☛ ER Man held over on sodomy, molestation charges
A man accused of sodomizing and molesting his then-8-year-old daughter was held over Friday on the charges, which carry a life sentence.
Isaias Felix Romero, 33, impregnated his now-wife when she was 13. They married after he pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. The child from the pregnancy is now a 9-year-old in the fourth grade and the alleged victim of Romero. She will be referred to as Jane Doe.
There was sufficient evidence to move forward with charges of sodomizing a child younger than 10 and continuous sexual abuse of a child, Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Timothy Cissna ruled.
Showing posts with label Gallegos/Martinez-Hernandez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gallegos/Martinez-Hernandez. Show all posts
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Oh, you Gallegos haters!
Oh it's just the Gallegos haters. It's not that Paul has done anything WRONG! Poor Paul. He can't do anything right. they just hate him no matter what.
Let's review.
If you read Paul Hagen's My Word in today's Times-Standard you received confirmation that Gallegos' suit was "politically motivated," Read that "filed at the behest of his handlers."
Now ask yourself, once again - If Paul's supporters and backers were the Aryan Brotherhood, and they wanted him to go after Kobe Bryant "get that black man" - would that be ok with you?
Now some people thought Kobe was guilty. Some defended him. Just like Palco. Some hate Palco. Some defend them.
Would it be ok? NO SANE PERSON WOULD SAY YES, yet Gallegos' defenders see no problem at all with him filing a suit, against the recommendations of the professionals in the DA's Office, whose knowledge of the law vastly exceeds his own, and FOR his backers. Trying to find a way to make it fly. And failing spectacularly, albeit so many years later that no one cares, to even get his case into court. Failed after multiple attempts to rewrite it and make it work.
His history of bad judgement, and of filing charges capriciously - as in the case of Penny O'Gara (to send a message), Sean Marsh (to send a message), and yes, the Palco suit (t send a message), the dismissal of felony charges against a campaign contributors son... the hiring of Tim Stoen... the firing and loss of virtually ALL the experienced prosecutors in his office... the corrupt campaign manager, the plagiarized My Words...
What's to like? And that is only part of the picture. It's not that any of these things were made up. HE DID IT ALL TO HIMSELF.
Face the facts. Stop making excuses for him like he is a little boy who needs protection for hiding his peas under the table.
If he worked for you, you would have fired him by now. For incompetence. For being late for meetings. For failing to show up for meetings.... long before you even got to the big stuff, and there's lots of that on the record now.
THINK! He DOES work for you.
Let's review.
If you read Paul Hagen's My Word in today's Times-Standard you received confirmation that Gallegos' suit was "politically motivated," Read that "filed at the behest of his handlers."
Now ask yourself, once again - If Paul's supporters and backers were the Aryan Brotherhood, and they wanted him to go after Kobe Bryant "get that black man" - would that be ok with you?
Now some people thought Kobe was guilty. Some defended him. Just like Palco. Some hate Palco. Some defend them.
Would it be ok? NO SANE PERSON WOULD SAY YES, yet Gallegos' defenders see no problem at all with him filing a suit, against the recommendations of the professionals in the DA's Office, whose knowledge of the law vastly exceeds his own, and FOR his backers. Trying to find a way to make it fly. And failing spectacularly, albeit so many years later that no one cares, to even get his case into court. Failed after multiple attempts to rewrite it and make it work.
His history of bad judgement, and of filing charges capriciously - as in the case of Penny O'Gara (to send a message), Sean Marsh (to send a message), and yes, the Palco suit (t send a message), the dismissal of felony charges against a campaign contributors son... the hiring of Tim Stoen... the firing and loss of virtually ALL the experienced prosecutors in his office... the corrupt campaign manager, the plagiarized My Words...
What's to like? And that is only part of the picture. It's not that any of these things were made up. HE DID IT ALL TO HIMSELF.
Face the facts. Stop making excuses for him like he is a little boy who needs protection for hiding his peas under the table.
If he worked for you, you would have fired him by now. For incompetence. For being late for meetings. For failing to show up for meetings.... long before you even got to the big stuff, and there's lots of that on the record now.
THINK! He DOES work for you.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Another plea deal. Another light sentence for a child molester.
A brave victim willing to testify. Deals made anyway. The pattern continues... What you have now is an alleged repeat offender who will serve less time in prison than his victims will spend in high school. He'll get out, he'll do it again, only next time he may not want to leave any witnesses behind.
Child molester is given a three-year sentence in plea deal
...Todd William Gonsalves was sentenced to three years in prison as part of a negotiated agreement.
Gonsalves pleaded guilty to a single count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child younger than 14, with a stipulated sentence of three years in prison, of which he must serve at least 85 percent. (30 months)
In exchange, two identical charges were dropped, and sentences for unrelated misdemeanor cases will run concurrent with the three-year term.
Additionally, Gonsalves must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Going into the sentencing hearing, (the victim's mother) expressed displeasure with the handling of the case by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.
She said she had helped track down an alleged previous victim living in another jurisdiction, and could not understand why the case did not proceed to trial on the original charges — which could have resulted in a sentence of 24 years.
“I asked on numerous occasions,” (she) said, “‘Don’t you think we have enough evidence to go to trial? Don’t you think this is an injustice?’ — and (the deputy district attorney) said she’d rather have a small win than a big loss.”...
Deputy District Attorney Kelly Neel, who handled the case, claimed that she was aware of another potential victim, but that her office was unable to confirm that she was a victim or make contact with her.
“At this point, I’m just glad it’s over,” (the victim's mother) said. “I’m fine with the outcome. I’m fine that she doesn’t have to go through it anymore.”
Note: Kelly Neel is one of the new DDA's, was in the Del Norte County DA's Office in January 2007;
Kelly Neel has four years experience as a public defender and three years experience as a prosecuting attorney for
various agencies. No mention of what those agencies were.
Additional discussion on Eric's blog
Child molester is given a three-year sentence in plea deal
...Todd William Gonsalves was sentenced to three years in prison as part of a negotiated agreement.
Gonsalves pleaded guilty to a single count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child younger than 14, with a stipulated sentence of three years in prison, of which he must serve at least 85 percent. (30 months)
In exchange, two identical charges were dropped, and sentences for unrelated misdemeanor cases will run concurrent with the three-year term.
Additionally, Gonsalves must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Going into the sentencing hearing, (the victim's mother) expressed displeasure with the handling of the case by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.
She said she had helped track down an alleged previous victim living in another jurisdiction, and could not understand why the case did not proceed to trial on the original charges — which could have resulted in a sentence of 24 years.
“I asked on numerous occasions,” (she) said, “‘Don’t you think we have enough evidence to go to trial? Don’t you think this is an injustice?’ — and (the deputy district attorney) said she’d rather have a small win than a big loss.”...
Deputy District Attorney Kelly Neel, who handled the case, claimed that she was aware of another potential victim, but that her office was unable to confirm that she was a victim or make contact with her.
“At this point, I’m just glad it’s over,” (the victim's mother) said. “I’m fine with the outcome. I’m fine that she doesn’t have to go through it anymore.”
Note: Kelly Neel is one of the new DDA's, was in the Del Norte County DA's Office in January 2007;
Kelly Neel has four years experience as a public defender and three years experience as a prosecuting attorney for
various agencies. No mention of what those agencies were.
Additional discussion on Eric's blog
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Let's hear both sides
Why do you do this, Rose? Why don't you just drop this?
It's a good question, and one I get all the time. Along with, why did you even start doing this?
The answer to that last question is really the answer to the first one. I have already described my conversation with Richard Salzman, and his statement that this was bigger than I could possibly imagine. From things I learned from him, I had a different perspective on events that unfolded - Stoen's lawsuit, the bizarre dog and pony show, the involvement of the activist community, links to much larger groups with phenomenal sources of funding and support, Gallegos' - sorry, but no other way to say it but - dishonesty - the Recall, the enormous effort to keep Gallegos in office and the reasons for it, all the way to now, the destruction of the office, the loss of valuable talent, the decimation of important programs...
In the beginning, with my post-Watergate mentality, I believed in the press. I believed in the press almost as an arm of law enforcement... that if there was wrongdoing, they would expose it... if there was another side to the story, they would be happy to tell it. I was sadly mistaken.
The press, here and elsewhere, were sucked up into the great Gallegos fairy-tale. The gallant David against Goliath, the courageous young upstart against the evil corporation.
The press bought the story spun by the master PR team hook line and sinker.
In the beginning, I asked my friends in journalism why they didn't ask the questions, why the very words used by Salzman and his crew didn't make the hairs on the backs of their necks rise up. "Timber Yes, Fraud NO" Look behind the words and there is an empty vacuum. "Justice for all" - the picture of the statue of liberty on Paul's election materials... all a facade.
I began my own inquiries, and along the way, I have gotten to know the people involved. Whenever the opportunity arose to talk to the people actually affected by what was going on, I took it.
And as people began to bring me information, and documents that backed up what they had to say, and the media continued to ignore it, I learned about Gallegos' entry into the DAs office from the other side - from those who were told in a meeting that any perceived act of disloyalty would result in their termination, the side who received the infamous "gag order" memo telling them that they were not allowed to talk to the media. And I came to know the atmosphere that pervaded the DAs office. I have watched as the prosecutors have left, til only those who are unable to leave remain.
I learned about People's Temple, and Stoen's role. And I talked to people who were involved way back then, in various capacities.
I have talked to watchdog groups all across the country about "Salzman's Plan" and many watched to see if any further attempts were made to implement it.
More importantly, I came to see the extent of the activist network, the inter-relationships, the funding opportunities and connections. As I began to put pieces of the puzzle together, clearer and clearer pictures emerged.
Every morning I would wake up and say to myself "This is crazy."
And by the end of the day, I would have talked to two more people, gotten another piece of the puzzle and knew that there was an important story here to be told.
But I watched as day after day, Salzman's spin was written across the front pages of the paper, and I knew people had gone and talked to the reporters, and gotten nowhere.
So they stopped coming forward. they lost faith in the reporters. And I did, too. This ensured that Salzman's view prevailed, as now no one even tried to get the other side out.
Well, the old saying that "you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time " held true in this case - eventually, Gallegos' failings began to show, little by little, culminating in the plagiarism coming to light, but too late.
Eventually the media did begin to ask questions, and Hank Sims took the first step forward with his exposure of Richard Salzman and his tactics.
Little by little the media came to see that the shiny facade was at least a little tarnished, if not completely hollow.
So - I am a little hyper-sensitive to things like John Driscoll's sitting with Mark Lovelace and covering the Palco proceedings. I see it from a completely different perspective.
The perspective of looking at Ken Miller professing to be "stunned" when the Gallegos' (Stoen's) PL case was first announced, and finding that he was involved long before, and was in fact actually instrumental in the drafting of the suit (which he ultimately had to 'fess up to, try as he did to hide it), to finding out just how long he had been involved in the effort.
The perspective of knowing who and what Michael Shellenberger was, and knowing that the national press coverage that Gallegos was receiving was well orchestrated, knowing that the spin machine was in full force. That they were indeed "structuring the debate."
The perspective of knowing when lies were being told, such as when Salzman acted as a defacto spokesperson for the DAs office during the Martinez-Hernandez case.
Everyone has had their say about the Lovelace/Driscoll thing - unethical practices, just a volley in the newspaper war, nothing at all compared to Arkley...
Well, none of that answered the questions about the incident and Lovelace's response only told us who paid for the calls, not how many days of shared coverage... How many people in the room... Who they were... Whether or not there was discussion about key points, whether Lovelace expounded on his version of the events...
But more importantly - who is Mark Lovelace, who has such an effect on so many issues with his testimony to the Water Board, with his being the go-to source whenever anything remotely involving Palco comes up - what is Humboldt Watershed Council? How many people are on the "council"? When do they meet? Who votes? What are its origins? What is its source of funding? Who pays Mark Lovelace's salary? Does he even have a salary? Does it come out of Ken Miller's pocket? What's the relationship with Michael Shellenberger? Why the full court press, the appearances on every radio talk show, the cultivation of reporters? Where does Mark Lovelace come by his sudden "expertise" in the intricacies of the Stock market, big business and bankruptcy procedure? Where do the talking points come from?
The story has already been told as if they are the ragtag underdogs, like the Merry Men against the King, the idealistic young college students who give up their lives to come sit in the trees -
Now let's hear the other side - about the activist networks which ensure protestors arrive on cue - and disappear during a contentious election - about the people who manipulate behind the scenes.
What could it hurt?
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
It's a good question, and one I get all the time. Along with, why did you even start doing this?
The answer to that last question is really the answer to the first one. I have already described my conversation with Richard Salzman, and his statement that this was bigger than I could possibly imagine. From things I learned from him, I had a different perspective on events that unfolded - Stoen's lawsuit, the bizarre dog and pony show, the involvement of the activist community, links to much larger groups with phenomenal sources of funding and support, Gallegos' - sorry, but no other way to say it but - dishonesty - the Recall, the enormous effort to keep Gallegos in office and the reasons for it, all the way to now, the destruction of the office, the loss of valuable talent, the decimation of important programs...
In the beginning, with my post-Watergate mentality, I believed in the press. I believed in the press almost as an arm of law enforcement... that if there was wrongdoing, they would expose it... if there was another side to the story, they would be happy to tell it. I was sadly mistaken.
The press, here and elsewhere, were sucked up into the great Gallegos fairy-tale. The gallant David against Goliath, the courageous young upstart against the evil corporation.
The press bought the story spun by the master PR team hook line and sinker.
In the beginning, I asked my friends in journalism why they didn't ask the questions, why the very words used by Salzman and his crew didn't make the hairs on the backs of their necks rise up. "Timber Yes, Fraud NO" Look behind the words and there is an empty vacuum. "Justice for all" - the picture of the statue of liberty on Paul's election materials... all a facade.
I began my own inquiries, and along the way, I have gotten to know the people involved. Whenever the opportunity arose to talk to the people actually affected by what was going on, I took it.
And as people began to bring me information, and documents that backed up what they had to say, and the media continued to ignore it, I learned about Gallegos' entry into the DAs office from the other side - from those who were told in a meeting that any perceived act of disloyalty would result in their termination, the side who received the infamous "gag order" memo telling them that they were not allowed to talk to the media. And I came to know the atmosphere that pervaded the DAs office. I have watched as the prosecutors have left, til only those who are unable to leave remain.
I learned about People's Temple, and Stoen's role. And I talked to people who were involved way back then, in various capacities.
I have talked to watchdog groups all across the country about "Salzman's Plan" and many watched to see if any further attempts were made to implement it.
More importantly, I came to see the extent of the activist network, the inter-relationships, the funding opportunities and connections. As I began to put pieces of the puzzle together, clearer and clearer pictures emerged.
Every morning I would wake up and say to myself "This is crazy."
And by the end of the day, I would have talked to two more people, gotten another piece of the puzzle and knew that there was an important story here to be told.
But I watched as day after day, Salzman's spin was written across the front pages of the paper, and I knew people had gone and talked to the reporters, and gotten nowhere.
So they stopped coming forward. they lost faith in the reporters. And I did, too. This ensured that Salzman's view prevailed, as now no one even tried to get the other side out.
Well, the old saying that "you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time " held true in this case - eventually, Gallegos' failings began to show, little by little, culminating in the plagiarism coming to light, but too late.
Eventually the media did begin to ask questions, and Hank Sims took the first step forward with his exposure of Richard Salzman and his tactics.
Little by little the media came to see that the shiny facade was at least a little tarnished, if not completely hollow.
So - I am a little hyper-sensitive to things like John Driscoll's sitting with Mark Lovelace and covering the Palco proceedings. I see it from a completely different perspective.
The perspective of looking at Ken Miller professing to be "stunned" when the Gallegos' (Stoen's) PL case was first announced, and finding that he was involved long before, and was in fact actually instrumental in the drafting of the suit (which he ultimately had to 'fess up to, try as he did to hide it), to finding out just how long he had been involved in the effort.
The perspective of knowing who and what Michael Shellenberger was, and knowing that the national press coverage that Gallegos was receiving was well orchestrated, knowing that the spin machine was in full force. That they were indeed "structuring the debate."
The perspective of knowing when lies were being told, such as when Salzman acted as a defacto spokesperson for the DAs office during the Martinez-Hernandez case.
Everyone has had their say about the Lovelace/Driscoll thing - unethical practices, just a volley in the newspaper war, nothing at all compared to Arkley...
Well, none of that answered the questions about the incident and Lovelace's response only told us who paid for the calls, not how many days of shared coverage... How many people in the room... Who they were... Whether or not there was discussion about key points, whether Lovelace expounded on his version of the events...
But more importantly - who is Mark Lovelace, who has such an effect on so many issues with his testimony to the Water Board, with his being the go-to source whenever anything remotely involving Palco comes up - what is Humboldt Watershed Council? How many people are on the "council"? When do they meet? Who votes? What are its origins? What is its source of funding? Who pays Mark Lovelace's salary? Does he even have a salary? Does it come out of Ken Miller's pocket? What's the relationship with Michael Shellenberger? Why the full court press, the appearances on every radio talk show, the cultivation of reporters? Where does Mark Lovelace come by his sudden "expertise" in the intricacies of the Stock market, big business and bankruptcy procedure? Where do the talking points come from?
The story has already been told as if they are the ragtag underdogs, like the Merry Men against the King, the idealistic young college students who give up their lives to come sit in the trees -
Now let's hear the other side - about the activist networks which ensure protestors arrive on cue - and disappear during a contentious election - about the people who manipulate behind the scenes.
What could it hurt?
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Gallegos v. Martinez-Hernandez (2004)
For many of you who read this blog this may be old news. Remember that part of the purpose of this blog is to include the old stuff. For those who knew what happened, it was a clear example of the way Gallegos approached his job, and how he handled difficult media attention.
It is also a clear example of a pattern which continues to this day, especially the immediate response and then the spin-doctored response which characterizes all of Gallegos' debacles.
The Martinez-Hernandez case received widespread news coverage during the Recall. But only part of the story was told. (see RELATED STORIES below)
This was no ordinary case. Veteran prosecutors called it one of the biggest miscarriages of justice they had ever seen.
Not a traditional "molest" - this was a father forcibly raping his daughter every day for nine years, sometimes while the girl's young brother watched. This conduct started when she was five years old.
The case was brought in for charging on Christmas Eve. Wes Keat, the overworked Chief Charging Deputy (a position that receives no compensation other than a title) received the case.
Pedro Martinez-Hernandez was in custody, and because he was in custody, the case had to be charged immediately. Unfortunately, there were no other lawyers in the office to help because neither the DA (Paul Gallegos) or the Assistant DA (Tim Stoen) were around or cared enough to make sure the office was adequately staffed.
Charging molest cases is a very complex task even for an experienced deputy. It is usually turned over to someone who specializes in it.
Upon reading the preliminary report from the Sheriff's Department, Keat charged one continuous count of continuing molest covering the entire 9 year period. This was enough to HOLD Martinez-Hernandez in jail, knowing the additional charges needed would be added when the prosecutor looked at the case file.
Keat added a note that there were a lot of stackable charges which would put Martinez-Hernandez away for hundreds of years. "It's probably going to turn out that there are a lot of stackable 288b's [sex offense counts] that can get him into the century club" -- or 100 years in prison. NCJ
Mid January, Gallegos picks up the files, and because he is too inexperienced to realize there is a problem, and apparently fails to read the full report, he lets the guy plead to one count.
Martinez-Hernandez's lawyer can't believe their good fortune, and seizes the deal.
When a few people spoke out, the Times Standard reported that "The Sheriff's Department said investigating deputies found reason to believe Martinez-Hernandez had sexual intercourse with the child 1,900 times over a six or seven year period. Deputies also determined there were about 1,000 counts of crimes like fondling and oral copulation. The child was about 5 when the abuse began about seven years ago.
"Gallegos has said the continuous act charge was made to avoid the necessity of proving each count and to spare the child from testifying."
The Sheriff's Department provided to the Times Standard fifteen other cases with far less serious conduct. In each the guy got well in excess of a life term (like 29 consecutive 15-years-to-life terms). Paul's response was that the guy pleaded to everything that he was charged with so it wasn't plea bargaining and that the U.S. Attorney was going to charge him for being an illegal immigrant who was once deported and that this guy would never get out of jail. In short, Paul admits no error in charging or judgment.
The U.S. Attorney reportedly said that they hadn't received the case and did not know anything about it. A clear lie by Paul, and, an attempt to cover it up failed when Paul sent one of his DDAs down to try to get the U.S. Attorney on board, but was denied.
Then, when the Times Standard called the DAs office, they were told Paul was out of town.
Did the Assistant District Attorney answer questions on the case? No.
He turned it over to Salzman, who acted as the defacto spokesperson for the office. He says that it was handled correctly but, he hinted that if it wasn't charged properly that Wes Keat was at fault.
"Salzman maintained that while Gallegos appeared in court, the actual charging was done by senior prosecutor Wes Keat, using a law passed by the Legislature that allows for instances of long-term abuse to be consolidated into a single, continuous act." TS
And thus began the decline in child abuse prosecutions in the Humboldt County District Attorney's office.
RELATED STORIES:
TS - Plea bargain made with molester - Jan 24, 2004
TS - Gallegos responds to molester's plea - Jan 27, 2004
TS - Albin Sheets accuses Gallegos of incompetence - Jan, 2004
NCJ - MOLESTATION CASE TAKES CENTER STAGE:
...a copy of this article is also at watchpaul-articles
TS - Investigating deputy speaks out on molest case - Feb 13, 2004
It is also a clear example of a pattern which continues to this day, especially the immediate response and then the spin-doctored response which characterizes all of Gallegos' debacles.
The Martinez-Hernandez case received widespread news coverage during the Recall. But only part of the story was told. (see RELATED STORIES below)
This was no ordinary case. Veteran prosecutors called it one of the biggest miscarriages of justice they had ever seen.
Not a traditional "molest" - this was a father forcibly raping his daughter every day for nine years, sometimes while the girl's young brother watched. This conduct started when she was five years old.
The case was brought in for charging on Christmas Eve. Wes Keat, the overworked Chief Charging Deputy (a position that receives no compensation other than a title) received the case.
Pedro Martinez-Hernandez was in custody, and because he was in custody, the case had to be charged immediately. Unfortunately, there were no other lawyers in the office to help because neither the DA (Paul Gallegos) or the Assistant DA (Tim Stoen) were around or cared enough to make sure the office was adequately staffed.
Charging molest cases is a very complex task even for an experienced deputy. It is usually turned over to someone who specializes in it.
Upon reading the preliminary report from the Sheriff's Department, Keat charged one continuous count of continuing molest covering the entire 9 year period. This was enough to HOLD Martinez-Hernandez in jail, knowing the additional charges needed would be added when the prosecutor looked at the case file.
Keat added a note that there were a lot of stackable charges which would put Martinez-Hernandez away for hundreds of years. "It's probably going to turn out that there are a lot of stackable 288b's [sex offense counts] that can get him into the century club" -- or 100 years in prison. NCJ
Mid January, Gallegos picks up the files, and because he is too inexperienced to realize there is a problem, and apparently fails to read the full report, he lets the guy plead to one count.
Martinez-Hernandez's lawyer can't believe their good fortune, and seizes the deal.
When a few people spoke out, the Times Standard reported that "The Sheriff's Department said investigating deputies found reason to believe Martinez-Hernandez had sexual intercourse with the child 1,900 times over a six or seven year period. Deputies also determined there were about 1,000 counts of crimes like fondling and oral copulation. The child was about 5 when the abuse began about seven years ago.
"Gallegos has said the continuous act charge was made to avoid the necessity of proving each count and to spare the child from testifying."
The Sheriff's Department provided to the Times Standard fifteen other cases with far less serious conduct. In each the guy got well in excess of a life term (like 29 consecutive 15-years-to-life terms). Paul's response was that the guy pleaded to everything that he was charged with so it wasn't plea bargaining and that the U.S. Attorney was going to charge him for being an illegal immigrant who was once deported and that this guy would never get out of jail. In short, Paul admits no error in charging or judgment.
The U.S. Attorney reportedly said that they hadn't received the case and did not know anything about it. A clear lie by Paul, and, an attempt to cover it up failed when Paul sent one of his DDAs down to try to get the U.S. Attorney on board, but was denied.
Then, when the Times Standard called the DAs office, they were told Paul was out of town.
Did the Assistant District Attorney answer questions on the case? No.
He turned it over to Salzman, who acted as the defacto spokesperson for the office. He says that it was handled correctly but, he hinted that if it wasn't charged properly that Wes Keat was at fault.
"Salzman maintained that while Gallegos appeared in court, the actual charging was done by senior prosecutor Wes Keat, using a law passed by the Legislature that allows for instances of long-term abuse to be consolidated into a single, continuous act." TS
And thus began the decline in child abuse prosecutions in the Humboldt County District Attorney's office.
RELATED STORIES:
TS - Plea bargain made with molester - Jan 24, 2004
TS - Gallegos responds to molester's plea - Jan 27, 2004
TS - Albin Sheets accuses Gallegos of incompetence - Jan, 2004
NCJ - MOLESTATION CASE TAKES CENTER STAGE:
...a copy of this article is also at watchpaul-articles
TS - Investigating deputy speaks out on molest case - Feb 13, 2004
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
The BLAME GAME
First Paul Gallegos tried to blame former Deputy District Attorney Ed Borg for not filing charges against Kiki Bugenig in the animal abuse case now revealed by the Eureka Reporter.
Then, he tries to pass it off as "politics" and then he blames Assistant District Attorney/Chief Charging Deputy Wes Keat.
It's not the first time he has claimed that anyone who points out that he is failing to do his job is just engaging in "political attacks." He tried this tactic when he tried to slip the loss of four positions in Humboldt County's Victim Witness Unit through the Consent Calendar. He never has explained why he didn't try to save the program and the four positions in the months between when he was notified that he had lost the grant that funded the positions, and when the grant ran out. Nor is there any evidence that he has worked to restore the funding or the program since that day. But he has time to plot a new "environmental crimes unit."
Nor is it the first time he has thrown Wes Keat under the bus. He blamed Wes Keat for his undercharging of Pedro Martinez-Hernandez.
And, judging by the editorial in today's Eureka Reporter, it looks like Gallegos' supporters are blaming the Eureka Reporter for the story that Gallegos failed to file charges against Kiki Bugening, "in the interests of justice" because he would have had to "prove intent."
Kudos to the Eureka Reporter for reporting the FACTS, and not being intimidated by the Salzman/Gallegos political machine.
Then, he tries to pass it off as "politics" and then he blames Assistant District Attorney/Chief Charging Deputy Wes Keat.
It's not the first time he has claimed that anyone who points out that he is failing to do his job is just engaging in "political attacks." He tried this tactic when he tried to slip the loss of four positions in Humboldt County's Victim Witness Unit through the Consent Calendar. He never has explained why he didn't try to save the program and the four positions in the months between when he was notified that he had lost the grant that funded the positions, and when the grant ran out. Nor is there any evidence that he has worked to restore the funding or the program since that day. But he has time to plot a new "environmental crimes unit."
Nor is it the first time he has thrown Wes Keat under the bus. He blamed Wes Keat for his undercharging of Pedro Martinez-Hernandez.
And, judging by the editorial in today's Eureka Reporter, it looks like Gallegos' supporters are blaming the Eureka Reporter for the story that Gallegos failed to file charges against Kiki Bugening, "in the interests of justice" because he would have had to "prove intent."
Kudos to the Eureka Reporter for reporting the FACTS, and not being intimidated by the Salzman/Gallegos political machine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)