Thursday, April 14, 2011
Nibs says.......
Nibs, a reliable source in San Bernardino County, who has been close to the Daily Press (and less frequently the San Bernardino Sun), has watched people who claim no bone in the fight, do a lot of growling and scurrying with their tails between their legs. With the 22nd coming up, it will be interesting to see who will get away.
Friday, April 1, 2011
My oh my - what the #@&* is going on in San Bernardino County
In today's Sun Newspaper (excerpted for context):
"A defense attorney said Thursday that San Bernardino County prosecutors may be seeking to dismiss criminal charges against former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin in a corruption probe and pushing for a Grand Jury indictment instead.
Investigators from the District Attorney's Office on Thursday served subpoenas to county supervisors Josie Gonzales, Neil Derry, Gary Ovitt and Brad Mitzelfelt, requesting that they appear before a criminal Grand Jury this month to testify. Steve Hauer, Derry's deputy chief of staff, also received a subpoena.
On Tuesday, prosecutors sent letters to at least four uncharged co-conspirators in the probe requesting that they present any evidence they feel will help them in their defense by April 21, officials said.
Prosecutors allege the county's $102 million legal settlement with Rancho Cucamonga developer Colonies Partners LP in November 2006 was tainted by a web of conspiracy, bribery and extortion.
Rajan Maline, Erwin's attorney, said Thursday that Erwin, Colonies co-managing partner Jeff Burum, and Mark Kirk, Ovitt's former chief of staff, received the letters from prosecutors this week.
Former Supervisor Paul Biane said Thursday that he also received the letter Tuesday.
"By them convening the Grand Jury, it appears they may be trying to go by way of indictment so they won't have to have a preliminary hearing," Maline said Thursday.
In a preliminary hearing, prosecutors present evidence by way of testimony stating the facts of the case, and a judge determines if enough evidence has been presented to warrant a trial.
Erwin, who faces multiple felony counts including conspiracy to commit a crime, bribery, forgery and perjury, is scheduled to appear in San Bernardino Superior Court on April 25 for a preliminary hearing. His co-defendant, former San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus, pleaded guilty Tuesday to criminal charges related to the case as part of a plea bargain with prosecutors.
Postmus has agreed to testify against defendants at future trials and cooperate with investigators in exchange for reduced charges.
Susan Mickey, a spokeswoman for the District Attorney's Office, declined to comment Thursday.
Ric Grenell, a spokesman for Burum, also declined to comment.
Prosecutors believe the defendants and uncharged co-conspirators orchestrated a settlement on Colonies' behalf in exchange for political favors and cash bribes in excess of $400,000, which were funneled into political-action committees operated by the three supervisors who voted in favor of the settlement - Biane, Ovitt and Postmus - or their staff members.
Colonies officials have denied all allegations, and maintain the settlement was fair and validated by two Superior Court judges and a retired state Supreme Court justice who served as a mediator during settlement hearings in 2006.
Biane maintains the settlement was just and that he remained engaged with county attorneys throughout the settlement negotiations.
"I don't believe I've done anything wrong. I believe I did everything by the book," Biane said Thursday.
Maline believes prosecutors may be trying to avert a preliminary hearing by issuing an indictment, which would warrant the dismissal of the existing charges and allow prosecutors to go straight to trial.
Maline doesn't believe prosecutors have any evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
"It's unfortunate they don't want to go forward with the preliminary hearing, but sooner or later you will have to produce some evidence," Maline said. "To this date, there is no evidence that shows us Mr. Erwin was involved in any conspiracy."
..
Blogger Bob's comment: This opens up a number of questions:
.
(1) Does the DA's office believe that Postmus, Aleman and Guttierrez would survive an aggressive preliminary hearing cross examination and trial (and be consistent);
(2) What if the Grand Jury does not find sufficient evidence to charge Erwin--if so, what may that say about the motivation for Ramos' action against Erwin?...and if the grand jury does find some basis upon which to pursue Erwin, will the State AG come in to try and bailout/save the otherwise any blown statute of limitations?
(3) Is the uncharged unnamed (but fully known) co-conspirator approach even constitutional?? If you describe the person and conduct, they are not unknown, so has the felony statute has run on those folks (like it did on some of the counts against Erwin)?
(4) Why has it taken 4 1/2 years for this follow-up, unless the delay was part of a conspiracy to give the "unnamed" (but known) defendants a statute of limitations-based your-off-the-hook ticket?
"A defense attorney said Thursday that San Bernardino County prosecutors may be seeking to dismiss criminal charges against former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin in a corruption probe and pushing for a Grand Jury indictment instead.
Investigators from the District Attorney's Office on Thursday served subpoenas to county supervisors Josie Gonzales, Neil Derry, Gary Ovitt and Brad Mitzelfelt, requesting that they appear before a criminal Grand Jury this month to testify. Steve Hauer, Derry's deputy chief of staff, also received a subpoena.
On Tuesday, prosecutors sent letters to at least four uncharged co-conspirators in the probe requesting that they present any evidence they feel will help them in their defense by April 21, officials said.
Prosecutors allege the county's $102 million legal settlement with Rancho Cucamonga developer Colonies Partners LP in November 2006 was tainted by a web of conspiracy, bribery and extortion.
Rajan Maline, Erwin's attorney, said Thursday that Erwin, Colonies co-managing partner Jeff Burum, and Mark Kirk, Ovitt's former chief of staff, received the letters from prosecutors this week.
Former Supervisor Paul Biane said Thursday that he also received the letter Tuesday.
"By them convening the Grand Jury, it appears they may be trying to go by way of indictment so they won't have to have a preliminary hearing," Maline said Thursday.
In a preliminary hearing, prosecutors present evidence by way of testimony stating the facts of the case, and a judge determines if enough evidence has been presented to warrant a trial.
Erwin, who faces multiple felony counts including conspiracy to commit a crime, bribery, forgery and perjury, is scheduled to appear in San Bernardino Superior Court on April 25 for a preliminary hearing. His co-defendant, former San Bernardino County Assessor Bill Postmus, pleaded guilty Tuesday to criminal charges related to the case as part of a plea bargain with prosecutors.
Postmus has agreed to testify against defendants at future trials and cooperate with investigators in exchange for reduced charges.
Susan Mickey, a spokeswoman for the District Attorney's Office, declined to comment Thursday.
Ric Grenell, a spokesman for Burum, also declined to comment.
Prosecutors believe the defendants and uncharged co-conspirators orchestrated a settlement on Colonies' behalf in exchange for political favors and cash bribes in excess of $400,000, which were funneled into political-action committees operated by the three supervisors who voted in favor of the settlement - Biane, Ovitt and Postmus - or their staff members.
Colonies officials have denied all allegations, and maintain the settlement was fair and validated by two Superior Court judges and a retired state Supreme Court justice who served as a mediator during settlement hearings in 2006.
Biane maintains the settlement was just and that he remained engaged with county attorneys throughout the settlement negotiations.
"I don't believe I've done anything wrong. I believe I did everything by the book," Biane said Thursday.
Maline believes prosecutors may be trying to avert a preliminary hearing by issuing an indictment, which would warrant the dismissal of the existing charges and allow prosecutors to go straight to trial.
Maline doesn't believe prosecutors have any evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
"It's unfortunate they don't want to go forward with the preliminary hearing, but sooner or later you will have to produce some evidence," Maline said. "To this date, there is no evidence that shows us Mr. Erwin was involved in any conspiracy."
..
Blogger Bob's comment: This opens up a number of questions:
.
(1) Does the DA's office believe that Postmus, Aleman and Guttierrez would survive an aggressive preliminary hearing cross examination and trial (and be consistent);
(2) What if the Grand Jury does not find sufficient evidence to charge Erwin--if so, what may that say about the motivation for Ramos' action against Erwin?...and if the grand jury does find some basis upon which to pursue Erwin, will the State AG come in to try and bailout/save the otherwise any blown statute of limitations?
(3) Is the uncharged unnamed (but fully known) co-conspirator approach even constitutional?? If you describe the person and conduct, they are not unknown, so has the felony statute has run on those folks (like it did on some of the counts against Erwin)?
(4) Why has it taken 4 1/2 years for this follow-up, unless the delay was part of a conspiracy to give the "unnamed" (but known) defendants a statute of limitations-based your-off-the-hook ticket?
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Have We Created a Culture of Convictions at Any Cost in San Bernardino County??
John Thompson, who spent 14 years on death row before he was exonerated–based on evidence that had been purposefully withheld by prosecutors in the office of New Orleans DA Harry Connick Sr. A Louisiana jury found the DA’s office culpable for Thompson’s ordeal (which included coming within weeks of execution before the exculpatory evidence was revealed), and awarded him $14 million in compensatory damages.
.
The state appealed the jury’s verdict all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which yesterday ruled against Thompson and stripped him of his award.
.
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stated: “I would uphold the jury’s verdict awarding damages to Thompson for the gross, deliberately indifferent and long-continuing violation of his fair trial right,” she said, adding that she was joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
.
Ginsberg further said the actions of prosecutors under the control of Connick (the elected DA), who left office in 2003 and is the father of the famous singer of the same name, “dishonored” the obligation to turn over evidence favorable to the accused established in Brady v. Maryland nearly 50 years ago.
.
Ginsburg also wrote that “Connick’s deliberately indifferent attitude created a tinderbox in which Brady violations were nigh inevitable.” As we wrote in October, many other convictions have also been overturned, “all due to suppression of evidence,” said New Orleans Defense Attorney Nick Trenticosta. “They all try to portray it as rogue prosecutor; a fluke,” he continues, but “Harry Connick used to give awards to prosecutors for successfully convicting people.”
.
Connick, Trenticosta said, created a culture where convictions were won “at any cost.” The office’s zeal for sending people to death row was such that a New Orleans prosecutor kept on his desk a model electric chair holding photos of five condemned men–John Thompson among them. Trenticosta has called the prosectors’ actions “calculated measures to take people’s lives away.”
.
What do you think?
.
The state appealed the jury’s verdict all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which yesterday ruled against Thompson and stripped him of his award.
.
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stated: “I would uphold the jury’s verdict awarding damages to Thompson for the gross, deliberately indifferent and long-continuing violation of his fair trial right,” she said, adding that she was joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
.
Ginsberg further said the actions of prosecutors under the control of Connick (the elected DA), who left office in 2003 and is the father of the famous singer of the same name, “dishonored” the obligation to turn over evidence favorable to the accused established in Brady v. Maryland nearly 50 years ago.
.
Ginsburg also wrote that “Connick’s deliberately indifferent attitude created a tinderbox in which Brady violations were nigh inevitable.” As we wrote in October, many other convictions have also been overturned, “all due to suppression of evidence,” said New Orleans Defense Attorney Nick Trenticosta. “They all try to portray it as rogue prosecutor; a fluke,” he continues, but “Harry Connick used to give awards to prosecutors for successfully convicting people.”
.
Connick, Trenticosta said, created a culture where convictions were won “at any cost.” The office’s zeal for sending people to death row was such that a New Orleans prosecutor kept on his desk a model electric chair holding photos of five condemned men–John Thompson among them. Trenticosta has called the prosectors’ actions “calculated measures to take people’s lives away.”
.
What do you think?
Monday, March 28, 2011
Postmus Pleads Guilty to 15 Counts--DA Finds Way to Muzzle Postmus?
An effective strategy to muffling Postmus relating his alleged inside information on some of the DA's office's misconduct/malicious motives is to chase off private defense counsel with aggressive litigation tactics, leave the defendant with counsel he may not have full confidence in to try the case (and even if he did, not the resources to fight a protracted battle) and force him to plead guilty to 15 counts with no sentencing on any of the charges [http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/postmus29.22d084feb.html] so if the DA does not like what Postmus testifies to, the DA recommends to the judge ringing Postmus up for a max sentence?--Isn't that rather like burying testimony you don't want to come out and buying what you do want to come out? Isn't that censoring content? Who is the gatekeeper on Postmus' memory? Isn't that also bomb-proofing yourself against the potential damage from a material witness' testimony against you? Certainly Postmus painted a target on himself over the years and made moral judgment errors, but he made a mistake. When he did what he did, he wasn't the elected DA. Heh--imagine the Colonies' defense--"the County's prosecution against us was only possible after they found three convicted felons who were willing to lie again (this time against us)". Wow
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
PRESS RELEASE --NATIONAL CONSUMER PROTECTION WEEK HERE & ANNOUNCING A PROGRAM TO HELP LOAN MODIFICATION SCAM VICTIMS
The following press release care of Assemblymember Carter:
.
A public awareness campaign tied to National Consumer Protection Week this month is helping homeowners protect themselves against loan modification scams, find trusted help and report illegal activity to authorities.
.
The nationwide Loan Modification Scam Alert Campaign, sponsored by a coalition of national government agencies, nonprofit organizations and financial institutions, reminds people who are having difficulty paying their mortgage to avoid loan modification scammers.
.
OneJustice, a nonprofit organization, takes urban law students and pro bono attorneys on the road to rural and other areas in California to volunteer at free legal clinics through the Justice Bus™ Project. On March 23, the Justice Bus Project is coming to San Bernardino to provide a free legal clinic on home loan modification scams.
.
I urge you to take advantage of this free service or let someone you know it will be available. It will be held from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the San Bernardino County Law Library, 402 North "D" Street, San Bernardino.
.
The service is by appointment only. Call Candace Chen at (415) 834-0100, extention 313. The website is www.one-justice.org. OneJustice is partnering with the University of California, Irvine School of Law, Verizon, and Asian Pacific American Legal Center, a member of Asian American Center for Advancing Justice.
.
The non-profit Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino offers legal services to clients with limited financial means. Roberta Shouse, Legal Aid Society's executive director, says, "A lot of our clients are being tricked. People sell them these modifications; people pay them and never hear from them again.
.
"Before they give money to anyone, they should come into the clinic with every piece of paper on the subject and talk to an attorney."
.
Don't hesitate to get help. Call them at (909) 889-7328 and/or visit their website http://legalaidofsb.org/
.
Hope this helps.
.
A public awareness campaign tied to National Consumer Protection Week this month is helping homeowners protect themselves against loan modification scams, find trusted help and report illegal activity to authorities.
.
The nationwide Loan Modification Scam Alert Campaign, sponsored by a coalition of national government agencies, nonprofit organizations and financial institutions, reminds people who are having difficulty paying their mortgage to avoid loan modification scammers.
.
OneJustice, a nonprofit organization, takes urban law students and pro bono attorneys on the road to rural and other areas in California to volunteer at free legal clinics through the Justice Bus™ Project. On March 23, the Justice Bus Project is coming to San Bernardino to provide a free legal clinic on home loan modification scams.
.
I urge you to take advantage of this free service or let someone you know it will be available. It will be held from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the San Bernardino County Law Library, 402 North "D" Street, San Bernardino.
.
The service is by appointment only. Call Candace Chen at (415) 834-0100, extention 313. The website is www.one-justice.org. OneJustice is partnering with the University of California, Irvine School of Law, Verizon, and Asian Pacific American Legal Center, a member of Asian American Center for Advancing Justice.
.
The non-profit Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino offers legal services to clients with limited financial means. Roberta Shouse, Legal Aid Society's executive director, says, "A lot of our clients are being tricked. People sell them these modifications; people pay them and never hear from them again.
.
"Before they give money to anyone, they should come into the clinic with every piece of paper on the subject and talk to an attorney."
.
Don't hesitate to get help. Call them at (909) 889-7328 and/or visit their website http://legalaidofsb.org/
.
Hope this helps.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Supreme Court Allows State Prisoners to Seek DNA Evidence Through US Civil Rights Law - News - ABA Journal
Supreme Court Allows State Prisoners to Seek DNA Evidence Through US Civil Rights Law - News - ABA Journal
Blogger Bob's comments: Good article on another way to get justice through DNA evidence. Some of the questions, apart from who picks up the costs and can give the time for such actions (assuming jailhouse lawyering is not an alternative) and whether the District Attorneys' offices across the state may have any new duties/ responsibilities under this case, (1) does defense counsel have a duty to bring the action where DNA tested was requested by the defense lawyer, but denied [and now there is an appropriate remedy], (2) does prior defense counsel, in cases when DNA testing was demanded but denied, have a fiduciary duty to notify all their clients (not unlike a probate or trust lawyer having a duty to advise clients of significant changes in the law) and (3) is the US District court system which requires electronic filing, an undue burden on the prison population that may elect to force DNA testing via the 42 USC § 1983 tool (or is that not a problem as the relief only gives State Prisoners the right to bring the action in State court?). A practical problem is whether the 42 USC § 1983 can be used to force other people's DNA testing where a close relative might be, in the "plaintiff's" view a possible perp?
Blogger Bob's comments: Good article on another way to get justice through DNA evidence. Some of the questions, apart from who picks up the costs and can give the time for such actions (assuming jailhouse lawyering is not an alternative) and whether the District Attorneys' offices across the state may have any new duties/ responsibilities under this case, (1) does defense counsel have a duty to bring the action where DNA tested was requested by the defense lawyer, but denied [and now there is an appropriate remedy], (2) does prior defense counsel, in cases when DNA testing was demanded but denied, have a fiduciary duty to notify all their clients (not unlike a probate or trust lawyer having a duty to advise clients of significant changes in the law) and (3) is the US District court system which requires electronic filing, an undue burden on the prison population that may elect to force DNA testing via the 42 USC § 1983 tool (or is that not a problem as the relief only gives State Prisoners the right to bring the action in State court?). A practical problem is whether the 42 USC § 1983 can be used to force other people's DNA testing where a close relative might be, in the "plaintiff's" view a possible perp?
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Another Post to Help Homeowners Maybe Keep their Homes.....
Senator Barbara Boxer's “Resources for Struggling Homeowners” web page, part of the “Constituent Services” section of her Senate website, can be found at http://boxer.senate.gov/en/services/homes.cfm. Check it out!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)