Thursday, August 5, 2010

All's Not Well (?) # 6

iePolitics.com reports:

"Additional information regarding the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) probe into the San Bernardino County corruption scandal has been trickling into iePolitics. It appears there are two general areas the Bureau is concentrating on: all investigations conducted by District Attorney Mike Ramos’ Public Integrity Unit (PIU) and the Superior Court bench.

Based upon questions being asked by agents, this investigation is wide-ranging. iePolitics has been told that questions are being asked regarding various real estate deals; destruction of records by former Third District Supervisor Dennis Hansberger; disparity in handling the various FPPC complaints by Ramos against Penrod, Erwin, Biane, Devereaux, and others; the difference in the way in which 1099 charges against Jim Miller and Bea Cortes were handled; the POST scandal; possibly several of the issues at ARMC (regarding Supervisors Biane and Gonzales); and much more.

From what we are being told, the FBI is looking at each investigation the PIU has been involved in and tracing it back to its inception. It would appear that part of the investigation is meant to uncover selective prosecution and use of the district attorney’s prosecutorial powers for political purposes. It is believed that the attorney general’s involvement is also being reviewed.

As stated in previous articles, we know that solid evidence of at least one felony committed by Ramos was provided to the FBI several months ago; however, it is not known what crime was alleged. Furthermore, evidence of witness tampering and intimidation personally committed by Ramos may be made public as early as today.

As much as we here at iePolitics enjoy watching Ramos squirm as the tables have been turned on him, of much greater concern and satisfaction is the scrutiny the Superior Court bench is now receiving from the federal government. Clearly, all judges have a great deal of discretion in the decisions they make. However, from the first moment a Superior Court judge became involved in the corruption scandal, there have been highly suspect decisions and rulings.

Search warrants were issued based solely on the testimony of a convicted perjurer who agreed to cooperate to gain a lesser sentence. Excessively high bails were set for white collar crimes that far exceed what is set for violent offenders who are a flight risk. And one judge had a personal relationship with the Ramos’ personal attorney. This scandal has been fraught with questionable rulings from the bench.

Additionally, we have witnessed two examples where the district attorney and attorney general have attempted to thwart attorney/client privilege. First, a search warrant was signed and served on the attorney of one of the defendants, something this is almost unheard of. And more recently, the bullying by the Attorney General’s office to force all parties involved in the Colonies decision to waive attorney/client privilege has reached new heights with threats being made by the Attorney General’s office.

But perhaps the most egregious examples of prosecutorial misconduct and judicial incompetence or payoff involve the two sets of charges against former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin. There are sections of the law that clearly show Erwin did NOT have to report the trip or watch, but the district attorney charged him anyway. The craziest and most far-fetched charges are the conspiracy and bribery allegations.

We realize the average person reading this article does not understand the law well enough to know that certain elements must be present to allege both conspiracy and bribery. While Erwin was still in custody we asked a retired prosecutor to review the charges against Erwin and give us his opinion. He was shocked that a judge would sign an arrest warrant based on the allegations made as the elements of the crime were not present. That has been the opinion of every attorney we know of who has actually spent the time to read the entire complaint.

And that begs this question: Why would a judge sign these search warrants and arrest warrants? Certainly, they should know as well as anyone what the elements of each crime are.

As we have written about before here at iePolitics, the close personal relationship between Ramos and members of the San Bernardino County Superior Court bench is a concern. It is not only a concern to the corruption scandal defendants, but to all who enter the courthouse in search of justice. Now we have the FBI observing San Bernardino County justice first hand. And if they do a thorough job, it will benefit every citizen in this county.

Be it corrupt prosecutors, politicians or judges, they all need to go down and be punished for the havoc they have wreaked on our county. We welcome this investigation and look forward to their findings."

Comment by blogger Bob: That my clients may be getting retaliated against because I couldn't stand what Ramos represented and I ran against Ramos to try and get him to clean it up or get replaced, is the saddest part of this. I personally hope any compromised members of the bench are not given a free ride--hell, most of the people on the bench are hand picked and or approved by Ramos during the Governor's review of judicial applications; I have felt more squeezing on things that I routinely have won. In the last 6 months, I have lost more substantive motions in civil cases than I have over the last twenty (oh my, its been almost 25 now that I think of it) years practicing in both state and federal court--I am not doing a poorer job. Its been ugly.

No comments:

Post a Comment