Questions answered and questions raised in the Cheri Lynn Moore inquest
IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH
☛ ER Music, shots, then silence 4/15/2006
☛ ER Investigation launched into police involved shooting 4/15/2006
☛ ER Police respond to fatal shooting of Eureka woman 4/16/2006
☛ TS Eureka shooting tragedy runs deep 04/16/2006
☛ ER In aftermath of shooting, many questions remain 4/17/2006
☛ TS Questions swirl around standoff shooting 04/18/2006
☛ TS Haunted by the past 04/19/2006
☛ ER Group gathers to remember Cheri Moore 4/19/2006
☛ TS Police remain tight-lipped on shooting 04/20/2006
☛ TS Lethal Weapon - Was it “just a flare gun”? 04/21/2006
☛ ER Dispatch logs of fatal shooting made public 4/21/2006
☛ ER Reserve judgment on shooting; question about timing lingers 4/23/2006
☛ TS 'Force options' 04/24/2006
☛ TS Shooting damage 'profound' 04/25/2006
☛ TS City won't hand over 911 tapes 04/26/2006
☛ TS 'Parallel' options 04/28/2006
☛ ER Preliminary results indicate officers followed protocol4/28/2006
☛ TS Shooting: ”Legal and lawful” 04/28/2006
☛ ER Meeting about police review coalition turns to discussions of April 14 shooting 4/28/2006
☛ ER Cheri Moore's son speaks out 4/28/2006
☛ ER Idea of Police Review Coalition discussed with City Council subcommittee 4/29/2006
☛ ER Moore shooting headed for Grand Jury? 5/25/2006
☛ ER Civil rights suit filed in standoff death 6/14/2007
THE INQUEST
☛ ER Police chief said he stands by his officers' actions in shooting 7/21/2006
☛ ER Coroner's inquest into police-involved shooting rescheduled 7/24/2006
☛ ER MOORE INQUEST MAY BE TELEVISED 8/30/2006
☛ ER Inquest should include still photos 8/30/2006
☛ ER Coroner's inquest into death of Cheri Moore will start today 9/12/2006
☛ ERWITNESSES TESTIFY AT INQUEST 9/12/2006
☛ TS Inquest testimony begins today - 11 jurors sworn in for rare court proceeding 09/12/2006
☛ TS Neighbors, friends and SWAT commander testify during inquest's second half 09/12/2006
☛ TS The last inquest - Moore shooting circumstances far more complicated 09/12/2006
☛ TS Witnesses begin testifying in Moore case 09/12/2006
☛ TS Witnesses from the First Day of the Moore Inquest 09/12/2006
☛ TS 'I was scared' - Officers who fired fatal shots testify 09/13/2006
☛ TS Incident commander testifies at coroner's inquest 09/13/2006
☛ TS Witnesses from the Third Day of the Moore Inquest 09/14/2006
☛ ER NINE MORE TAKE THE STAND 9/14/2006
☛ TS Officer, chief take stand in Moore inquest 09/14/2006
☛ ER Final nine testify at coroner's inquest 9/15/2006
☛ TS Jury makes three recommendations after inquest 09/15/2006
And then the tortuous delay fraught with threats - Rumors, Leaks, and the path leading to a Grand Jury Indictment:
☛ ER A grim anniversary passes without resolution 4/13/2007
☛ ER Closure necessary in Cheri Moore shooting 4/13/2007
☛ ER Civil rights suit filed in standoff death 6/14/2007
☛ TS Gallegos: Retrial will 'likely' delay Moore decision 07/13/2007
☛ TS Countdown to a decision 07/23/2007
☛ ER Moore case headed to grand jury? 9/11/2007
☛ ER DA considers grand jury investigation of Cheri Moore's death 10/12/2007
THE INDICTMENTS
☛ TS Police Chief hopes grand jury proceedings are made public 11/08/2007
☛ TS Grand Jury will indict two police commanders, says source (with archived video) 12/05/2007
☛ TS Untested waters: Case against police commanders likely to hinge on 'criminal negligence,' expert says 12/06/2007
☛ TS What is a criminal grand jury?12/06/2007
☛ TS Who owns the 'facts'? 12/11/2007
☛ TS EPD, other law enforcement turn out to support Zanotti, Douglas 12/11/2007
☛ TS Arraignment in Moore case postponed (with video) Dozens show up to support former chief, lieutenant 12/11/2007
☛ TS Moore Case Facts 12/11/2007
☛ TS Gallegos to handle police prosecution 12/13/2007
link
☛ TS Dikeman vs. Gallegos, Round 3? 12/16/2007
☛ TS City could face hefty bill for Douglas' defense 12/18/2007
☛ ER City to assist with costs of former police chief's defense 12/18/2007
☛ TS Ex-chief garners $75K for his defense 12/21/2007
☛ TS State police chiefs association president responds to indictments 12/24/07
☛ TS Gallegos offered immunity for shooters' testimony in Moore case 02/02/2008
☛ ER Grand Jury papers to be unsealed in Moore case 2/20/08
☛ TS 'Right to know': Not just words 2/21/08
THE ARRAIGNMENT
☛ TS Douglas, Zanotti set to be arraigned today in Moore shooting 2/21/08
☛ TS Cheri Lyn Moore case: What the grand jury heard 2/21/08
☛ TS Commanders' arraignment in Moore case continued 2/21/08
☛ ER Arraignment continued second time, charges exposed 2/22/08
☛ TS Judge continues Douglas-Zanotti arraignment 2/22/08
☛ TS Police commanders' defense to file motion for dismissal 2/24/08
☛ ER ‘Fatal funnel’ for law enforcement in Cheri Lyn Moore stand off 2/27/08
☛ ER No charges for Douglas and Zanotti 4/2/08
☛ TS Officers' arraignment postponed once again 4/2/08
☛ TS Douglas, Zanotti enter not guilty pleas update in TS, more tomorrow 4/22/08
☛ TS Commanding officers plead not guilty 4/23/08
☛ ER Officers plead not guilty in Moore death 4/23/08
☛ TS California police lend Douglas a hand 5/8/08
MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
☛ TS Attorneys asks for Douglas-Zanotti case dismissal 6/20/08
☛ TS Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward 7/11/08
☛ TS Douglas appeals denial of defense coverage 7/18/08
☛ ER Hearing to dismiss case against former EPD leaders scheduled next month 7/18/08
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti defense: DA misrepresented the law 8/22/08 Oral arguments scheduled to begin Aug. 26.
Day 875 - CASE TOSSED!
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti case tossed by judge BREAKING NEWS!
☛ ER Douglas/Zanotti case dismissed
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
☛ TS Judge tosses Douglas, Zanotti manslaughter charges
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
☛ TS Law enforcement responds to dismissal of Douglas-Zanotti case
It drew an outburst of applause in the courtroom. And it's a safe bet that police chiefs around the county, state and nation slept a little easier after Feeney's ruling....
Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said he knows Douglas and Zanotti and that it's been difficult to watch them endure the last nine months.
”I know these guys well enough where I know it's been devastating for them -- living in a small community and hearing comments; having your good reputation smeared before the public,” Mendosa said. “It's terrible. It's not fair and it's not just.”
Mendosa said he was also relieved for himself and for his profession.
”It could easily have been me in there,” Mendosa said. “Being criminally indicted for basically being in charge of a high-risk operation is not something that police chiefs have ever encountered before, anywhere that I can find.”...
LETTERS
ER Ltr Everyone needs to be treated with compassion, respect 4/19/2006
ER Ltr Don't rush to judgment in police shooting 4/19/2006
ER Ltr Humboldt County's dedicated officers deserve better 4/20/2006
ER Ltr Joseph Humble should not have passed judgment 4/20/2006
ER Ltr Writer ashamed of police action in Friday shooting 4/21/2006
ER Ltr Patience, kindness would have worked in police shooting 4/21/2006
ER Ltr Was there quick justice in shooting of Eureka resident? 4/26/2006
ER Ltr Accounting of Cheri Moore killing necessary 5/13/2006
ER Ltr Why we're blessed to have Paul Gallegos
ER Ltr Where's the outrage over this death? 5/31/2006
TS Anti-establishment publicity stunt 12/18/2007
TS Sour grapes on district attorney 12/22/2007
ER Ltr Police officers put their lives on the line for public's safety 12/20/2007
TS Blue lights can show support 12/21/2007
ER Ltr What does the DA expect to gain from police indictments? 12/27/2007
ER Ltr “Dear Chief Garr Nielsen and the EPD,
Note: The Times Standard's Letters to the Editor were not available online until recently. Those letters as well as other coverage in The Arcata Eye and The McKinleyville Press, and The Independent could be accessed through traditional channels in the Library.
The Eureka Reporter's new website meant a major transfer of all articles to new urls. All links should now be updated. If you find one that isn't working please email watchpaul.blogspot@gmail.com, and/or check watchpaulARTICLES. If you have anything you'd like included (like letters to the editor that are not online,) please send via email (link in sidebar).
***
To contribute to city's defense fund for David Douglas: Send checks made out to the City of Eureka, with David Douglas written in the “for” line, to City Hall, 531 K St., Eureka, CA 95502. Councilman Larry Glass said the checks would only be cashed if needed.
Originally posted 12/17/07
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
If I am missing any links - please email them to me - I'll be happy to add them.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
It's not like every detail of this case hasn't received intense scrutiny. Even Cheri Moore's diaries made the papers. The experts and witnesses testified during a Coroner's Inquest...
☛ April 27, 2006 SCENES FROM A SHOOTING - friends, bystanders, activists, police and the death of Cheri Moore
☛ September 21. 2006 CAUSE OF DEATH - Questions answered and questions raised in the Cheri Lynn Moore inquest
IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH
☛ ER Music, shots, then silence 4/15/2006
☛ ER Investigation launched into police involved shooting 4/15/2006
☛ ER Police respond to fatal shooting of Eureka woman 4/16/2006
☛ TS Eureka shooting tragedy runs deep 04/16/2006
☛ ER In aftermath of shooting, many questions remain 4/17/2006
☛ TS Questions swirl around standoff shooting 04/18/2006
☛ TS Haunted by the past 04/19/2006
☛ ER Group gathers to remember Cheri Moore 4/19/2006
☛ TS Police remain tight-lipped on shooting 04/20/2006
☛ TS Lethal Weapon - Was it “just a flare gun”? 04/21/2006
☛ ER Dispatch logs of fatal shooting made public 4/21/2006
☛ ER Reserve judgment on shooting; question about timing lingers 4/23/2006
☛ TS 'Force options' 04/24/2006
☛ TS Shooting damage 'profound' 04/25/2006
☛ TS City won't hand over 911 tapes 04/26/2006
☛ TS 'Parallel' options 04/28/2006
☛ ER Preliminary results indicate officers followed protocol4/28/2006
☛ TS Shooting: ”Legal and lawful” 04/28/2006
☛ ER Meeting about police review coalition turns to discussions of April 14 shooting 4/28/2006
☛ ER Cheri Moore's son speaks out 4/28/2006
☛ ER Idea of Police Review Coalition discussed with City Council subcommittee 4/29/2006
☛ ER Moore shooting headed for Grand Jury? 5/25/2006
☛ ER Civil rights suit filed in standoff death 6/14/2007
THE INQUEST
☛ ER Police chief said he stands by his officers' actions in shooting 7/21/2006
☛ ER Coroner's inquest into police-involved shooting rescheduled 7/24/2006
☛ ER MOORE INQUEST MAY BE TELEVISED 8/30/2006
☛ ER Inquest should include still photos 8/30/2006
☛ ER Coroner's inquest into death of Cheri Moore will start today 9/12/2006
☛ ERWITNESSES TESTIFY AT INQUEST 9/12/2006
☛ TS Inquest testimony begins today - 11 jurors sworn in for rare court proceeding 09/12/2006
☛ TS Neighbors, friends and SWAT commander testify during inquest's second half 09/12/2006
☛ TS The last inquest - Moore shooting circumstances far more complicated 09/12/2006
☛ TS Witnesses begin testifying in Moore case 09/12/2006
☛ TS Witnesses from the First Day of the Moore Inquest 09/12/2006
☛ TS 'I was scared' - Officers who fired fatal shots testify 09/13/2006
☛ TS Incident commander testifies at coroner's inquest 09/13/2006
☛ TS Witnesses from the Third Day of the Moore Inquest 09/14/2006
☛ ER NINE MORE TAKE THE STAND 9/14/2006
☛ TS Officer, chief take stand in Moore inquest 09/14/2006
☛ ER Final nine testify at coroner's inquest 9/15/2006
☛ TS Jury makes three recommendations after inquest 09/15/2006
And then the tortuous delay fraught with threats - Rumors, Leaks, and the path leading to a Grand Jury Indictment:
☛ ER A grim anniversary passes without resolution 4/13/2007
☛ ER Closure necessary in Cheri Moore shooting 4/13/2007
☛ ER Civil rights suit filed in standoff death 6/14/2007
☛ TS Gallegos: Retrial will 'likely' delay Moore decision 07/13/2007
☛ TS Countdown to a decision 07/23/2007
☛ ER Moore case headed to grand jury? 9/11/2007
☛ ER DA considers grand jury investigation of Cheri Moore's death 10/12/2007
THE INDICTMENTS
☛ TS Police Chief hopes grand jury proceedings are made public 11/08/2007
☛ TS Grand Jury will indict two police commanders, says source (with archived video) 12/05/2007
☛ TS Untested waters: Case against police commanders likely to hinge on 'criminal negligence,' expert says 12/06/2007
☛ TS What is a criminal grand jury?12/06/2007
☛ TS Who owns the 'facts'? 12/11/2007
☛ TS EPD, other law enforcement turn out to support Zanotti, Douglas 12/11/2007
☛ TS Arraignment in Moore case postponed (with video) Dozens show up to support former chief, lieutenant 12/11/2007
☛ TS Moore Case Facts 12/11/2007
☛ TS Gallegos to handle police prosecution 12/13/2007
link
☛ TS Dikeman vs. Gallegos, Round 3? 12/16/2007
☛ TS City could face hefty bill for Douglas' defense 12/18/2007
☛ ER City to assist with costs of former police chief's defense 12/18/2007
☛ TS Ex-chief garners $75K for his defense 12/21/2007
☛ TS State police chiefs association president responds to indictments 12/24/07
☛ TS Gallegos offered immunity for shooters' testimony in Moore case 02/02/2008
District Attorney Paul Gallegos gave SWAT team members and negotiators “transactional immunity” in order to illicit (sp:elicit) their testimony in the grand jury proceedings that ultimately lead to the indictment of their commanding officers, sources said this week.
☛ ER Grand Jury papers to be unsealed in Moore case 2/20/08
☛ TS 'Right to know': Not just words 2/21/08
THE ARRAIGNMENT
☛ TS Douglas, Zanotti set to be arraigned today in Moore shooting 2/21/08
☛ TS Cheri Lyn Moore case: What the grand jury heard 2/21/08
☛ TS Commanders' arraignment in Moore case continued 2/21/08
☛ ER Arraignment continued second time, charges exposed 2/22/08
☛ TS Judge continues Douglas-Zanotti arraignment 2/22/08
☛ TS Police commanders' defense to file motion for dismissal 2/24/08
☛ ER ‘Fatal funnel’ for law enforcement in Cheri Lyn Moore stand off 2/27/08
☛ ER No charges for Douglas and Zanotti 4/2/08
☛ TS Officers' arraignment postponed once again 4/2/08
In asking for the continuance, Zanotti's attorney, William Rapoport, said the defense has received 15 of the 151 grand jury exhibits....”I have been continuously trying to get from (District Attorney Paul) Gallegos the discovery, which includes but is not limited to the exhibits from the grand jury,” Rapoport told the court, adding that the exhibits were necessary for the defense to prepare its post-arraignment motions.
☛ TS Douglas, Zanotti enter not guilty pleas update in TS, more tomorrow 4/22/08
Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti pleaded not guilty this afternoon in Superior Court to charges of involuntary manslaughter.
☛ TS Commanding officers plead not guilty 4/23/08
☛ ER Officers plead not guilty in Moore death 4/23/08
☛ TS California police lend Douglas a hand 5/8/08
MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
☛ TS Attorneys asks for Douglas-Zanotti case dismissal 6/20/08
☛ TS Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward 7/11/08
☛ TS Douglas appeals denial of defense coverage 7/18/08
☛ ER Hearing to dismiss case against former EPD leaders scheduled next month 7/18/08
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti defense: DA misrepresented the law 8/22/08 Oral arguments scheduled to begin Aug. 26.
Day 875 - CASE TOSSED!
☛ TS Douglas-Zanotti case tossed by judge BREAKING NEWS!
☛ ER Douglas/Zanotti case dismissed
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
☛ TS Judge tosses Douglas, Zanotti manslaughter charges
☛ ER Judge throws out involuntary manslaughter case
☛ TS Law enforcement responds to dismissal of Douglas-Zanotti case
It drew an outburst of applause in the courtroom. And it's a safe bet that police chiefs around the county, state and nation slept a little easier after Feeney's ruling....
Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said he knows Douglas and Zanotti and that it's been difficult to watch them endure the last nine months.
”I know these guys well enough where I know it's been devastating for them -- living in a small community and hearing comments; having your good reputation smeared before the public,” Mendosa said. “It's terrible. It's not fair and it's not just.”
Mendosa said he was also relieved for himself and for his profession.
”It could easily have been me in there,” Mendosa said. “Being criminally indicted for basically being in charge of a high-risk operation is not something that police chiefs have ever encountered before, anywhere that I can find.”...
LETTERS
ER Ltr Everyone needs to be treated with compassion, respect 4/19/2006
ER Ltr Don't rush to judgment in police shooting 4/19/2006
ER Ltr Humboldt County's dedicated officers deserve better 4/20/2006
ER Ltr Joseph Humble should not have passed judgment 4/20/2006
ER Ltr Writer ashamed of police action in Friday shooting 4/21/2006
ER Ltr Patience, kindness would have worked in police shooting 4/21/2006
ER Ltr Was there quick justice in shooting of Eureka resident? 4/26/2006
ER Ltr Accounting of Cheri Moore killing necessary 5/13/2006
ER Ltr Why we're blessed to have Paul Gallegos
ER Ltr Where's the outrage over this death? 5/31/2006
TS Anti-establishment publicity stunt 12/18/2007
TS Sour grapes on district attorney 12/22/2007
ER Ltr Police officers put their lives on the line for public's safety 12/20/2007
TS Blue lights can show support 12/21/2007
ER Ltr What does the DA expect to gain from police indictments? 12/27/2007
ER Ltr “Dear Chief Garr Nielsen and the EPD,
Note: The Times Standard's Letters to the Editor were not available online until recently. Those letters as well as other coverage in The Arcata Eye and The McKinleyville Press, and The Independent could be accessed through traditional channels in the Library.
The Eureka Reporter's new website meant a major transfer of all articles to new urls. All links should now be updated. If you find one that isn't working please email watchpaul.blogspot@gmail.com, and/or check watchpaulARTICLES. If you have anything you'd like included (like letters to the editor that are not online,) please send via email (link in sidebar).
***
To contribute to city's defense fund for David Douglas: Send checks made out to the City of Eureka, with David Douglas written in the “for” line, to City Hall, 531 K St., Eureka, CA 95502. Councilman Larry Glass said the checks would only be cashed if needed.
Originally posted 12/17/07
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
If I am missing any links - please email them to me - I'll be happy to add them.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Timeline change? Now July 31 Gallegos, August 21 defense
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
ER Hearing to dismiss case against former EPD leaders scheduled next month
A hearing on a motion to dismiss the involuntary manslaughter case against two former Eureka Police Department leaders is scheduled for next month.
The Aug. 26 hearing could last between an hour and 1 1/2 hours. Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos (now) has until July 31 to file his opposing argument to the defense team’s motion. The defense team then has until Aug. 21 to reply to Gallegos’ opposition.
***
Previously reported that Gallegos and the defense agreed to a timeline for the motions to be heard. They set a July 21 deadline for Gallegos to submit an opposition to the defense motion and a July 31 deadline for the defense to respond. TS Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
ER Hearing to dismiss case against former EPD leaders scheduled next month
A hearing on a motion to dismiss the involuntary manslaughter case against two former Eureka Police Department leaders is scheduled for next month.
The Aug. 26 hearing could last between an hour and 1 1/2 hours. Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos (now) has until July 31 to file his opposing argument to the defense team’s motion. The defense team then has until Aug. 21 to reply to Gallegos’ opposition.
***
Previously reported that Gallegos and the defense agreed to a timeline for the motions to be heard. They set a July 21 deadline for Gallegos to submit an opposition to the defense motion and a July 31 deadline for the defense to respond. TS Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward
Chief Douglas appealing insurance carrier's decision
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Douglas appeals denial of defense coverage
Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas will argue his case today appealing an insurance carrier's decision to deny him legal defense coverage against the involuntary manslaughter charges he faces stemming from the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore -- a decision that has cost the city of Eureka $75,000 and counting...
...The Peace Officers Research Association of California Legal Defense Fund (PORAC LDF), which had covered Douglas throughout his entire career, denied the former chief's request for defense coverage against the charges back in April, saying Douglas' membership was terminated April 13, 2006 -- the day before the shooting.
In an April 3, 2008, letter, PORAC LDF informed Douglas it was denying him coverage, saying that when he resumed his position as police chief in January 2006 he did so on a contract basis and was no longer a full-time employee. Because of that status, the letter states Douglas' member organization, the Eureka Police Officers Association (EPOA), terminated his coverage.
In a May 28, 2008, letter appealing PORAC LDF's decision, Douglas, his attorney Bill Bragg and City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner argue that Douglas was in fact a full-time employee throughout his tenure as police chief. The only difference when Douglas returned to the position in 2006, they contend, was that he was no longer a salaried employee, but was working full time on an hourly basis.
Further, they argue the city of Eureka has not received or found any documentation verifying that EPOA canceled Douglas' membership. Schaffner also said that at no point did PORAC LDF contact Douglas, the city or the police department to notify them of the cancellation.
”If indeed someone from the chief's association did call in a termination of the chief's membership, that call was erroneous and unauthorized,” the letter states. “Chief Douglas was an eligible, dues-paying member of (PORAC LDF) at the time of the incident in question. Any actions that may have been taken by his association contrary to that eligibility were not the chief's action, were in error, and should be disregarded or corrected.”
Today, Douglas and Schaffner will appear before the PORAC LDF Board of Trustees to argue their appeal, the outcome of which could have major ramifications to Eureka.
Because Douglas was denied coverage, the Eureka City Council voted to pony up $75,000 for the former chief's legal defense, with several councilmembers saying they felt obligated to provide the former chief with a legal defense. That money has been spent, Schaffner said, and the case hasn't even approached trial yet.
The city also set up a defense fund for Douglas, which as of July 14 had fielded more than $26,000 in donations that mostly came from law enforcement agencies and advocacy groups throughout the state. But, the combined total of $100,000 is expected to be just a drop in the bucket, as some have estimated it could cost in the neighborhood of $1 million to defend Douglas if the case goes to trial. And, with a cash-strapped general fund, it's unclear how far Eureka can go in funding Douglas' defense.
Schaffner said Thursday she is cautiously optimistic about Douglas' appeal.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Douglas appeals denial of defense coverage
Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas will argue his case today appealing an insurance carrier's decision to deny him legal defense coverage against the involuntary manslaughter charges he faces stemming from the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore -- a decision that has cost the city of Eureka $75,000 and counting...
...The Peace Officers Research Association of California Legal Defense Fund (PORAC LDF), which had covered Douglas throughout his entire career, denied the former chief's request for defense coverage against the charges back in April, saying Douglas' membership was terminated April 13, 2006 -- the day before the shooting.
In an April 3, 2008, letter, PORAC LDF informed Douglas it was denying him coverage, saying that when he resumed his position as police chief in January 2006 he did so on a contract basis and was no longer a full-time employee. Because of that status, the letter states Douglas' member organization, the Eureka Police Officers Association (EPOA), terminated his coverage.
In a May 28, 2008, letter appealing PORAC LDF's decision, Douglas, his attorney Bill Bragg and City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner argue that Douglas was in fact a full-time employee throughout his tenure as police chief. The only difference when Douglas returned to the position in 2006, they contend, was that he was no longer a salaried employee, but was working full time on an hourly basis.
Further, they argue the city of Eureka has not received or found any documentation verifying that EPOA canceled Douglas' membership. Schaffner also said that at no point did PORAC LDF contact Douglas, the city or the police department to notify them of the cancellation.
”If indeed someone from the chief's association did call in a termination of the chief's membership, that call was erroneous and unauthorized,” the letter states. “Chief Douglas was an eligible, dues-paying member of (PORAC LDF) at the time of the incident in question. Any actions that may have been taken by his association contrary to that eligibility were not the chief's action, were in error, and should be disregarded or corrected.”
Today, Douglas and Schaffner will appear before the PORAC LDF Board of Trustees to argue their appeal, the outcome of which could have major ramifications to Eureka.
Because Douglas was denied coverage, the Eureka City Council voted to pony up $75,000 for the former chief's legal defense, with several councilmembers saying they felt obligated to provide the former chief with a legal defense. That money has been spent, Schaffner said, and the case hasn't even approached trial yet.
The city also set up a defense fund for Douglas, which as of July 14 had fielded more than $26,000 in donations that mostly came from law enforcement agencies and advocacy groups throughout the state. But, the combined total of $100,000 is expected to be just a drop in the bucket, as some have estimated it could cost in the neighborhood of $1 million to defend Douglas if the case goes to trial. And, with a cash-strapped general fund, it's unclear how far Eureka can go in funding Douglas' defense.
Schaffner said Thursday she is cautiously optimistic about Douglas' appeal.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
California Bar Journal
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Misconduct charges for 3 prosecutors
In three disciplinary cases pending before the State Bar Court, current or former deputy district attorneys are charged with committing acts of moral turpitude and disobeying the law. The bar alleges that two of those charged withheld exculpatory evidence.
Fascinating.
Gallegos' withholding of critical evidence in the Douglas/Zanotti persecutions fits into that category, as does what happened with Debi August. Wonder if there is a statute of limitations on these things.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Misconduct charges for 3 prosecutors
In three disciplinary cases pending before the State Bar Court, current or former deputy district attorneys are charged with committing acts of moral turpitude and disobeying the law. The bar alleges that two of those charged withheld exculpatory evidence.
Fascinating.
Gallegos' withholding of critical evidence in the Douglas/Zanotti persecutions fits into that category, as does what happened with Debi August. Wonder if there is a statute of limitations on these things.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward
...Douglas and Zanotti's defense team filed two separate motions seeking to dismiss the charges on June 18, arguing that District Attorney Paul Gallegos improperly represented the law to the (grand) jury and that he failed to present evidence that would have backed up Douglas and Zanotti's decisions that day.
”In this case, the preceding resulted in a travesty of justice -- a due process violation -- that must be corrected by the court,” one of the motions states.
Prior to Thursday's hearing on the motions, Gallegos and the defense agreed to a timeline for the motions to be heard. They set a July 21 deadline for Gallegos to submit an opposition to the defense motion and a July 31 deadline for the defense to respond.
Oral arguments are scheduled to be heard before Judge John Feeney on a yet-to-be-determined date in August....
,,,The defense motions filed last month argue that Gallegos knew of expert witnesses who felt the standoff was handled correctly, but didn't call them to testify before the (grand) jury, and that Gallegos failed to properly instruct the grand jury on the law.
”There were numerous serious errors and omissions in the prosecutor's instructions to the grand jury in this case; together and separately, they permitted the grand jury to indict on a legally improper basis and on less than probable cause,” one of the motions states.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Motion to dismiss Douglas-Zanotti charges is inching forward
...Douglas and Zanotti's defense team filed two separate motions seeking to dismiss the charges on June 18, arguing that District Attorney Paul Gallegos improperly represented the law to the (grand) jury and that he failed to present evidence that would have backed up Douglas and Zanotti's decisions that day.
”In this case, the preceding resulted in a travesty of justice -- a due process violation -- that must be corrected by the court,” one of the motions states.
Prior to Thursday's hearing on the motions, Gallegos and the defense agreed to a timeline for the motions to be heard. They set a July 21 deadline for Gallegos to submit an opposition to the defense motion and a July 31 deadline for the defense to respond.
Oral arguments are scheduled to be heard before Judge John Feeney on a yet-to-be-determined date in August....
,,,The defense motions filed last month argue that Gallegos knew of expert witnesses who felt the standoff was handled correctly, but didn't call them to testify before the (grand) jury, and that Gallegos failed to properly instruct the grand jury on the law.
”There were numerous serious errors and omissions in the prosecutor's instructions to the grand jury in this case; together and separately, they permitted the grand jury to indict on a legally improper basis and on less than probable cause,” one of the motions states.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Eye-Opener
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Thanks! to Thaddeus Greenson for an information-filled article!
Read the whole thing here - Attorneys asks for Douglas-Zanotti case dismissal
Paul Gallegos' obligation to present BOTH sides to the Grand Jury has been discussed here before. This article details the defense's motion and for the first time it is crystal clear just how spectacularly he failed to do that. If you remember the early months of the Palco case, it was reported that Stoen stopped talking to people and agencies that tried to tell him he had no case. In this case, Gallegos had a fully qualified expert witness who gave an opinion contrary to what Gallegos wanted to hear, and he never called him back, instead presenting the Criminal Grand Jury with a lesser qualified expert witness, and then proceeded to tear him down, pointing out that he really had no qualifications.
Excerpts - ...Because criminal grand jury proceedings are prosecution driven, and don't provide defendants with a defense, it is the legal obligation of the prosecutor to present evidence which might show the innocence of the defendants.
In one of the motions filed Wednesday, the defense argues that Gallegos failed to fulfill that obligation.
According to two declarations filed with one of the motions, District Attorney's Office Chief Investigator Mike Hislop interviewed two experts in the field of SWAT team operations and both said they did not believe there was a criminal case against Douglas and Zanotti.
Neither expert was called to testify before the grand jury.
According to the motion and accompanying declaration, Stuart Meyers is the CEO of OpTac International and president of Operational Tactics, a nonprofit organization that manages law enforcement instructors and consultation services. It was selected to train the SWAT and sniper teams for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.
According to Meyers' declaration, after being briefed on the events surrounding Moore's death in a June 2007 phone conversation, Meyers told Hislop he did not believe there was a basis for criminal liability. Hislop never contacted Meyers again, according to the declaration.
EPD Sgt. William Nova, who was the SWAT team commander in April 2006 but was off-duty at the time of the Moore shooting, states in a declaration that he had a similar conversation with Hislop.
In his declaration, Nova states that Hislop told him he felt the shooting of Moore was legally justified, and that he was trying to persuade Gallegos not to bring the matter to the grand jury.
”I advised Mr. Hislop that I agreed with him, and that in my capacity both as the Eureka Police Department SWAT commander and as an uninvolved party, I believed that there had been no violation of law, policy or current SWAT practices with regard to anything that had been done in connection with the Moore incident,” Nova states in the declaration.
Nova said he would have given the same testimony before the grand jury had he been called....
Gallegos did call police training specialist George Williams to the stand as an expert witness at the request of Zanotti's attorney. Williams testified that Moore's death was a clear case of “suicide by cop,” and that the SWAT operation had been handled properly.
Gallegos questioned Williams' qualifications as an expert before the jury, saying he had never trained in SWAT tactics.
”Quite simply ... his summary of qualifications, though impressive as to particular things, is lacking as it relates to the facts that he gave an opinion as to,” Gallegos told the grand jury.
The other defense motion filed Wednesday targets the pillars of Gallegos' involuntary manslaughter case: that Douglas and Zanotti acted with criminal negligence and that, in entering Moore's apartment without a Ramey warrant, officers committed an unlawful act that led to Moore's death.
In the motion, the defense argues the Ramey warrant wasn't required in the Moore situation because clear exigent circumstances existed, namely that Moore posed an immediate threat to herself and the community that necessitated prompt action.
The defense motion also takes aim at the prosecution's claim that Douglas and Zanotti acted in a criminally negligent manner by failing to adequately supervise the SWAT and crisis negotiation teams, and the communication between the two.
Not only does the evidence show that both teams, and the communication between them, was supervised, the defense argues, but Gallegos also failed to provide the grand jury with a benchmark of what constitutes “adequate supervision.”
In the motions, the defense also argues that Gallegos improperly and inadequately instructed the grand jury on the law.
”There were numerous serious errors and omissions in the prosecutor's instructions to the grand jury in this case; together and separately, they permitted the grand jury to indict on a legally improper basis and on less than probable cause,” the motion states.
The defense also argues that Gallegos failed to instruct the jury on justifiable homicide as an absolute defense to manslaughter and that, by presenting SWAT team members with immunity agreements that were known to the jury, Gallegos implied they were somehow guilty of committing a crime and that, by extension, so were their commanding officers.
Further, the defense argues in the motions that if the court finds legal fault with one of Gallegos' theories -- either of criminal negligence or the commission of an unlawful act leading to Moore's death -- it is obligated to throw out the entire indictment.
The motion states “where a court finds that one of the two alternate theories of guilt is legally unavailable, and there is no means by which to determine whether or not a conviction was predicated on that theory, the convictions must be reversed altogether.”
If a judge denies the defense motions, which are scheduled to be heard July 10, it would still have an opportunity to appeal them to another court before a trial takes place because the motions were filed within 60 days of Douglas and Zanotti's arraignment.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
Thanks! to Thaddeus Greenson for an information-filled article!
Read the whole thing here - Attorneys asks for Douglas-Zanotti case dismissal
Paul Gallegos' obligation to present BOTH sides to the Grand Jury has been discussed here before. This article details the defense's motion and for the first time it is crystal clear just how spectacularly he failed to do that. If you remember the early months of the Palco case, it was reported that Stoen stopped talking to people and agencies that tried to tell him he had no case. In this case, Gallegos had a fully qualified expert witness who gave an opinion contrary to what Gallegos wanted to hear, and he never called him back, instead presenting the Criminal Grand Jury with a lesser qualified expert witness, and then proceeded to tear him down, pointing out that he really had no qualifications.
Excerpts - ...Because criminal grand jury proceedings are prosecution driven, and don't provide defendants with a defense, it is the legal obligation of the prosecutor to present evidence which might show the innocence of the defendants.
In one of the motions filed Wednesday, the defense argues that Gallegos failed to fulfill that obligation.
According to two declarations filed with one of the motions, District Attorney's Office Chief Investigator Mike Hislop interviewed two experts in the field of SWAT team operations and both said they did not believe there was a criminal case against Douglas and Zanotti.
Neither expert was called to testify before the grand jury.
According to the motion and accompanying declaration, Stuart Meyers is the CEO of OpTac International and president of Operational Tactics, a nonprofit organization that manages law enforcement instructors and consultation services. It was selected to train the SWAT and sniper teams for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.
According to Meyers' declaration, after being briefed on the events surrounding Moore's death in a June 2007 phone conversation, Meyers told Hislop he did not believe there was a basis for criminal liability. Hislop never contacted Meyers again, according to the declaration.
EPD Sgt. William Nova, who was the SWAT team commander in April 2006 but was off-duty at the time of the Moore shooting, states in a declaration that he had a similar conversation with Hislop.
In his declaration, Nova states that Hislop told him he felt the shooting of Moore was legally justified, and that he was trying to persuade Gallegos not to bring the matter to the grand jury.
”I advised Mr. Hislop that I agreed with him, and that in my capacity both as the Eureka Police Department SWAT commander and as an uninvolved party, I believed that there had been no violation of law, policy or current SWAT practices with regard to anything that had been done in connection with the Moore incident,” Nova states in the declaration.
Nova said he would have given the same testimony before the grand jury had he been called....
Gallegos did call police training specialist George Williams to the stand as an expert witness at the request of Zanotti's attorney. Williams testified that Moore's death was a clear case of “suicide by cop,” and that the SWAT operation had been handled properly.
Gallegos questioned Williams' qualifications as an expert before the jury, saying he had never trained in SWAT tactics.
”Quite simply ... his summary of qualifications, though impressive as to particular things, is lacking as it relates to the facts that he gave an opinion as to,” Gallegos told the grand jury.
I wonder what the Grand Jury members would say to this?
The other defense motion filed Wednesday targets the pillars of Gallegos' involuntary manslaughter case: that Douglas and Zanotti acted with criminal negligence and that, in entering Moore's apartment without a Ramey warrant, officers committed an unlawful act that led to Moore's death.
In the motion, the defense argues the Ramey warrant wasn't required in the Moore situation because clear exigent circumstances existed, namely that Moore posed an immediate threat to herself and the community that necessitated prompt action.
The defense motion also takes aim at the prosecution's claim that Douglas and Zanotti acted in a criminally negligent manner by failing to adequately supervise the SWAT and crisis negotiation teams, and the communication between the two.
Not only does the evidence show that both teams, and the communication between them, was supervised, the defense argues, but Gallegos also failed to provide the grand jury with a benchmark of what constitutes “adequate supervision.”
In the motions, the defense also argues that Gallegos improperly and inadequately instructed the grand jury on the law.
”There were numerous serious errors and omissions in the prosecutor's instructions to the grand jury in this case; together and separately, they permitted the grand jury to indict on a legally improper basis and on less than probable cause,” the motion states.
The defense also argues that Gallegos failed to instruct the jury on justifiable homicide as an absolute defense to manslaughter and that, by presenting SWAT team members with immunity agreements that were known to the jury, Gallegos implied they were somehow guilty of committing a crime and that, by extension, so were their commanding officers.
Further, the defense argues in the motions that if the court finds legal fault with one of Gallegos' theories -- either of criminal negligence or the commission of an unlawful act leading to Moore's death -- it is obligated to throw out the entire indictment.
The motion states “where a court finds that one of the two alternate theories of guilt is legally unavailable, and there is no means by which to determine whether or not a conviction was predicated on that theory, the convictions must be reversed altogether.”
If a judge denies the defense motions, which are scheduled to be heard July 10, it would still have an opportunity to appeal them to another court before a trial takes place because the motions were filed within 60 days of Douglas and Zanotti's arraignment.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
Thursday, May 08, 2008
If it doesn't get tossed
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
If Gallegos' case against Douglas and Zanotti actually makes it to trial, Douglas is going to need help with the legal bills. Looks like some help is already on the way. Gallegos continues to cost this County money it can't afford to lose.
California police lend Douglas a hand
The City of Eureka recently sent out an impassioned plea to hundreds of police chiefs and law enforcement agencies and associations seeking help funding a legal defense for its former police chief, David Douglas, who is facing involuntary manslaughter charges stemming from the 2006 police shooting of Cheri Lyn Moore.
The results have been immediate. A defense fund created to field donations, which racked up less than $2,000 in its first three months, hauled in more than $11,000 in about three weeks, with contributions coming from law enforcement agencies, associations and individual officers throughout the state.
Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti were indicted by a criminal grand jury on Dec. 3, 2007, for their decision-making roles in the April 14, 2006, incident...
...While Douglas and Zanotti, the incident's commanding officers, face charges, none of the shooters were indicted, which many legal and police experts have called unprecedented.
...The Eureka City Council voted unanimously after the indictments to allocate $75,000 from city coffers to help with Douglas' legal defense bills, but the letter sent last month indicates that money is all but gone.
”The case presents unique issues and opens completely untrod ground that demands significant legal work, however, and that money is nearly gone,” states the letter, which was signed by Douglas, City Manager David Tyson and current Police Chief Garr Nielsen.
The letter also indicates Eureka will be hard-pressed to offer more money from its general fund.
”Like many cities in the rapidly evolving financial meltdown across the country, to state that Eureka's economic condition is fragile is an understatement,” the letter continues. “The city's emergency reserve funds are rapidly being depleted due to our bleak state and local economy... The city simply does not have the ability to carry the costs of this case further. Your help is needed immediately.”
The California Police Chiefs Association was one of the first to answer the call, sending a $5,000 check to the fund.
Reached Wednesday, Vacaville police chief and past association president Richard Word said law enforcement agencies are eager to contribute, both to support Douglas and Zanotti and to avoid the legal precedent their convictions would set.
”The potential impacts could be devastating to law enforcement,” Word said. “We're concerned that this could have a chilling affect on commanders who respond to these scenes, which is their job, and make these judgment calls, which is their job.”
Word worries that convictions of Douglas and Zanotti could result in police chiefs taking critical incident decisions out of the hands of their better-trained commanders or, conversely, police chiefs refusing to review tactical plans because of the possibility that doing so could make them criminally liable.
”That's what bugs us,” Word said. “I know there are police officers that commit wrongs and violate the law, and they should be prosecuted. This is totally different.”
...While the $75,000 pledged by the council and the $13,000 in the fund might seem like a hefty sum, they pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands some experts have estimated Douglas' defense will cost if the case goes all the way through trial.
...One lesson already learned from the situation, Word said, is the need for all acting police chiefs to have insurance coverage.
While Zanotti is being covered by the Peace Officers Research Association Legal Defense Fund, Douglas is not, as he had retired and was operating as police chief under an hourly contract with the city at the time of Moore's death. Thus, he was not eligible for coverage under the fund.
”We talked at our last (California Police Chief's Association) meeting about how all chiefs need to make sure they have legal defense fund coverage of some sort,” Word said.
Look. You've got Bill Bragg on Douglas' side. He knows his stuff. And he has Gallegos' number. This is a good thing.
To contribute to city's defense fund for David Douglas: Send checks made out to the City of Eureka, with David Douglas written in the “for” line, to City Hall, 531 K St., Eureka, CA 95502. Councilman Larry Glass said the checks would only be cashed if needed.
Or Donate via PayPal
(That link can be reached through the City of Eureka website - here)
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds (as complete a compilation of articles as I can assemble)
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
If Gallegos' case against Douglas and Zanotti actually makes it to trial, Douglas is going to need help with the legal bills. Looks like some help is already on the way. Gallegos continues to cost this County money it can't afford to lose.
California police lend Douglas a hand
The City of Eureka recently sent out an impassioned plea to hundreds of police chiefs and law enforcement agencies and associations seeking help funding a legal defense for its former police chief, David Douglas, who is facing involuntary manslaughter charges stemming from the 2006 police shooting of Cheri Lyn Moore.
The results have been immediate. A defense fund created to field donations, which racked up less than $2,000 in its first three months, hauled in more than $11,000 in about three weeks, with contributions coming from law enforcement agencies, associations and individual officers throughout the state.
Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti were indicted by a criminal grand jury on Dec. 3, 2007, for their decision-making roles in the April 14, 2006, incident...
...While Douglas and Zanotti, the incident's commanding officers, face charges, none of the shooters were indicted, which many legal and police experts have called unprecedented.
...The Eureka City Council voted unanimously after the indictments to allocate $75,000 from city coffers to help with Douglas' legal defense bills, but the letter sent last month indicates that money is all but gone.
”The case presents unique issues and opens completely untrod ground that demands significant legal work, however, and that money is nearly gone,” states the letter, which was signed by Douglas, City Manager David Tyson and current Police Chief Garr Nielsen.
The letter also indicates Eureka will be hard-pressed to offer more money from its general fund.
”Like many cities in the rapidly evolving financial meltdown across the country, to state that Eureka's economic condition is fragile is an understatement,” the letter continues. “The city's emergency reserve funds are rapidly being depleted due to our bleak state and local economy... The city simply does not have the ability to carry the costs of this case further. Your help is needed immediately.”
The California Police Chiefs Association was one of the first to answer the call, sending a $5,000 check to the fund.
Reached Wednesday, Vacaville police chief and past association president Richard Word said law enforcement agencies are eager to contribute, both to support Douglas and Zanotti and to avoid the legal precedent their convictions would set.
”The potential impacts could be devastating to law enforcement,” Word said. “We're concerned that this could have a chilling affect on commanders who respond to these scenes, which is their job, and make these judgment calls, which is their job.”
Word worries that convictions of Douglas and Zanotti could result in police chiefs taking critical incident decisions out of the hands of their better-trained commanders or, conversely, police chiefs refusing to review tactical plans because of the possibility that doing so could make them criminally liable.
”That's what bugs us,” Word said. “I know there are police officers that commit wrongs and violate the law, and they should be prosecuted. This is totally different.”
...While the $75,000 pledged by the council and the $13,000 in the fund might seem like a hefty sum, they pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands some experts have estimated Douglas' defense will cost if the case goes all the way through trial.
...One lesson already learned from the situation, Word said, is the need for all acting police chiefs to have insurance coverage.
While Zanotti is being covered by the Peace Officers Research Association Legal Defense Fund, Douglas is not, as he had retired and was operating as police chief under an hourly contract with the city at the time of Moore's death. Thus, he was not eligible for coverage under the fund.
”We talked at our last (California Police Chief's Association) meeting about how all chiefs need to make sure they have legal defense fund coverage of some sort,” Word said.
Look. You've got Bill Bragg on Douglas' side. He knows his stuff. And he has Gallegos' number. This is a good thing.
To contribute to city's defense fund for David Douglas: Send checks made out to the City of Eureka, with David Douglas written in the “for” line, to City Hall, 531 K St., Eureka, CA 95502. Councilman Larry Glass said the checks would only be cashed if needed.
Or Donate via PayPal
(That link can be reached through the City of Eureka website - here)
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds (as complete a compilation of articles as I can assemble)
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Today's coverage - Douglas and Zanotti
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
TS Commanding officers plead not guilty
EUREKA -- Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti pleaded not guilty Tuesday in Humboldt County Superior Court to charges of involuntary manslaughter stemming from their decision-making roles in the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore.
The two defendants were indicted Dec. 3, 2007, by a criminal grand jury, more than a year and a half after Moore's death.
While entering the pleas, attorneys for Zanotti and Douglas said the defendants waived their right to a speedy trial but retained the right to file motions to dismiss the case and demurrers on the indictments, which Douglas' attorney Bill Bragg later said would have to specifically target the indictments' wording as being ambiguous or invalid.
Superior Court Judge John Feeney scheduled a status-review hearing on the case for Aug. 26, but said he expected to see it return to his chambers before then on potential motions.
ER Officers plead not guilty in Moore death
Defense lawyers also asked the court to release exhibits it held from the grand jury, including questions written by jurors.
Judge John T. Feeney approved the request and said they should be ready by next Tuesday at the latest.
Another topic discussed at the arraignment was a request by the Eureka Times-Standard for evidence exhibits introduced by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.
Feeney said the exhibits, including those to be provided by the court relating to the grand jury, would be placed in the public record.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
TS Commanding officers plead not guilty
EUREKA -- Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti pleaded not guilty Tuesday in Humboldt County Superior Court to charges of involuntary manslaughter stemming from their decision-making roles in the 2006 police shooting death of Cheri Lyn Moore.
The two defendants were indicted Dec. 3, 2007, by a criminal grand jury, more than a year and a half after Moore's death.
While entering the pleas, attorneys for Zanotti and Douglas said the defendants waived their right to a speedy trial but retained the right to file motions to dismiss the case and demurrers on the indictments, which Douglas' attorney Bill Bragg later said would have to specifically target the indictments' wording as being ambiguous or invalid.
Superior Court Judge John Feeney scheduled a status-review hearing on the case for Aug. 26, but said he expected to see it return to his chambers before then on potential motions.
ER Officers plead not guilty in Moore death
Defense lawyers also asked the court to release exhibits it held from the grand jury, including questions written by jurors.
Judge John T. Feeney approved the request and said they should be ready by next Tuesday at the latest.
Another topic discussed at the arraignment was a request by the Eureka Times-Standard for evidence exhibits introduced by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.
Feeney said the exhibits, including those to be provided by the court relating to the grand jury, would be placed in the public record.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Douglas, Zanotti enter not guilty pleas
***URGENT UPDATE/ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial,
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
update in TS, more tomorrow Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti pleaded not guilty this afternoon in Superior Court to charges of involuntary manslaughter.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.***
update in TS, more tomorrow Former Eureka Police Chief David Douglas and Lt. Tony Zanotti pleaded not guilty this afternoon in Superior Court to charges of involuntary manslaughter.
Related coverage Links to articles, letters and Op-Eds
Monday, April 14, 2008
2 years and counting
URGENT ALERT! This case was TOSSED by the Judge - never made it to trial.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.
***
previous coverage
No mention in today's papers? Odd.
☛ ER http://eurekareporter.com/article/080826-judge-throws-out-douglas-zanotti-case
Feeney said the indictments the grand jury handed down to Douglas and Zanotti in December 2007 weren’t supported by probable cause. Insufficient evidence regarding the former leaders’ alleged failure to oversee other law enforcement was also presented to the grand jury, Feeney said, and instructions given on “exigent circumstances” were inadequate.
The grand jury should have also been instructed on justifiable homicide by law enforcement officials, Feeney said.
***
previous coverage
No mention in today's papers? Odd.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)