Court Executive Officer Jim Perry issued a statement from Yolo Superior Court Presiding Judge David Rosenberg.
“In criminal proceedings, our courtrooms must, should and will operate open to the public, with appropriate security to ensure the safety of courtroom personnel and the public. The Court necessarily relies on the Yolo County Sheriff to ensure public access and to provide oversight of security to the Courthouse and courtrooms. The conclusion of this report is that the Yolo County Sheriffs Office committed two errors: (1) failure, after lunch, to ensure that the public entrance door to Department 9 was unlocked thereby denying entry to a criminal arraignment to waiting members of the public, press and family members of the defendant; (2) allowing, via side doors, members of law enforcement, as spectators, preferential entry to Department 9.”
Notice that the blame gets placed squarely by the Sheriff’s department. Judge Rosenberg writes:
“These failures by the Sheriffs Office are not acceptable to the Court.”
At the same time that Judge Rosenberg citing the report puts blame on the Sheriff’s department, he fails to acknowledge any blame he himself has in the handling the matter. Moreover he told the Sacramento Bee that he “lacked authority to take action against the deputies involved.”
“”They’re not my employees,” he said. “The ball is in the sheriff’s court right now.
“I do believe the sheriff will take the appropriate action. Ed Prieto’s a decent man and takes his job seriously. I trust he will do the right thing.””
Thus Judge Rosenberg basically throws the mess in the lap of Sheriff Ed Prieto. Sheriff Prieto has just lost one of his men and any criticism of his actions must necessarily be weighed against the enormity of that burden. Nevertheless, his response has been less than satisfactory as well.
On Tuesday, according again to the Sacramento Bee, Sheriff Prieto repeated the assertion that the closure of the hearing was an honest mistake and said he has no intention of punishing or reassigning the courthouse deputies responsible.
Again, I understand the strain that his department is under, but the term honest mistake does not ring true here. This was in many ways a deliberate act. They locked the public entrance door to the court room denying access to specific people notably the press and family members of the defendant. In the meantime, they allowed entrance to members of law enforcement and the victim’s family. How is that anything but a deliberate act? The claim just does not ring true.
The Sacramento Bee editorial this morning writes:
“Deputies told investigators that they “just plain forgot” to unlock the doors. But as The Sacramento Bee’s Hudson Sangree reports, there is a pattern here. Members of the public were regularly elbowed aside in favor of law enforcement officers during a recent capital trial involving a CHP officer murdered in Yolo. At other hearings involving a dentist accused of fondling his patients, the court held the proceeding earlier than it was scheduled, and at a second, failed to post the schedule at all.”
Even if the claim that this was an honest mistake is true, perhaps this suggests that the Yolo County Sheriff’s Department is too emotionally attached to this case to properly and professionally perform their duties. Perhaps this case needs to be moved to another jurisdiction. Last night on the Vanguard radio show, the two guests disagreed as to the feasibility of this. With Peter Scheer from the California First Amendment Coalition suggesting that this would not merit a move, but Natasha Mintzger a death penalty specialist with the ACLU suggesting the violation might suggest that the defendant would be able to get a fair trial.
However, this kind of benefit of the doubt really is strained by the history of not only similar incidents, but of mistakes that are skewed in one way or another to provide preference to one side over another. In the case of the accused dentist, it was the defense that was granted preferential access. In this case it was the victim and prosecution.
The biggest concern by far in this case is that no one seems to be stepping up and saying it is my fault, here is what we are going to do, and here is why it will not happen in the future. Instead you have both Judge Rosenberg and Sheriff Prieto making vague but nondescript promises that this will not happen again. Judge Rosenberg has to this point not taken any responsibility for the mistakes and has instead placed them on the Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff has called them “honest mistakes” which again does not ring true, has stated he will not discipline those responsible, and has instead issued a blanked insurance that from now on, access to the court will be open and fair. But how do we get to that point? What assurances does the public have?
Transparency and accountability in government demands that someone take a far greater measure of responsibility than they have so far. Someone needs to step up and tells us why this will never occur again. There needs to be someone making a genuine and heartfelt apology.
The worst part of this incident is that we are talking about this at all. We have a young Sheriff’s Deputy who was brutally murdered a week and a half ago. He was a single father of three who was due to be married in August to a single mother of five. Because of the actions of this Deputy’s former colleagues, instead of focusing on the tragedy that everyone agrees on, we are dealing with the abstraction of court proceedings and the right to a fair trial by the defendant.
It seems to us that the defendant needs to be arraigned again in an open courtroom to insure that down the line this case does not get reversed on a technicality–a technicality that has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence but rather to do with mistakes made by those involved in the criminal justice system. The best way to insure justice in this case would then be to move it to another county, where there will be no lingering doubts about conflicts of interest, about preferential treatment, and the only question will be the facts that will either convict or exonerate this individual charged with committed a horrible crime.
–Doug Paul Davis reporting
I can’t help wondering why the officers from the sheriff’s department were asked to unlock the court doors. This is generally a responsibility of the bailiff or the court clerk. It is a responsibility that should belong to court personnel. The only appropriate responsibility of the deputies in the court is security. Perhaps part of the problem is that the court is assigning to the deputies tasks that blur the line between who is a court officer and who is not.
That said, by refusing to discipline any deputies for excluding the public and giving preferential access to other deputies, Sheriff Ed Prieto essentially acknowledges that he has not adequately trained or supervised this employees. He should be recalled if this sort of thing happens again.
I can’t help wondering why the officers from the sheriff’s department were asked to unlock the court doors. This is generally a responsibility of the bailiff or the court clerk. It is a responsibility that should belong to court personnel. The only appropriate responsibility of the deputies in the court is security. Perhaps part of the problem is that the court is assigning to the deputies tasks that blur the line between who is a court officer and who is not.
That said, by refusing to discipline any deputies for excluding the public and giving preferential access to other deputies, Sheriff Ed Prieto essentially acknowledges that he has not adequately trained or supervised this employees. He should be recalled if this sort of thing happens again.
I can’t help wondering why the officers from the sheriff’s department were asked to unlock the court doors. This is generally a responsibility of the bailiff or the court clerk. It is a responsibility that should belong to court personnel. The only appropriate responsibility of the deputies in the court is security. Perhaps part of the problem is that the court is assigning to the deputies tasks that blur the line between who is a court officer and who is not.
That said, by refusing to discipline any deputies for excluding the public and giving preferential access to other deputies, Sheriff Ed Prieto essentially acknowledges that he has not adequately trained or supervised this employees. He should be recalled if this sort of thing happens again.
I can’t help wondering why the officers from the sheriff’s department were asked to unlock the court doors. This is generally a responsibility of the bailiff or the court clerk. It is a responsibility that should belong to court personnel. The only appropriate responsibility of the deputies in the court is security. Perhaps part of the problem is that the court is assigning to the deputies tasks that blur the line between who is a court officer and who is not.
That said, by refusing to discipline any deputies for excluding the public and giving preferential access to other deputies, Sheriff Ed Prieto essentially acknowledges that he has not adequately trained or supervised this employees. He should be recalled if this sort of thing happens again.
Do Judge Rosenberg and court-connected staff know that this discussion is happening online at this blog?
I would think if anyone of them spent 10-15 minutes reviewing all the comments made during the 4-5 days that this topic has run, they might be nervous enough to behave better next time.
Do Judge Rosenberg and court-connected staff know that this discussion is happening online at this blog?
I would think if anyone of them spent 10-15 minutes reviewing all the comments made during the 4-5 days that this topic has run, they might be nervous enough to behave better next time.
Do Judge Rosenberg and court-connected staff know that this discussion is happening online at this blog?
I would think if anyone of them spent 10-15 minutes reviewing all the comments made during the 4-5 days that this topic has run, they might be nervous enough to behave better next time.
Do Judge Rosenberg and court-connected staff know that this discussion is happening online at this blog?
I would think if anyone of them spent 10-15 minutes reviewing all the comments made during the 4-5 days that this topic has run, they might be nervous enough to behave better next time.
This incident may be an example of mission creep-the addition of more and more tasks on existing staff without compensatory deletion of other tasks. As a former field supervisor with the Ca. Dept. of Water Resources, I was often asked by management to “..do more with less!” Specific additional requests (mission creep) would have compromised field crew health and safety if I hadn’t “pushed back” as necessary. Yolo County support staff may need to do the same in the stressful quickening of the work environment of today.
This incident may be an example of mission creep-the addition of more and more tasks on existing staff without compensatory deletion of other tasks. As a former field supervisor with the Ca. Dept. of Water Resources, I was often asked by management to “..do more with less!” Specific additional requests (mission creep) would have compromised field crew health and safety if I hadn’t “pushed back” as necessary. Yolo County support staff may need to do the same in the stressful quickening of the work environment of today.
This incident may be an example of mission creep-the addition of more and more tasks on existing staff without compensatory deletion of other tasks. As a former field supervisor with the Ca. Dept. of Water Resources, I was often asked by management to “..do more with less!” Specific additional requests (mission creep) would have compromised field crew health and safety if I hadn’t “pushed back” as necessary. Yolo County support staff may need to do the same in the stressful quickening of the work environment of today.
This incident may be an example of mission creep-the addition of more and more tasks on existing staff without compensatory deletion of other tasks. As a former field supervisor with the Ca. Dept. of Water Resources, I was often asked by management to “..do more with less!” Specific additional requests (mission creep) would have compromised field crew health and safety if I hadn’t “pushed back” as necessary. Yolo County support staff may need to do the same in the stressful quickening of the work environment of today.
DPD –
I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.
The investigation points to the deputies in charge of court security as the cause of the lock out. This is something that we already knew, but it helped to find out what the Commissioner knew and didn’t know.
Rosenberg wasn’t at fault in the lock out. He wasn’t there and he doesn’t directly supervise the deputies involved. The court contracts with the Sherrif’s department to provide services according to direction given by the judges, referees and commissioners and Rosenberg has communicated quite clearly that the contract was violated by the deputies 1)locking the door to a public hearing & 2)allowing deputies to bypass the first-come, first-seated rule for public attendance. Rosenberg put it very bluntly, “These failures by the Sheriffs Office are not acceptable to the Court.”
I’m wondering what kind of conversations are occurring at the courthouse about this. Don’t you think that Rosenberg is pissed about this just as much as we are?
Prieto’s actions are really inexcusable. He apparently doesn’t plan to do much of anything.
In the Enterprise article Prieto even states that he plans to reserve places at future hearings for officers “because they want to be there.” He doesn’t get it that his officers are just members of the public when it comes to attending court hearings and have to stand in line with everyone else. He doesn’t get that his officers violated the U.S. Constitution in their actions. I’m sure that he has no sympathy for criminals who claim that there actions were “just a mistake.” I don’t understand why he thinks his deputies are above the law and don’t have to suffer the same consequences when they blunder as the rest of us. Not even minimal action of rotating the officers responsible to another job outside of the courthouse?
Rosenberg has agreed to Bench-Bar-Media meetings. This is where the broader pattern of violations (fuzzy court calendars, lack of notice, private hearings in chambers, etc.) can be addressed.
DPD –
I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.
The investigation points to the deputies in charge of court security as the cause of the lock out. This is something that we already knew, but it helped to find out what the Commissioner knew and didn’t know.
Rosenberg wasn’t at fault in the lock out. He wasn’t there and he doesn’t directly supervise the deputies involved. The court contracts with the Sherrif’s department to provide services according to direction given by the judges, referees and commissioners and Rosenberg has communicated quite clearly that the contract was violated by the deputies 1)locking the door to a public hearing & 2)allowing deputies to bypass the first-come, first-seated rule for public attendance. Rosenberg put it very bluntly, “These failures by the Sheriffs Office are not acceptable to the Court.”
I’m wondering what kind of conversations are occurring at the courthouse about this. Don’t you think that Rosenberg is pissed about this just as much as we are?
Prieto’s actions are really inexcusable. He apparently doesn’t plan to do much of anything.
In the Enterprise article Prieto even states that he plans to reserve places at future hearings for officers “because they want to be there.” He doesn’t get it that his officers are just members of the public when it comes to attending court hearings and have to stand in line with everyone else. He doesn’t get that his officers violated the U.S. Constitution in their actions. I’m sure that he has no sympathy for criminals who claim that there actions were “just a mistake.” I don’t understand why he thinks his deputies are above the law and don’t have to suffer the same consequences when they blunder as the rest of us. Not even minimal action of rotating the officers responsible to another job outside of the courthouse?
Rosenberg has agreed to Bench-Bar-Media meetings. This is where the broader pattern of violations (fuzzy court calendars, lack of notice, private hearings in chambers, etc.) can be addressed.
DPD –
I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.
The investigation points to the deputies in charge of court security as the cause of the lock out. This is something that we already knew, but it helped to find out what the Commissioner knew and didn’t know.
Rosenberg wasn’t at fault in the lock out. He wasn’t there and he doesn’t directly supervise the deputies involved. The court contracts with the Sherrif’s department to provide services according to direction given by the judges, referees and commissioners and Rosenberg has communicated quite clearly that the contract was violated by the deputies 1)locking the door to a public hearing & 2)allowing deputies to bypass the first-come, first-seated rule for public attendance. Rosenberg put it very bluntly, “These failures by the Sheriffs Office are not acceptable to the Court.”
I’m wondering what kind of conversations are occurring at the courthouse about this. Don’t you think that Rosenberg is pissed about this just as much as we are?
Prieto’s actions are really inexcusable. He apparently doesn’t plan to do much of anything.
In the Enterprise article Prieto even states that he plans to reserve places at future hearings for officers “because they want to be there.” He doesn’t get it that his officers are just members of the public when it comes to attending court hearings and have to stand in line with everyone else. He doesn’t get that his officers violated the U.S. Constitution in their actions. I’m sure that he has no sympathy for criminals who claim that there actions were “just a mistake.” I don’t understand why he thinks his deputies are above the law and don’t have to suffer the same consequences when they blunder as the rest of us. Not even minimal action of rotating the officers responsible to another job outside of the courthouse?
Rosenberg has agreed to Bench-Bar-Media meetings. This is where the broader pattern of violations (fuzzy court calendars, lack of notice, private hearings in chambers, etc.) can be addressed.
DPD –
I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.
The investigation points to the deputies in charge of court security as the cause of the lock out. This is something that we already knew, but it helped to find out what the Commissioner knew and didn’t know.
Rosenberg wasn’t at fault in the lock out. He wasn’t there and he doesn’t directly supervise the deputies involved. The court contracts with the Sherrif’s department to provide services according to direction given by the judges, referees and commissioners and Rosenberg has communicated quite clearly that the contract was violated by the deputies 1)locking the door to a public hearing & 2)allowing deputies to bypass the first-come, first-seated rule for public attendance. Rosenberg put it very bluntly, “These failures by the Sheriffs Office are not acceptable to the Court.”
I’m wondering what kind of conversations are occurring at the courthouse about this. Don’t you think that Rosenberg is pissed about this just as much as we are?
Prieto’s actions are really inexcusable. He apparently doesn’t plan to do much of anything.
In the Enterprise article Prieto even states that he plans to reserve places at future hearings for officers “because they want to be there.” He doesn’t get it that his officers are just members of the public when it comes to attending court hearings and have to stand in line with everyone else. He doesn’t get that his officers violated the U.S. Constitution in their actions. I’m sure that he has no sympathy for criminals who claim that there actions were “just a mistake.” I don’t understand why he thinks his deputies are above the law and don’t have to suffer the same consequences when they blunder as the rest of us. Not even minimal action of rotating the officers responsible to another job outside of the courthouse?
Rosenberg has agreed to Bench-Bar-Media meetings. This is where the broader pattern of violations (fuzzy court calendars, lack of notice, private hearings in chambers, etc.) can be addressed.
“I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.”
I don’t know if I am or am not being unfair here. I would say I completely agree with your comments vis-a-vis Prieto. I think you rightly criticize Prieto, but part of me suspects that the Judge has a bit more authority in this matter than what he has stated. The question for me is where the buck stops here, who has the authority, I don’t see anyone stepping up and take responsibility. That’s my concern.
“I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.”
I don’t know if I am or am not being unfair here. I would say I completely agree with your comments vis-a-vis Prieto. I think you rightly criticize Prieto, but part of me suspects that the Judge has a bit more authority in this matter than what he has stated. The question for me is where the buck stops here, who has the authority, I don’t see anyone stepping up and take responsibility. That’s my concern.
“I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.”
I don’t know if I am or am not being unfair here. I would say I completely agree with your comments vis-a-vis Prieto. I think you rightly criticize Prieto, but part of me suspects that the Judge has a bit more authority in this matter than what he has stated. The question for me is where the buck stops here, who has the authority, I don’t see anyone stepping up and take responsibility. That’s my concern.
“I think that you are being a little unfair here.
Rosenberg asked that an investigation be done into what happened and this was done. But you are not happy with the results because blame is not placed in way that you see that it should.”
I don’t know if I am or am not being unfair here. I would say I completely agree with your comments vis-a-vis Prieto. I think you rightly criticize Prieto, but part of me suspects that the Judge has a bit more authority in this matter than what he has stated. The question for me is where the buck stops here, who has the authority, I don’t see anyone stepping up and take responsibility. That’s my concern.
this is just typical Yolo County, cover your a– until it all blows over, and then you can return to business as usual
treat it as an isolated incident instead of acknowledging the consistent, systemic practices of failing to respect the public’s right to attend criminal proceedings . . .
treat it as a “mistake” someone made, instead of acknowledging that there has been a deliberate decision by the court to delegate control over public access to its court rooms to the sheriff’s deputies
point the figure elsewhere, to someone safely esconsced, like Sheriff Prieto, who can safely do nothing, instead of having the court deal with the problem itself
indeed, if you read Rosenberg’s remarks carefully, as DPD did, he basically says that the court has no ability to guarantee that the public will have access to court proceedings, that’s up to the Sheriff’s Department!
Don King said, after being found not guilty of tax evasion, “Only in America!”, and it had an obvious double-edged meaning
Here, we have a Presiding Judge either unwilling or incapable of insuring that the public will have access to the proceedings of his court: Only in Yolo County!
We can only hope that the AOC or the Judicial Council steps in and demands that appropriate action be taken. Given their history of docility, it’s a pretty thin reed.
–Richard Estes
this is just typical Yolo County, cover your a– until it all blows over, and then you can return to business as usual
treat it as an isolated incident instead of acknowledging the consistent, systemic practices of failing to respect the public’s right to attend criminal proceedings . . .
treat it as a “mistake” someone made, instead of acknowledging that there has been a deliberate decision by the court to delegate control over public access to its court rooms to the sheriff’s deputies
point the figure elsewhere, to someone safely esconsced, like Sheriff Prieto, who can safely do nothing, instead of having the court deal with the problem itself
indeed, if you read Rosenberg’s remarks carefully, as DPD did, he basically says that the court has no ability to guarantee that the public will have access to court proceedings, that’s up to the Sheriff’s Department!
Don King said, after being found not guilty of tax evasion, “Only in America!”, and it had an obvious double-edged meaning
Here, we have a Presiding Judge either unwilling or incapable of insuring that the public will have access to the proceedings of his court: Only in Yolo County!
We can only hope that the AOC or the Judicial Council steps in and demands that appropriate action be taken. Given their history of docility, it’s a pretty thin reed.
–Richard Estes
this is just typical Yolo County, cover your a– until it all blows over, and then you can return to business as usual
treat it as an isolated incident instead of acknowledging the consistent, systemic practices of failing to respect the public’s right to attend criminal proceedings . . .
treat it as a “mistake” someone made, instead of acknowledging that there has been a deliberate decision by the court to delegate control over public access to its court rooms to the sheriff’s deputies
point the figure elsewhere, to someone safely esconsced, like Sheriff Prieto, who can safely do nothing, instead of having the court deal with the problem itself
indeed, if you read Rosenberg’s remarks carefully, as DPD did, he basically says that the court has no ability to guarantee that the public will have access to court proceedings, that’s up to the Sheriff’s Department!
Don King said, after being found not guilty of tax evasion, “Only in America!”, and it had an obvious double-edged meaning
Here, we have a Presiding Judge either unwilling or incapable of insuring that the public will have access to the proceedings of his court: Only in Yolo County!
We can only hope that the AOC or the Judicial Council steps in and demands that appropriate action be taken. Given their history of docility, it’s a pretty thin reed.
–Richard Estes
this is just typical Yolo County, cover your a– until it all blows over, and then you can return to business as usual
treat it as an isolated incident instead of acknowledging the consistent, systemic practices of failing to respect the public’s right to attend criminal proceedings . . .
treat it as a “mistake” someone made, instead of acknowledging that there has been a deliberate decision by the court to delegate control over public access to its court rooms to the sheriff’s deputies
point the figure elsewhere, to someone safely esconsced, like Sheriff Prieto, who can safely do nothing, instead of having the court deal with the problem itself
indeed, if you read Rosenberg’s remarks carefully, as DPD did, he basically says that the court has no ability to guarantee that the public will have access to court proceedings, that’s up to the Sheriff’s Department!
Don King said, after being found not guilty of tax evasion, “Only in America!”, and it had an obvious double-edged meaning
Here, we have a Presiding Judge either unwilling or incapable of insuring that the public will have access to the proceedings of his court: Only in Yolo County!
We can only hope that the AOC or the Judicial Council steps in and demands that appropriate action be taken. Given their history of docility, it’s a pretty thin reed.
–Richard Estes
There is one point and one point only that the residents of Yolo County must focus upon, which is “Everyone has civil rights and those rights must be protected.” Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will get a fair trial in Yolo County. That particular train has left the station to points unknown and cannot be called back to the station. The fact that law enforcement entered the courtroom through the side entrance shows that law enforcement knew the front door was locked and it proves it was exactly what it appears to be; a deliberate, intentional decision to violate the defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial—as does the fact that according to the Sacramento Bee editorial, Commissioner Beronio ordered the bailiff to unlock the courtroom and he refused to obey her order. The “show of force” by law enforcement was to intimidate the defendant, his counsel, his family and the media. Over four years ago, I was an innocent victim of this type of corruption and violations of my civil rights; furthermore, as racial minority, the conduct still occurring in Yolo County clearly shows that the system in operation is broken, corrupt and biased, and therefore it is impossible for an innocent racial minority to get and receive a fair trial. As I told a former presiding judge during the first year of my case, “This is like being in Atlanta during the 1930s facing a lynch mob there bent on destroying me.” I have always been innocent of all charges but I was blessed and fortunate the case was finally dismissed years later, after tremendous financial , time and energy expenses not only to me, but to others who assisted me. During the years of fighting the false charges, I was shown the cruel, dishonest, racist and corrupt underbelly of the Yolo County court system, its judges, law enforcement and attorneys who actively participated in the corrupt system still at play. Therefore, I do not believe law enforcement acted alone. Therefore, I do not believe current Presiding Judge Rosenberg. Presiding Judge Rosenberg’s most recent press release is yet another attempt to hide the public corruption running rampant in Yolo County and to evade accountability for it. There is no justice in Yolo County but “just us.”
There is one point and one point only that the residents of Yolo County must focus upon, which is “Everyone has civil rights and those rights must be protected.” Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will get a fair trial in Yolo County. That particular train has left the station to points unknown and cannot be called back to the station. The fact that law enforcement entered the courtroom through the side entrance shows that law enforcement knew the front door was locked and it proves it was exactly what it appears to be; a deliberate, intentional decision to violate the defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial—as does the fact that according to the Sacramento Bee editorial, Commissioner Beronio ordered the bailiff to unlock the courtroom and he refused to obey her order. The “show of force” by law enforcement was to intimidate the defendant, his counsel, his family and the media. Over four years ago, I was an innocent victim of this type of corruption and violations of my civil rights; furthermore, as racial minority, the conduct still occurring in Yolo County clearly shows that the system in operation is broken, corrupt and biased, and therefore it is impossible for an innocent racial minority to get and receive a fair trial. As I told a former presiding judge during the first year of my case, “This is like being in Atlanta during the 1930s facing a lynch mob there bent on destroying me.” I have always been innocent of all charges but I was blessed and fortunate the case was finally dismissed years later, after tremendous financial , time and energy expenses not only to me, but to others who assisted me. During the years of fighting the false charges, I was shown the cruel, dishonest, racist and corrupt underbelly of the Yolo County court system, its judges, law enforcement and attorneys who actively participated in the corrupt system still at play. Therefore, I do not believe law enforcement acted alone. Therefore, I do not believe current Presiding Judge Rosenberg. Presiding Judge Rosenberg’s most recent press release is yet another attempt to hide the public corruption running rampant in Yolo County and to evade accountability for it. There is no justice in Yolo County but “just us.”
There is one point and one point only that the residents of Yolo County must focus upon, which is “Everyone has civil rights and those rights must be protected.” Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will get a fair trial in Yolo County. That particular train has left the station to points unknown and cannot be called back to the station. The fact that law enforcement entered the courtroom through the side entrance shows that law enforcement knew the front door was locked and it proves it was exactly what it appears to be; a deliberate, intentional decision to violate the defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial—as does the fact that according to the Sacramento Bee editorial, Commissioner Beronio ordered the bailiff to unlock the courtroom and he refused to obey her order. The “show of force” by law enforcement was to intimidate the defendant, his counsel, his family and the media. Over four years ago, I was an innocent victim of this type of corruption and violations of my civil rights; furthermore, as racial minority, the conduct still occurring in Yolo County clearly shows that the system in operation is broken, corrupt and biased, and therefore it is impossible for an innocent racial minority to get and receive a fair trial. As I told a former presiding judge during the first year of my case, “This is like being in Atlanta during the 1930s facing a lynch mob there bent on destroying me.” I have always been innocent of all charges but I was blessed and fortunate the case was finally dismissed years later, after tremendous financial , time and energy expenses not only to me, but to others who assisted me. During the years of fighting the false charges, I was shown the cruel, dishonest, racist and corrupt underbelly of the Yolo County court system, its judges, law enforcement and attorneys who actively participated in the corrupt system still at play. Therefore, I do not believe law enforcement acted alone. Therefore, I do not believe current Presiding Judge Rosenberg. Presiding Judge Rosenberg’s most recent press release is yet another attempt to hide the public corruption running rampant in Yolo County and to evade accountability for it. There is no justice in Yolo County but “just us.”
There is one point and one point only that the residents of Yolo County must focus upon, which is “Everyone has civil rights and those rights must be protected.” Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will get a fair trial in Yolo County. That particular train has left the station to points unknown and cannot be called back to the station. The fact that law enforcement entered the courtroom through the side entrance shows that law enforcement knew the front door was locked and it proves it was exactly what it appears to be; a deliberate, intentional decision to violate the defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial—as does the fact that according to the Sacramento Bee editorial, Commissioner Beronio ordered the bailiff to unlock the courtroom and he refused to obey her order. The “show of force” by law enforcement was to intimidate the defendant, his counsel, his family and the media. Over four years ago, I was an innocent victim of this type of corruption and violations of my civil rights; furthermore, as racial minority, the conduct still occurring in Yolo County clearly shows that the system in operation is broken, corrupt and biased, and therefore it is impossible for an innocent racial minority to get and receive a fair trial. As I told a former presiding judge during the first year of my case, “This is like being in Atlanta during the 1930s facing a lynch mob there bent on destroying me.” I have always been innocent of all charges but I was blessed and fortunate the case was finally dismissed years later, after tremendous financial , time and energy expenses not only to me, but to others who assisted me. During the years of fighting the false charges, I was shown the cruel, dishonest, racist and corrupt underbelly of the Yolo County court system, its judges, law enforcement and attorneys who actively participated in the corrupt system still at play. Therefore, I do not believe law enforcement acted alone. Therefore, I do not believe current Presiding Judge Rosenberg. Presiding Judge Rosenberg’s most recent press release is yet another attempt to hide the public corruption running rampant in Yolo County and to evade accountability for it. There is no justice in Yolo County but “just us.”
CRIMINAL SECTION
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Criminal Section, PHB
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 514-3204
Fax: (202) 514-8336
The trial attorneys of the Criminal Section prosecute violations of several federal criminal civil rights statutes, including those which prohibit the following types of crimes:
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.
CRIMINAL SECTION
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Criminal Section, PHB
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 514-3204
Fax: (202) 514-8336
The trial attorneys of the Criminal Section prosecute violations of several federal criminal civil rights statutes, including those which prohibit the following types of crimes:
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.
CRIMINAL SECTION
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Criminal Section, PHB
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 514-3204
Fax: (202) 514-8336
The trial attorneys of the Criminal Section prosecute violations of several federal criminal civil rights statutes, including those which prohibit the following types of crimes:
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.
CRIMINAL SECTION
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Criminal Section, PHB
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 514-3204
Fax: (202) 514-8336
The trial attorneys of the Criminal Section prosecute violations of several federal criminal civil rights statutes, including those which prohibit the following types of crimes:
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.
Correction to my previous post:
Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and DENIAL OF access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will NOT get a fair trial in Yolo County.
Correction to my previous post:
Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and DENIAL OF access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will NOT get a fair trial in Yolo County.
Correction to my previous post:
Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and DENIAL OF access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will NOT get a fair trial in Yolo County.
Correction to my previous post:
Allowing what occurred– the “locking of the doors and DENIAL OF access to the courtroom”–clearly illustrates to the world that the defendant cannot and will NOT get a fair trial in Yolo County.
Can Rosenberg instruct the court administrator to order some extra keys and distribute them to the judges and commissioners? That’s how easy it is to fix this problem. That’s how not serious Rosenberg is about changing anything about this dirty system.
Can Rosenberg instruct the court administrator to order some extra keys and distribute them to the judges and commissioners? That’s how easy it is to fix this problem. That’s how not serious Rosenberg is about changing anything about this dirty system.
Can Rosenberg instruct the court administrator to order some extra keys and distribute them to the judges and commissioners? That’s how easy it is to fix this problem. That’s how not serious Rosenberg is about changing anything about this dirty system.
Can Rosenberg instruct the court administrator to order some extra keys and distribute them to the judges and commissioners? That’s how easy it is to fix this problem. That’s how not serious Rosenberg is about changing anything about this dirty system.
Just to clarify – The commissioner didn’t order the baliff that he should go unlock the door. She asked that the family be allowed in to attend the hearing and she was essentially told that there was no room. Per the investigation she was shocked to later learn that the doors to the building had been locked.
I wonder about the actual design of the building. I believe that there is a door to the building and then a door to the actual courtroom. All-Phase Security handles locking and unlocking the door to the outside and the bailiff would control the door to the actual courtroom. The outside door was locked to the general public while other people were allowed to enter the building through other entrances – through the DA’s Office & through side doors used to allow transfer of prisoners without going through the public lobby. These people were then able to enter the courtroom itself.
Since I’ve never been there I can only go by assumption, but the pictures in the paper show a glass door to the building. I don’t think that this door is the entrance to the actual court room and there must be a lobby of some sort out of the view of the commissioner.
Just to clarify – The commissioner didn’t order the baliff that he should go unlock the door. She asked that the family be allowed in to attend the hearing and she was essentially told that there was no room. Per the investigation she was shocked to later learn that the doors to the building had been locked.
I wonder about the actual design of the building. I believe that there is a door to the building and then a door to the actual courtroom. All-Phase Security handles locking and unlocking the door to the outside and the bailiff would control the door to the actual courtroom. The outside door was locked to the general public while other people were allowed to enter the building through other entrances – through the DA’s Office & through side doors used to allow transfer of prisoners without going through the public lobby. These people were then able to enter the courtroom itself.
Since I’ve never been there I can only go by assumption, but the pictures in the paper show a glass door to the building. I don’t think that this door is the entrance to the actual court room and there must be a lobby of some sort out of the view of the commissioner.
Just to clarify – The commissioner didn’t order the baliff that he should go unlock the door. She asked that the family be allowed in to attend the hearing and she was essentially told that there was no room. Per the investigation she was shocked to later learn that the doors to the building had been locked.
I wonder about the actual design of the building. I believe that there is a door to the building and then a door to the actual courtroom. All-Phase Security handles locking and unlocking the door to the outside and the bailiff would control the door to the actual courtroom. The outside door was locked to the general public while other people were allowed to enter the building through other entrances – through the DA’s Office & through side doors used to allow transfer of prisoners without going through the public lobby. These people were then able to enter the courtroom itself.
Since I’ve never been there I can only go by assumption, but the pictures in the paper show a glass door to the building. I don’t think that this door is the entrance to the actual court room and there must be a lobby of some sort out of the view of the commissioner.
Just to clarify – The commissioner didn’t order the baliff that he should go unlock the door. She asked that the family be allowed in to attend the hearing and she was essentially told that there was no room. Per the investigation she was shocked to later learn that the doors to the building had been locked.
I wonder about the actual design of the building. I believe that there is a door to the building and then a door to the actual courtroom. All-Phase Security handles locking and unlocking the door to the outside and the bailiff would control the door to the actual courtroom. The outside door was locked to the general public while other people were allowed to enter the building through other entrances – through the DA’s Office & through side doors used to allow transfer of prisoners without going through the public lobby. These people were then able to enter the courtroom itself.
Since I’ve never been there I can only go by assumption, but the pictures in the paper show a glass door to the building. I don’t think that this door is the entrance to the actual court room and there must be a lobby of some sort out of the view of the commissioner.
Anonymous 9:48… a presiding judge, (Rosenberg) should know what is happening in his courts at all times.
There should already be a systsem in place in the event that there is some breakdown of the system so that he may be immediately notified and can respond. This was not and is not obviously in place.
Anonymous 9:48… a presiding judge, (Rosenberg) should know what is happening in his courts at all times.
There should already be a systsem in place in the event that there is some breakdown of the system so that he may be immediately notified and can respond. This was not and is not obviously in place.
Anonymous 9:48… a presiding judge, (Rosenberg) should know what is happening in his courts at all times.
There should already be a systsem in place in the event that there is some breakdown of the system so that he may be immediately notified and can respond. This was not and is not obviously in place.
Anonymous 9:48… a presiding judge, (Rosenberg) should know what is happening in his courts at all times.
There should already be a systsem in place in the event that there is some breakdown of the system so that he may be immediately notified and can respond. This was not and is not obviously in place.
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.
Dave Rosenberg has made a joke out of the Yolo Courts instead of bringing professionalism. For Ed Prieto it’s just another example of him skirting the system.
Do you recall “flower gate” where he used funds to order items for his wife and others? The grand jury slapped him on the hand. Now, we have this.
I think we can all agree that it’s time to clean house in Yolo County. The D.A. should be included in the above mentioned matters as well. He’s a embarrassed our county too.
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.
Dave Rosenberg has made a joke out of the Yolo Courts instead of bringing professionalism. For Ed Prieto it’s just another example of him skirting the system.
Do you recall “flower gate” where he used funds to order items for his wife and others? The grand jury slapped him on the hand. Now, we have this.
I think we can all agree that it’s time to clean house in Yolo County. The D.A. should be included in the above mentioned matters as well. He’s a embarrassed our county too.
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.
Dave Rosenberg has made a joke out of the Yolo Courts instead of bringing professionalism. For Ed Prieto it’s just another example of him skirting the system.
Do you recall “flower gate” where he used funds to order items for his wife and others? The grand jury slapped him on the hand. Now, we have this.
I think we can all agree that it’s time to clean house in Yolo County. The D.A. should be included in the above mentioned matters as well. He’s a embarrassed our county too.
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.
Dave Rosenberg has made a joke out of the Yolo Courts instead of bringing professionalism. For Ed Prieto it’s just another example of him skirting the system.
Do you recall “flower gate” where he used funds to order items for his wife and others? The grand jury slapped him on the hand. Now, we have this.
I think we can all agree that it’s time to clean house in Yolo County. The D.A. should be included in the above mentioned matters as well. He’s a embarrassed our county too.
Sacramento Bee Editorial today, “In its report, the court’s executive office recommends establishing a committee to focus on media access, among other things. That’s helpful, but not enough. The issues raised by the lockout need serious examination by authorities independent of Yolo County.”
It needs to be reviewed by authorities with no connection whatsoever to Rosenberg. He worked for former governor Gray Davis who pulled a lot of strings while in office, so there needs to be some assurance that the investigation will be done by a truly independent (away from Yolo and Sacramento) body.
Sacramento Bee Editorial today, “In its report, the court’s executive office recommends establishing a committee to focus on media access, among other things. That’s helpful, but not enough. The issues raised by the lockout need serious examination by authorities independent of Yolo County.”
It needs to be reviewed by authorities with no connection whatsoever to Rosenberg. He worked for former governor Gray Davis who pulled a lot of strings while in office, so there needs to be some assurance that the investigation will be done by a truly independent (away from Yolo and Sacramento) body.
Sacramento Bee Editorial today, “In its report, the court’s executive office recommends establishing a committee to focus on media access, among other things. That’s helpful, but not enough. The issues raised by the lockout need serious examination by authorities independent of Yolo County.”
It needs to be reviewed by authorities with no connection whatsoever to Rosenberg. He worked for former governor Gray Davis who pulled a lot of strings while in office, so there needs to be some assurance that the investigation will be done by a truly independent (away from Yolo and Sacramento) body.
Sacramento Bee Editorial today, “In its report, the court’s executive office recommends establishing a committee to focus on media access, among other things. That’s helpful, but not enough. The issues raised by the lockout need serious examination by authorities independent of Yolo County.”
It needs to be reviewed by authorities with no connection whatsoever to Rosenberg. He worked for former governor Gray Davis who pulled a lot of strings while in office, so there needs to be some assurance that the investigation will be done by a truly independent (away from Yolo and Sacramento) body.
I believe that Rosenberg did respond just as soon as he was made aware of the problem. I watched the video from the TV news media. Even Prieto who was at the court hearing is stating that they were not aware inside the courtroom that the door remained unlocked outside.
Rosenberg is the Presiding Judge, but also has his own calendar. I don’t see how a Judge who is in Court in the main courthouse and running his own calendar could be instantly aware of a problem and take action for something occurring in a courtroom in another building. I believe you are being a little unrealistic and unfair to imply that Judge Rosenberg somehow needed to be able to detect and avert this mistake over, say, Prieto and the other supervisors from the sheriff’s department who were there, on site, in the building, in the courtroom, in Dept. 9, at the very time of the hearing and are directly in charge of the deputies involved in locking the doors.
I believe that Rosenberg did respond just as soon as he was made aware of the problem. I watched the video from the TV news media. Even Prieto who was at the court hearing is stating that they were not aware inside the courtroom that the door remained unlocked outside.
Rosenberg is the Presiding Judge, but also has his own calendar. I don’t see how a Judge who is in Court in the main courthouse and running his own calendar could be instantly aware of a problem and take action for something occurring in a courtroom in another building. I believe you are being a little unrealistic and unfair to imply that Judge Rosenberg somehow needed to be able to detect and avert this mistake over, say, Prieto and the other supervisors from the sheriff’s department who were there, on site, in the building, in the courtroom, in Dept. 9, at the very time of the hearing and are directly in charge of the deputies involved in locking the doors.
I believe that Rosenberg did respond just as soon as he was made aware of the problem. I watched the video from the TV news media. Even Prieto who was at the court hearing is stating that they were not aware inside the courtroom that the door remained unlocked outside.
Rosenberg is the Presiding Judge, but also has his own calendar. I don’t see how a Judge who is in Court in the main courthouse and running his own calendar could be instantly aware of a problem and take action for something occurring in a courtroom in another building. I believe you are being a little unrealistic and unfair to imply that Judge Rosenberg somehow needed to be able to detect and avert this mistake over, say, Prieto and the other supervisors from the sheriff’s department who were there, on site, in the building, in the courtroom, in Dept. 9, at the very time of the hearing and are directly in charge of the deputies involved in locking the doors.
I believe that Rosenberg did respond just as soon as he was made aware of the problem. I watched the video from the TV news media. Even Prieto who was at the court hearing is stating that they were not aware inside the courtroom that the door remained unlocked outside.
Rosenberg is the Presiding Judge, but also has his own calendar. I don’t see how a Judge who is in Court in the main courthouse and running his own calendar could be instantly aware of a problem and take action for something occurring in a courtroom in another building. I believe you are being a little unrealistic and unfair to imply that Judge Rosenberg somehow needed to be able to detect and avert this mistake over, say, Prieto and the other supervisors from the sheriff’s department who were there, on site, in the building, in the courtroom, in Dept. 9, at the very time of the hearing and are directly in charge of the deputies involved in locking the doors.
This is nothing more than the good ‘ol boy system at work. Ed Prieto takes the fall for Judge Rosenberg’s failure to manage his courts properly. And of course Ed Prieto can be forgiven since he is understandably upset about the death of his officer.
What has not been noted in this blog, but was mentioned in the Davis Enterprise, is that the lockout has drawn state attention. Sure Rosenberg has agreed to a media/court committee – because he has the state breathing down his neck.
The shame of all this is the damage it is doing to the family of the victim. The defense attorneys have been handed a good reason for an appeal of any conviction. Vicious criminals have gotten off on a lot less. (Remember the three accomplices in the Jessica Lundsford murder case that were never arrested because of police misconduct?) A do-over of the arraignment would only make matters worse, and add another reason to appeal a conviction. Venue change is the only possible solution here – but the issue-on-appeal horse has already been let out of the barn. The prosecution and Ed Prieto will have to live with that one. Mark my words well, the lockout WILL BE AN ISSUE RAISED ON APPEAL. THAT WILL RESULT IN THE CASE BEING DRAGGED OUT THAT MUCH LONGER – AND POSSIBLY OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
The other thing to remember is that this was not a one time incident, but a pattern of conduct in the Yolo County Court System. So how is that all Ed Prieto’s fault? How is it that Rosenberg doesn’t have the power to control his own courts? Baloney! The two act in concert, and finally went just a little bit too far – and drew the ire of the state. Had the state not taken a look, it would have been a brief mea culpa with a yawn and business as usual.
Will anything change? Good question…depends on how irritated the state is. Not a good start for Herr Rosenberg, who knows better.
This is nothing more than the good ‘ol boy system at work. Ed Prieto takes the fall for Judge Rosenberg’s failure to manage his courts properly. And of course Ed Prieto can be forgiven since he is understandably upset about the death of his officer.
What has not been noted in this blog, but was mentioned in the Davis Enterprise, is that the lockout has drawn state attention. Sure Rosenberg has agreed to a media/court committee – because he has the state breathing down his neck.
The shame of all this is the damage it is doing to the family of the victim. The defense attorneys have been handed a good reason for an appeal of any conviction. Vicious criminals have gotten off on a lot less. (Remember the three accomplices in the Jessica Lundsford murder case that were never arrested because of police misconduct?) A do-over of the arraignment would only make matters worse, and add another reason to appeal a conviction. Venue change is the only possible solution here – but the issue-on-appeal horse has already been let out of the barn. The prosecution and Ed Prieto will have to live with that one. Mark my words well, the lockout WILL BE AN ISSUE RAISED ON APPEAL. THAT WILL RESULT IN THE CASE BEING DRAGGED OUT THAT MUCH LONGER – AND POSSIBLY OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
The other thing to remember is that this was not a one time incident, but a pattern of conduct in the Yolo County Court System. So how is that all Ed Prieto’s fault? How is it that Rosenberg doesn’t have the power to control his own courts? Baloney! The two act in concert, and finally went just a little bit too far – and drew the ire of the state. Had the state not taken a look, it would have been a brief mea culpa with a yawn and business as usual.
Will anything change? Good question…depends on how irritated the state is. Not a good start for Herr Rosenberg, who knows better.
This is nothing more than the good ‘ol boy system at work. Ed Prieto takes the fall for Judge Rosenberg’s failure to manage his courts properly. And of course Ed Prieto can be forgiven since he is understandably upset about the death of his officer.
What has not been noted in this blog, but was mentioned in the Davis Enterprise, is that the lockout has drawn state attention. Sure Rosenberg has agreed to a media/court committee – because he has the state breathing down his neck.
The shame of all this is the damage it is doing to the family of the victim. The defense attorneys have been handed a good reason for an appeal of any conviction. Vicious criminals have gotten off on a lot less. (Remember the three accomplices in the Jessica Lundsford murder case that were never arrested because of police misconduct?) A do-over of the arraignment would only make matters worse, and add another reason to appeal a conviction. Venue change is the only possible solution here – but the issue-on-appeal horse has already been let out of the barn. The prosecution and Ed Prieto will have to live with that one. Mark my words well, the lockout WILL BE AN ISSUE RAISED ON APPEAL. THAT WILL RESULT IN THE CASE BEING DRAGGED OUT THAT MUCH LONGER – AND POSSIBLY OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
The other thing to remember is that this was not a one time incident, but a pattern of conduct in the Yolo County Court System. So how is that all Ed Prieto’s fault? How is it that Rosenberg doesn’t have the power to control his own courts? Baloney! The two act in concert, and finally went just a little bit too far – and drew the ire of the state. Had the state not taken a look, it would have been a brief mea culpa with a yawn and business as usual.
Will anything change? Good question…depends on how irritated the state is. Not a good start for Herr Rosenberg, who knows better.
This is nothing more than the good ‘ol boy system at work. Ed Prieto takes the fall for Judge Rosenberg’s failure to manage his courts properly. And of course Ed Prieto can be forgiven since he is understandably upset about the death of his officer.
What has not been noted in this blog, but was mentioned in the Davis Enterprise, is that the lockout has drawn state attention. Sure Rosenberg has agreed to a media/court committee – because he has the state breathing down his neck.
The shame of all this is the damage it is doing to the family of the victim. The defense attorneys have been handed a good reason for an appeal of any conviction. Vicious criminals have gotten off on a lot less. (Remember the three accomplices in the Jessica Lundsford murder case that were never arrested because of police misconduct?) A do-over of the arraignment would only make matters worse, and add another reason to appeal a conviction. Venue change is the only possible solution here – but the issue-on-appeal horse has already been let out of the barn. The prosecution and Ed Prieto will have to live with that one. Mark my words well, the lockout WILL BE AN ISSUE RAISED ON APPEAL. THAT WILL RESULT IN THE CASE BEING DRAGGED OUT THAT MUCH LONGER – AND POSSIBLY OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
The other thing to remember is that this was not a one time incident, but a pattern of conduct in the Yolo County Court System. So how is that all Ed Prieto’s fault? How is it that Rosenberg doesn’t have the power to control his own courts? Baloney! The two act in concert, and finally went just a little bit too far – and drew the ire of the state. Had the state not taken a look, it would have been a brief mea culpa with a yawn and business as usual.
Will anything change? Good question…depends on how irritated the state is. Not a good start for Herr Rosenberg, who knows better.
No one ever said that everything wrong with the running of the courts was Prieto’s fault. No one is actually saying that the locking of the doors for the Topete hearing is his fault. As the Sherrif, it is his responsibility to see that his employees are upholding the law and take appropriate action when they don’t. The locking of the doors and ignoring the commissioners direction to admit the public on a first-come, first-seated basis by his deputies falls under his responsibilty as the Yolo County sheriff, since it was his deputies that broke the law.
There are other problems with the justice system in Yolo County. Some of it falls under the responsibility of the Presiding Judge, some of it is the DAs Office, some of it the individual Judges, some of it probation, some of it the individual police departments (don’t forget about the recent killing of the mentally ill man by Woodland police officers), some of it by the local defense attorneys that don’t step up to really defend their clients, some of it by community service providers who work with the Court in Drug and Juvenile programs. I don’t think you can lay all blame at the feet of Rosenberg.
No one ever said that everything wrong with the running of the courts was Prieto’s fault. No one is actually saying that the locking of the doors for the Topete hearing is his fault. As the Sherrif, it is his responsibility to see that his employees are upholding the law and take appropriate action when they don’t. The locking of the doors and ignoring the commissioners direction to admit the public on a first-come, first-seated basis by his deputies falls under his responsibilty as the Yolo County sheriff, since it was his deputies that broke the law.
There are other problems with the justice system in Yolo County. Some of it falls under the responsibility of the Presiding Judge, some of it is the DAs Office, some of it the individual Judges, some of it probation, some of it the individual police departments (don’t forget about the recent killing of the mentally ill man by Woodland police officers), some of it by the local defense attorneys that don’t step up to really defend their clients, some of it by community service providers who work with the Court in Drug and Juvenile programs. I don’t think you can lay all blame at the feet of Rosenberg.
No one ever said that everything wrong with the running of the courts was Prieto’s fault. No one is actually saying that the locking of the doors for the Topete hearing is his fault. As the Sherrif, it is his responsibility to see that his employees are upholding the law and take appropriate action when they don’t. The locking of the doors and ignoring the commissioners direction to admit the public on a first-come, first-seated basis by his deputies falls under his responsibilty as the Yolo County sheriff, since it was his deputies that broke the law.
There are other problems with the justice system in Yolo County. Some of it falls under the responsibility of the Presiding Judge, some of it is the DAs Office, some of it the individual Judges, some of it probation, some of it the individual police departments (don’t forget about the recent killing of the mentally ill man by Woodland police officers), some of it by the local defense attorneys that don’t step up to really defend their clients, some of it by community service providers who work with the Court in Drug and Juvenile programs. I don’t think you can lay all blame at the feet of Rosenberg.
No one ever said that everything wrong with the running of the courts was Prieto’s fault. No one is actually saying that the locking of the doors for the Topete hearing is his fault. As the Sherrif, it is his responsibility to see that his employees are upholding the law and take appropriate action when they don’t. The locking of the doors and ignoring the commissioners direction to admit the public on a first-come, first-seated basis by his deputies falls under his responsibilty as the Yolo County sheriff, since it was his deputies that broke the law.
There are other problems with the justice system in Yolo County. Some of it falls under the responsibility of the Presiding Judge, some of it is the DAs Office, some of it the individual Judges, some of it probation, some of it the individual police departments (don’t forget about the recent killing of the mentally ill man by Woodland police officers), some of it by the local defense attorneys that don’t step up to really defend their clients, some of it by community service providers who work with the Court in Drug and Juvenile programs. I don’t think you can lay all blame at the feet of Rosenberg.
I agree with the person who said that Rosenberg should have a system in place so that he is notified when an emergency or urgent matter happens in the courts. So what if he is in court at the time an incident occurs. If there is an emergency or an urgent matter (as was the case here) then someone should be able to communicate via radio or walkie talkie to the Baliff in Rosenberg’s location so that he may respond accordingly.
This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office. They end up on the bench and lack experience, professionalism, and leadership to know how to keep these things from happening in the first place and how to respond when they do happen.
The case needs to be heard in another county.
I agree with the person who said that Rosenberg should have a system in place so that he is notified when an emergency or urgent matter happens in the courts. So what if he is in court at the time an incident occurs. If there is an emergency or an urgent matter (as was the case here) then someone should be able to communicate via radio or walkie talkie to the Baliff in Rosenberg’s location so that he may respond accordingly.
This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office. They end up on the bench and lack experience, professionalism, and leadership to know how to keep these things from happening in the first place and how to respond when they do happen.
The case needs to be heard in another county.
I agree with the person who said that Rosenberg should have a system in place so that he is notified when an emergency or urgent matter happens in the courts. So what if he is in court at the time an incident occurs. If there is an emergency or an urgent matter (as was the case here) then someone should be able to communicate via radio or walkie talkie to the Baliff in Rosenberg’s location so that he may respond accordingly.
This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office. They end up on the bench and lack experience, professionalism, and leadership to know how to keep these things from happening in the first place and how to respond when they do happen.
The case needs to be heard in another county.
I agree with the person who said that Rosenberg should have a system in place so that he is notified when an emergency or urgent matter happens in the courts. So what if he is in court at the time an incident occurs. If there is an emergency or an urgent matter (as was the case here) then someone should be able to communicate via radio or walkie talkie to the Baliff in Rosenberg’s location so that he may respond accordingly.
This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office. They end up on the bench and lack experience, professionalism, and leadership to know how to keep these things from happening in the first place and how to respond when they do happen.
The case needs to be heard in another county.
This is a ridiculous suggestion.
Just who in Department 9 would have walkie-talkied the baliff in Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom to tell him that the doors were locked over in Department 9? Couldn’t this same person have merely leaned over and whispered in the ear of Prieto who was right there in the courtroom about the same thing? This isn’t McDonalds, where you need someone to hover over people to ensure they do their jobs.
How about some real solutions to actual problems?
This is a ridiculous suggestion.
Just who in Department 9 would have walkie-talkied the baliff in Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom to tell him that the doors were locked over in Department 9? Couldn’t this same person have merely leaned over and whispered in the ear of Prieto who was right there in the courtroom about the same thing? This isn’t McDonalds, where you need someone to hover over people to ensure they do their jobs.
How about some real solutions to actual problems?
This is a ridiculous suggestion.
Just who in Department 9 would have walkie-talkied the baliff in Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom to tell him that the doors were locked over in Department 9? Couldn’t this same person have merely leaned over and whispered in the ear of Prieto who was right there in the courtroom about the same thing? This isn’t McDonalds, where you need someone to hover over people to ensure they do their jobs.
How about some real solutions to actual problems?
This is a ridiculous suggestion.
Just who in Department 9 would have walkie-talkied the baliff in Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom to tell him that the doors were locked over in Department 9? Couldn’t this same person have merely leaned over and whispered in the ear of Prieto who was right there in the courtroom about the same thing? This isn’t McDonalds, where you need someone to hover over people to ensure they do their jobs.
How about some real solutions to actual problems?
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day. We still don’t know who that was and Prieto isn’t saying. So he walks away from this while his superiors and the Presiding Judge take the heat? That just doesn’t seem right, does it?
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day. We still don’t know who that was and Prieto isn’t saying. So he walks away from this while his superiors and the Presiding Judge take the heat? That just doesn’t seem right, does it?
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day. We still don’t know who that was and Prieto isn’t saying. So he walks away from this while his superiors and the Presiding Judge take the heat? That just doesn’t seem right, does it?
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day. We still don’t know who that was and Prieto isn’t saying. So he walks away from this while his superiors and the Presiding Judge take the heat? That just doesn’t seem right, does it?
perplexed said…
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
Maybe you should ask Rosenberg.
He’s the one who issued a court statement to the effect that the Presiding Judge can’t guarantee public access to his own courtrooms.
You shouldn’t be surprised that the water ends up full of sharks when you throw a red meat into it.
–Richard Estes
perplexed said…
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
Maybe you should ask Rosenberg.
He’s the one who issued a court statement to the effect that the Presiding Judge can’t guarantee public access to his own courtrooms.
You shouldn’t be surprised that the water ends up full of sharks when you throw a red meat into it.
–Richard Estes
perplexed said…
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
Maybe you should ask Rosenberg.
He’s the one who issued a court statement to the effect that the Presiding Judge can’t guarantee public access to his own courtrooms.
You shouldn’t be surprised that the water ends up full of sharks when you throw a red meat into it.
–Richard Estes
perplexed said…
I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
Maybe you should ask Rosenberg.
He’s the one who issued a court statement to the effect that the Presiding Judge can’t guarantee public access to his own courtrooms.
You shouldn’t be surprised that the water ends up full of sharks when you throw a red meat into it.
–Richard Estes
On the Yolo County court website, Marco Topete is scheduled for a hearing in DEPT 9 on Friday, June 27 at 8:30 am.
This is not Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom. It is Beronio’s courtroom – the same one where the arraignment happened.
On the Yolo County court website, Marco Topete is scheduled for a hearing in DEPT 9 on Friday, June 27 at 8:30 am.
This is not Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom. It is Beronio’s courtroom – the same one where the arraignment happened.
On the Yolo County court website, Marco Topete is scheduled for a hearing in DEPT 9 on Friday, June 27 at 8:30 am.
This is not Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom. It is Beronio’s courtroom – the same one where the arraignment happened.
On the Yolo County court website, Marco Topete is scheduled for a hearing in DEPT 9 on Friday, June 27 at 8:30 am.
This is not Judge Rosenberg’s courtroom. It is Beronio’s courtroom – the same one where the arraignment happened.
“yolo county clean up said…
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.”
When are they up for reelection?
Can we make them accountable at the next election?
“yolo county clean up said…
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.”
When are they up for reelection?
Can we make them accountable at the next election?
“yolo county clean up said…
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.”
When are they up for reelection?
Can we make them accountable at the next election?
“yolo county clean up said…
Dave Rosenberg and Ed Prieto need to be recalled.”
When are they up for reelection?
Can we make them accountable at the next election?
I think both Sheriff Ed Prieto and Judge Dave Rosenberg share equal responsibility. Rosenberg did the press release to save his a_ _, because he knew he had erred. Both need to be held accountable.
I think both Sheriff Ed Prieto and Judge Dave Rosenberg share equal responsibility. Rosenberg did the press release to save his a_ _, because he knew he had erred. Both need to be held accountable.
I think both Sheriff Ed Prieto and Judge Dave Rosenberg share equal responsibility. Rosenberg did the press release to save his a_ _, because he knew he had erred. Both need to be held accountable.
I think both Sheriff Ed Prieto and Judge Dave Rosenberg share equal responsibility. Rosenberg did the press release to save his a_ _, because he knew he had erred. Both need to be held accountable.
“I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day.”
This is not an isolated incident, but a pattern of conduct. That makes this matter fall squarely on the shoulders of the presiding judge – and is the reason the state has chosen to take a look.
“I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day.”
This is not an isolated incident, but a pattern of conduct. That makes this matter fall squarely on the shoulders of the presiding judge – and is the reason the state has chosen to take a look.
“I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day.”
This is not an isolated incident, but a pattern of conduct. That makes this matter fall squarely on the shoulders of the presiding judge – and is the reason the state has chosen to take a look.
“I don’t know how this turned into a Rosenberg-slamming session. I suspect that there are a lot of people who don’t like Rosenberg for political reasons that are taking advantage of this incident to slam him now.
The responsibiltiy for the locked doors ultimately falls on the deputy that was in charge that day.”
This is not an isolated incident, but a pattern of conduct. That makes this matter fall squarely on the shoulders of the presiding judge – and is the reason the state has chosen to take a look.
what? no story today regarding the villianous Stephen Souza and his attempts to out-fox the public, by joining with Sue and Lamar in support for the city pursuing a charter?
what? no story today regarding the villianous Stephen Souza and his attempts to out-fox the public, by joining with Sue and Lamar in support for the city pursuing a charter?
what? no story today regarding the villianous Stephen Souza and his attempts to out-fox the public, by joining with Sue and Lamar in support for the city pursuing a charter?
what? no story today regarding the villianous Stephen Souza and his attempts to out-fox the public, by joining with Sue and Lamar in support for the city pursuing a charter?
I would hope that DPD would write a story examining this new City Council voting bloc…
I would hope that DPD would write a story examining this new City Council voting bloc…
I would hope that DPD would write a story examining this new City Council voting bloc…
I would hope that DPD would write a story examining this new City Council voting bloc…
“This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office.”
Isn’t this how all judges are selected. Yes people can vote on their judges but rarely do judicial elections become a serious political contest. Rosenberg was an obvious choice he was a member of the bar, a county supervisor, an aide to the Governor seving in various and numerous capacities. He had shown competence in all of these appointments. What was Grey Davis to do throw Rosenberg to the curb when he left office? Making him a judge in his county of residence was an obvious choice.
This is a bad scene with this accused perp’s family and the press getting locked out and the Yolo courts do need to clean it up but I just think you guys should all calm down at least until after Deputy Diaz is buried on Friday. I saw Ed Prieto at a wedding the other night he wasn’t doing well. He had lost a deputy and had everyone crawling up his back over this first and sixth amendment issue. Can you at least wait until next week before calling for his head.
“This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office.”
Isn’t this how all judges are selected. Yes people can vote on their judges but rarely do judicial elections become a serious political contest. Rosenberg was an obvious choice he was a member of the bar, a county supervisor, an aide to the Governor seving in various and numerous capacities. He had shown competence in all of these appointments. What was Grey Davis to do throw Rosenberg to the curb when he left office? Making him a judge in his county of residence was an obvious choice.
This is a bad scene with this accused perp’s family and the press getting locked out and the Yolo courts do need to clean it up but I just think you guys should all calm down at least until after Deputy Diaz is buried on Friday. I saw Ed Prieto at a wedding the other night he wasn’t doing well. He had lost a deputy and had everyone crawling up his back over this first and sixth amendment issue. Can you at least wait until next week before calling for his head.
“This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office.”
Isn’t this how all judges are selected. Yes people can vote on their judges but rarely do judicial elections become a serious political contest. Rosenberg was an obvious choice he was a member of the bar, a county supervisor, an aide to the Governor seving in various and numerous capacities. He had shown competence in all of these appointments. What was Grey Davis to do throw Rosenberg to the curb when he left office? Making him a judge in his county of residence was an obvious choice.
This is a bad scene with this accused perp’s family and the press getting locked out and the Yolo courts do need to clean it up but I just think you guys should all calm down at least until after Deputy Diaz is buried on Friday. I saw Ed Prieto at a wedding the other night he wasn’t doing well. He had lost a deputy and had everyone crawling up his back over this first and sixth amendment issue. Can you at least wait until next week before calling for his head.
“This is what happens when you have a person who becomes judge via favors for people in political office.”
Isn’t this how all judges are selected. Yes people can vote on their judges but rarely do judicial elections become a serious political contest. Rosenberg was an obvious choice he was a member of the bar, a county supervisor, an aide to the Governor seving in various and numerous capacities. He had shown competence in all of these appointments. What was Grey Davis to do throw Rosenberg to the curb when he left office? Making him a judge in his county of residence was an obvious choice.
This is a bad scene with this accused perp’s family and the press getting locked out and the Yolo courts do need to clean it up but I just think you guys should all calm down at least until after Deputy Diaz is buried on Friday. I saw Ed Prieto at a wedding the other night he wasn’t doing well. He had lost a deputy and had everyone crawling up his back over this first and sixth amendment issue. Can you at least wait until next week before calling for his head.
off topic:
Excuse my ignorance, but how are certain peole in this blog able to make italics, boldface, and links in their comments?
off topic:
Excuse my ignorance, but how are certain peole in this blog able to make italics, boldface, and links in their comments?
off topic:
Excuse my ignorance, but how are certain peole in this blog able to make italics, boldface, and links in their comments?
off topic:
Excuse my ignorance, but how are certain peole in this blog able to make italics, boldface, and links in their comments?
Maybe this time someone will run against Ed Prieto; after the last election he boasted at the local coffeehouse that he had won! Surprise, surprise! I corrected him frankly and reminded him he ran against himself. Why wait for the next sheriff election? The court contracts for the security with the Yolo County Sheriff, so the court can cancel the contract and get someone else. Locking the doors is a breach of the contract.
It is my understanding that Barry Melton the Public Defender, Jeff Reisig the District Attorney and Ed Prieto the Sheriff were all in attendance; so if anyone thinks the doors were locked by “mistake” they deserve to have to go to trial in Yolo County.
Maybe this time someone will run against Ed Prieto; after the last election he boasted at the local coffeehouse that he had won! Surprise, surprise! I corrected him frankly and reminded him he ran against himself. Why wait for the next sheriff election? The court contracts for the security with the Yolo County Sheriff, so the court can cancel the contract and get someone else. Locking the doors is a breach of the contract.
It is my understanding that Barry Melton the Public Defender, Jeff Reisig the District Attorney and Ed Prieto the Sheriff were all in attendance; so if anyone thinks the doors were locked by “mistake” they deserve to have to go to trial in Yolo County.
Maybe this time someone will run against Ed Prieto; after the last election he boasted at the local coffeehouse that he had won! Surprise, surprise! I corrected him frankly and reminded him he ran against himself. Why wait for the next sheriff election? The court contracts for the security with the Yolo County Sheriff, so the court can cancel the contract and get someone else. Locking the doors is a breach of the contract.
It is my understanding that Barry Melton the Public Defender, Jeff Reisig the District Attorney and Ed Prieto the Sheriff were all in attendance; so if anyone thinks the doors were locked by “mistake” they deserve to have to go to trial in Yolo County.
Maybe this time someone will run against Ed Prieto; after the last election he boasted at the local coffeehouse that he had won! Surprise, surprise! I corrected him frankly and reminded him he ran against himself. Why wait for the next sheriff election? The court contracts for the security with the Yolo County Sheriff, so the court can cancel the contract and get someone else. Locking the doors is a breach of the contract.
It is my understanding that Barry Melton the Public Defender, Jeff Reisig the District Attorney and Ed Prieto the Sheriff were all in attendance; so if anyone thinks the doors were locked by “mistake” they deserve to have to go to trial in Yolo County.
You can type in certain taqs that make the html coding. Be sure to close the tag by putting the <, a /, the i or b, and >
The first one, b, makes bold
The second one, i, make italics
You can type in certain taqs that make the html coding. Be sure to close the tag by putting the <, a /, the i or b, and >
The first one, b, makes bold
The second one, i, make italics
You can type in certain taqs that make the html coding. Be sure to close the tag by putting the <, a /, the i or b, and >
The first one, b, makes bold
The second one, i, make italics
You can type in certain taqs that make the html coding. Be sure to close the tag by putting the <, a /, the i or b, and >
The first one, b, makes bold
The second one, i, make italics
Yolo County’s “legal system” requires an in depth review. The law enforcement agencies answer only to each other. We have had several questionable “acts” that have drawn public scrutiny from various agencies and the public. The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.
Why has the system been able to continue under the guise of “Justice being served” without review.
Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
Why do we not have complete disclosure regarding the District Attorney’s former Investigator’s claim of illegal practices by that office available. Along with the “indepth” review of the State Attorney Generals’ office fact and findings.
I am a member of a community that has the right to answers.
Yolo County’s “legal system” requires an in depth review. The law enforcement agencies answer only to each other. We have had several questionable “acts” that have drawn public scrutiny from various agencies and the public. The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.
Why has the system been able to continue under the guise of “Justice being served” without review.
Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
Why do we not have complete disclosure regarding the District Attorney’s former Investigator’s claim of illegal practices by that office available. Along with the “indepth” review of the State Attorney Generals’ office fact and findings.
I am a member of a community that has the right to answers.
Yolo County’s “legal system” requires an in depth review. The law enforcement agencies answer only to each other. We have had several questionable “acts” that have drawn public scrutiny from various agencies and the public. The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.
Why has the system been able to continue under the guise of “Justice being served” without review.
Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
Why do we not have complete disclosure regarding the District Attorney’s former Investigator’s claim of illegal practices by that office available. Along with the “indepth” review of the State Attorney Generals’ office fact and findings.
I am a member of a community that has the right to answers.
Yolo County’s “legal system” requires an in depth review. The law enforcement agencies answer only to each other. We have had several questionable “acts” that have drawn public scrutiny from various agencies and the public. The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.
Why has the system been able to continue under the guise of “Justice being served” without review.
Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
Why do we not have complete disclosure regarding the District Attorney’s former Investigator’s claim of illegal practices by that office available. Along with the “indepth” review of the State Attorney Generals’ office fact and findings.
I am a member of a community that has the right to answers.
Re: Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
What are you talking about? There has been no such request, either from city officials or anyone else.
Re: Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
What are you talking about? There has been no such request, either from city officials or anyone else.
Re: Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
What are you talking about? There has been no such request, either from city officials or anyone else.
Re: Why has the local newspaper complied with city officals request to no longer provide information to the community regarding the recent “taser” incident that lead to the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office?
What are you talking about? There has been no such request, either from city officials or anyone else.
“The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.”
You got that right!
The only thing good about the Yolo Justice system is the facade of the courthouse. Everything else (the local police, the DA’s office, the Judges and the inside of the courthouse) reflect small town rural America.
“The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.”
You got that right!
The only thing good about the Yolo Justice system is the facade of the courthouse. Everything else (the local police, the DA’s office, the Judges and the inside of the courthouse) reflect small town rural America.
“The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.”
You got that right!
The only thing good about the Yolo Justice system is the facade of the courthouse. Everything else (the local police, the DA’s office, the Judges and the inside of the courthouse) reflect small town rural America.
“The small town “justice system” is no longer acceptable for this day and age.”
You got that right!
The only thing good about the Yolo Justice system is the facade of the courthouse. Everything else (the local police, the DA’s office, the Judges and the inside of the courthouse) reflect small town rural America.
The only way to get to the bottom of this mess is for an independent outside investigation. Someone in the higher ups in the Sheriff, DA and or Courts order the doors locked. The reason, this issue does not die is because, the truth has not come out. This is a violation of the constitution by Yolo County authorities. Those that swore to defend and protect the constitution and have failed to do so delibertly.
The only way to get to the bottom of this mess is for an independent outside investigation. Someone in the higher ups in the Sheriff, DA and or Courts order the doors locked. The reason, this issue does not die is because, the truth has not come out. This is a violation of the constitution by Yolo County authorities. Those that swore to defend and protect the constitution and have failed to do so delibertly.
The only way to get to the bottom of this mess is for an independent outside investigation. Someone in the higher ups in the Sheriff, DA and or Courts order the doors locked. The reason, this issue does not die is because, the truth has not come out. This is a violation of the constitution by Yolo County authorities. Those that swore to defend and protect the constitution and have failed to do so delibertly.
The only way to get to the bottom of this mess is for an independent outside investigation. Someone in the higher ups in the Sheriff, DA and or Courts order the doors locked. The reason, this issue does not die is because, the truth has not come out. This is a violation of the constitution by Yolo County authorities. Those that swore to defend and protect the constitution and have failed to do so delibertly.
I agree whole heartedly!
I agree whole heartedly!
I agree whole heartedly!
I agree whole heartedly!
According to the Daily Democrat, the name of the bailiff who refused to open the courtroom door when Commissioner Beronio requested he do so was “Sergeant Vaughn”. http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_9690095 There is only one sergeant in court services who is the boss of the entire Court Services Section of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office. http://www.yolocountysheriff.com/court_services.htm
So Boss Sheriff Prieto was at Department 9, and Court Services Boss Sergeant Vaughn was there, too. Mama, read me that fairy tale again about the bosses who didn’t remember they locked the doors! Didn’t their noses grow in that one every time they talked to a reporter?
Mind you, the building housing Department 9 has the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office on one side, and also contains the jail in addition to the single courtroom in Department 9. When you go through the glass door by the courtroom you have to go through security and a metal detector first which span the hallway at the opposite side of which, on the right hand side of the corridor, is the door to the courtroom. So when the building door in front of the metal detector which has to be continually staffed by metal detector operating sheriffs was locked, did the metal detector operators not notice that the door was locked and people could not get in? No, because obviously they were not there. Obviously, they locked the doors, left their posts, and turned their backs on the public. If it was after lunch, the metal detector sheriffs just did not go back to work. I bet they stayed on the clock with the complicity of Yolo County government officials.
These people have no respect or regard for anything or anyone except themselves.
According to the Daily Democrat, the name of the bailiff who refused to open the courtroom door when Commissioner Beronio requested he do so was “Sergeant Vaughn”. http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_9690095 There is only one sergeant in court services who is the boss of the entire Court Services Section of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office. http://www.yolocountysheriff.com/court_services.htm
So Boss Sheriff Prieto was at Department 9, and Court Services Boss Sergeant Vaughn was there, too. Mama, read me that fairy tale again about the bosses who didn’t remember they locked the doors! Didn’t their noses grow in that one every time they talked to a reporter?
Mind you, the building housing Department 9 has the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office on one side, and also contains the jail in addition to the single courtroom in Department 9. When you go through the glass door by the courtroom you have to go through security and a metal detector first which span the hallway at the opposite side of which, on the right hand side of the corridor, is the door to the courtroom. So when the building door in front of the metal detector which has to be continually staffed by metal detector operating sheriffs was locked, did the metal detector operators not notice that the door was locked and people could not get in? No, because obviously they were not there. Obviously, they locked the doors, left their posts, and turned their backs on the public. If it was after lunch, the metal detector sheriffs just did not go back to work. I bet they stayed on the clock with the complicity of Yolo County government officials.
These people have no respect or regard for anything or anyone except themselves.
According to the Daily Democrat, the name of the bailiff who refused to open the courtroom door when Commissioner Beronio requested he do so was “Sergeant Vaughn”. http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_9690095 There is only one sergeant in court services who is the boss of the entire Court Services Section of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office. http://www.yolocountysheriff.com/court_services.htm
So Boss Sheriff Prieto was at Department 9, and Court Services Boss Sergeant Vaughn was there, too. Mama, read me that fairy tale again about the bosses who didn’t remember they locked the doors! Didn’t their noses grow in that one every time they talked to a reporter?
Mind you, the building housing Department 9 has the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office on one side, and also contains the jail in addition to the single courtroom in Department 9. When you go through the glass door by the courtroom you have to go through security and a metal detector first which span the hallway at the opposite side of which, on the right hand side of the corridor, is the door to the courtroom. So when the building door in front of the metal detector which has to be continually staffed by metal detector operating sheriffs was locked, did the metal detector operators not notice that the door was locked and people could not get in? No, because obviously they were not there. Obviously, they locked the doors, left their posts, and turned their backs on the public. If it was after lunch, the metal detector sheriffs just did not go back to work. I bet they stayed on the clock with the complicity of Yolo County government officials.
These people have no respect or regard for anything or anyone except themselves.
According to the Daily Democrat, the name of the bailiff who refused to open the courtroom door when Commissioner Beronio requested he do so was “Sergeant Vaughn”. http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_9690095 There is only one sergeant in court services who is the boss of the entire Court Services Section of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office. http://www.yolocountysheriff.com/court_services.htm
So Boss Sheriff Prieto was at Department 9, and Court Services Boss Sergeant Vaughn was there, too. Mama, read me that fairy tale again about the bosses who didn’t remember they locked the doors! Didn’t their noses grow in that one every time they talked to a reporter?
Mind you, the building housing Department 9 has the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office on one side, and also contains the jail in addition to the single courtroom in Department 9. When you go through the glass door by the courtroom you have to go through security and a metal detector first which span the hallway at the opposite side of which, on the right hand side of the corridor, is the door to the courtroom. So when the building door in front of the metal detector which has to be continually staffed by metal detector operating sheriffs was locked, did the metal detector operators not notice that the door was locked and people could not get in? No, because obviously they were not there. Obviously, they locked the doors, left their posts, and turned their backs on the public. If it was after lunch, the metal detector sheriffs just did not go back to work. I bet they stayed on the clock with the complicity of Yolo County government officials.
These people have no respect or regard for anything or anyone except themselves.
To anonymous at 5 pm: The US Department of Justice is waiting for your call! Everyone who values justice and truth please call (202) 514-3204. That’s the number of the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section in Washington DC. Ask them to investigate. Raise your voice against
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights
Please don’t forget to mention the senseless murder of DA intern Ricardo Manuel Abrahams in Woodland this month, who died with a pencil in his hand after being tazed four times and beaten for his mistake in thinking he was a free man who had the right to walk down the street. Don’t let his death be in vain!
To anonymous at 5 pm: The US Department of Justice is waiting for your call! Everyone who values justice and truth please call (202) 514-3204. That’s the number of the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section in Washington DC. Ask them to investigate. Raise your voice against
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights
Please don’t forget to mention the senseless murder of DA intern Ricardo Manuel Abrahams in Woodland this month, who died with a pencil in his hand after being tazed four times and beaten for his mistake in thinking he was a free man who had the right to walk down the street. Don’t let his death be in vain!
To anonymous at 5 pm: The US Department of Justice is waiting for your call! Everyone who values justice and truth please call (202) 514-3204. That’s the number of the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section in Washington DC. Ask them to investigate. Raise your voice against
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights
Please don’t forget to mention the senseless murder of DA intern Ricardo Manuel Abrahams in Woodland this month, who died with a pencil in his hand after being tazed four times and beaten for his mistake in thinking he was a free man who had the right to walk down the street. Don’t let his death be in vain!
To anonymous at 5 pm: The US Department of Justice is waiting for your call! Everyone who values justice and truth please call (202) 514-3204. That’s the number of the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section in Washington DC. Ask them to investigate. Raise your voice against
Official Misconduct (18 U.S.C.§ § 241, 242) — Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights
Please don’t forget to mention the senseless murder of DA intern Ricardo Manuel Abrahams in Woodland this month, who died with a pencil in his hand after being tazed four times and beaten for his mistake in thinking he was a free man who had the right to walk down the street. Don’t let his death be in vain!
Forgot to mention you don’t have to give your name when calling the US DOJ! You are welcome to do it anonymously!
Forgot to mention you don’t have to give your name when calling the US DOJ! You are welcome to do it anonymously!
Forgot to mention you don’t have to give your name when calling the US DOJ! You are welcome to do it anonymously!
Forgot to mention you don’t have to give your name when calling the US DOJ! You are welcome to do it anonymously!
I am not an expert in criminal law and procedure. However, I am sure that any search of Westlaw for cases would produce very interesting reading on the issues of what certainly was a non-public arraignment, and the venue being held in the same courthouse where its security and some courtroom procedures are the responsiblity of the deputy killed in the line of duty.
This is a murder case. Cold blooded murder of a peace officer courageously trying to save an endangered child.
Judge Rosenberg should file a court motion to re-do the arraignment, and ship the case to a neutral county.
Then, everyone can throw stones as to how it all happened. But the arraignment needs to be re-done, and the case has to move.
I am not an expert in criminal law and procedure. However, I am sure that any search of Westlaw for cases would produce very interesting reading on the issues of what certainly was a non-public arraignment, and the venue being held in the same courthouse where its security and some courtroom procedures are the responsiblity of the deputy killed in the line of duty.
This is a murder case. Cold blooded murder of a peace officer courageously trying to save an endangered child.
Judge Rosenberg should file a court motion to re-do the arraignment, and ship the case to a neutral county.
Then, everyone can throw stones as to how it all happened. But the arraignment needs to be re-done, and the case has to move.
I am not an expert in criminal law and procedure. However, I am sure that any search of Westlaw for cases would produce very interesting reading on the issues of what certainly was a non-public arraignment, and the venue being held in the same courthouse where its security and some courtroom procedures are the responsiblity of the deputy killed in the line of duty.
This is a murder case. Cold blooded murder of a peace officer courageously trying to save an endangered child.
Judge Rosenberg should file a court motion to re-do the arraignment, and ship the case to a neutral county.
Then, everyone can throw stones as to how it all happened. But the arraignment needs to be re-done, and the case has to move.
I am not an expert in criminal law and procedure. However, I am sure that any search of Westlaw for cases would produce very interesting reading on the issues of what certainly was a non-public arraignment, and the venue being held in the same courthouse where its security and some courtroom procedures are the responsiblity of the deputy killed in the line of duty.
This is a murder case. Cold blooded murder of a peace officer courageously trying to save an endangered child.
Judge Rosenberg should file a court motion to re-do the arraignment, and ship the case to a neutral county.
Then, everyone can throw stones as to how it all happened. But the arraignment needs to be re-done, and the case has to move.
Typo correction: security and some courtroom procedures handled by the EMPLOYER of the deputy.
Typo correction: security and some courtroom procedures handled by the EMPLOYER of the deputy.
Typo correction: security and some courtroom procedures handled by the EMPLOYER of the deputy.
Typo correction: security and some courtroom procedures handled by the EMPLOYER of the deputy.
Here is the transcript of the hearing
http://www.my58.com/download/2008/0619/16649056.pdf
from http://www.my58.com/news/16700665/detail.html
It’s very enlightening! Now I see that Public Defender Barry Melton, who was there and asked to be personally appointed, did not even object to the locked courtroom. Failing to object on behalf of the defendant is standard operating procedure for the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Sad to say, it doesn’t really surprise me to see Melton malpracticing his client. Nor am I surprised to see him seeking appointment in a high profile case like this one since he loves the limelight and prefers to represent guilty people, so it is OK to malpractice them. The gag order helps with that, too.
I think Beronio should have asked the man, who is on trial for his life, if he is all good with being represented by a graduate of a correspondence law school which went out of business like Guitar Melton.
After reading this transcript, I think not enough negative attention has been paid to the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Melton and his associate Johansson both deserve a lot of blame for not aggressively advocating for their client’s constitutional right to a public trial and against intimidation by a gang of uniformed county employees there wearing their colors. Had they done so, and demanded the courtroom be opened, the public would have been able to attend.
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on the last page of the transcript, page 12, lines 7-8.
No wonder the bailiff responded by talking about the next hearing. The bailiff was following Melton/Johansson’s lead in treating it as unimportant and insignificant that the defendant’s constitutional rights had been violated.
I bet if the defendant was representing himself he would have managed to ask for his family to be let into the courtroom before the hearing started.
There’s been a lot of talk about a change of venue but now I vote for a motion for new counsel! One can only hope that a change of venue leads to a change of defense counsel, or any conviction will certainly be reversed on appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel if Melton continues to provide his usual quality service.
It’s interesting to see that Melton gives special treatment to a notorious defendant whom Melton can expect to raise his own public profile. According to the transcript, Melton has already interviewed the man before the arraignment and before being appointed to represent him.
For everyone else,
http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=938
“Can I speak to a public defender before my arraignment (first court appearance)?”
“Our office can provide general information regarding the court process. The specifics of your case cannot be discussed unless we are appointed to represent you.”—a policy of highly dubious constitutionality.
Of course, there is a special fund from the state for capital cases that Melton and Company are draining for Yolo County’s financial benefit, but nobody is talking about that. Count on the Yolo County Superior Court to resist granting the constitutionally required change of venue because there is money to be made here.
Here is the transcript of the hearing
http://www.my58.com/download/2008/0619/16649056.pdf
from http://www.my58.com/news/16700665/detail.html
It’s very enlightening! Now I see that Public Defender Barry Melton, who was there and asked to be personally appointed, did not even object to the locked courtroom. Failing to object on behalf of the defendant is standard operating procedure for the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Sad to say, it doesn’t really surprise me to see Melton malpracticing his client. Nor am I surprised to see him seeking appointment in a high profile case like this one since he loves the limelight and prefers to represent guilty people, so it is OK to malpractice them. The gag order helps with that, too.
I think Beronio should have asked the man, who is on trial for his life, if he is all good with being represented by a graduate of a correspondence law school which went out of business like Guitar Melton.
After reading this transcript, I think not enough negative attention has been paid to the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Melton and his associate Johansson both deserve a lot of blame for not aggressively advocating for their client’s constitutional right to a public trial and against intimidation by a gang of uniformed county employees there wearing their colors. Had they done so, and demanded the courtroom be opened, the public would have been able to attend.
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on the last page of the transcript, page 12, lines 7-8.
No wonder the bailiff responded by talking about the next hearing. The bailiff was following Melton/Johansson’s lead in treating it as unimportant and insignificant that the defendant’s constitutional rights had been violated.
I bet if the defendant was representing himself he would have managed to ask for his family to be let into the courtroom before the hearing started.
There’s been a lot of talk about a change of venue but now I vote for a motion for new counsel! One can only hope that a change of venue leads to a change of defense counsel, or any conviction will certainly be reversed on appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel if Melton continues to provide his usual quality service.
It’s interesting to see that Melton gives special treatment to a notorious defendant whom Melton can expect to raise his own public profile. According to the transcript, Melton has already interviewed the man before the arraignment and before being appointed to represent him.
For everyone else,
http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=938
“Can I speak to a public defender before my arraignment (first court appearance)?”
“Our office can provide general information regarding the court process. The specifics of your case cannot be discussed unless we are appointed to represent you.”—a policy of highly dubious constitutionality.
Of course, there is a special fund from the state for capital cases that Melton and Company are draining for Yolo County’s financial benefit, but nobody is talking about that. Count on the Yolo County Superior Court to resist granting the constitutionally required change of venue because there is money to be made here.
Here is the transcript of the hearing
http://www.my58.com/download/2008/0619/16649056.pdf
from http://www.my58.com/news/16700665/detail.html
It’s very enlightening! Now I see that Public Defender Barry Melton, who was there and asked to be personally appointed, did not even object to the locked courtroom. Failing to object on behalf of the defendant is standard operating procedure for the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Sad to say, it doesn’t really surprise me to see Melton malpracticing his client. Nor am I surprised to see him seeking appointment in a high profile case like this one since he loves the limelight and prefers to represent guilty people, so it is OK to malpractice them. The gag order helps with that, too.
I think Beronio should have asked the man, who is on trial for his life, if he is all good with being represented by a graduate of a correspondence law school which went out of business like Guitar Melton.
After reading this transcript, I think not enough negative attention has been paid to the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Melton and his associate Johansson both deserve a lot of blame for not aggressively advocating for their client’s constitutional right to a public trial and against intimidation by a gang of uniformed county employees there wearing their colors. Had they done so, and demanded the courtroom be opened, the public would have been able to attend.
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on the last page of the transcript, page 12, lines 7-8.
No wonder the bailiff responded by talking about the next hearing. The bailiff was following Melton/Johansson’s lead in treating it as unimportant and insignificant that the defendant’s constitutional rights had been violated.
I bet if the defendant was representing himself he would have managed to ask for his family to be let into the courtroom before the hearing started.
There’s been a lot of talk about a change of venue but now I vote for a motion for new counsel! One can only hope that a change of venue leads to a change of defense counsel, or any conviction will certainly be reversed on appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel if Melton continues to provide his usual quality service.
It’s interesting to see that Melton gives special treatment to a notorious defendant whom Melton can expect to raise his own public profile. According to the transcript, Melton has already interviewed the man before the arraignment and before being appointed to represent him.
For everyone else,
http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=938
“Can I speak to a public defender before my arraignment (first court appearance)?”
“Our office can provide general information regarding the court process. The specifics of your case cannot be discussed unless we are appointed to represent you.”—a policy of highly dubious constitutionality.
Of course, there is a special fund from the state for capital cases that Melton and Company are draining for Yolo County’s financial benefit, but nobody is talking about that. Count on the Yolo County Superior Court to resist granting the constitutionally required change of venue because there is money to be made here.
Here is the transcript of the hearing
http://www.my58.com/download/2008/0619/16649056.pdf
from http://www.my58.com/news/16700665/detail.html
It’s very enlightening! Now I see that Public Defender Barry Melton, who was there and asked to be personally appointed, did not even object to the locked courtroom. Failing to object on behalf of the defendant is standard operating procedure for the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Sad to say, it doesn’t really surprise me to see Melton malpracticing his client. Nor am I surprised to see him seeking appointment in a high profile case like this one since he loves the limelight and prefers to represent guilty people, so it is OK to malpractice them. The gag order helps with that, too.
I think Beronio should have asked the man, who is on trial for his life, if he is all good with being represented by a graduate of a correspondence law school which went out of business like Guitar Melton.
After reading this transcript, I think not enough negative attention has been paid to the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office.
Melton and his associate Johansson both deserve a lot of blame for not aggressively advocating for their client’s constitutional right to a public trial and against intimidation by a gang of uniformed county employees there wearing their colors. Had they done so, and demanded the courtroom be opened, the public would have been able to attend.
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on the last page of the transcript, page 12, lines 7-8.
No wonder the bailiff responded by talking about the next hearing. The bailiff was following Melton/Johansson’s lead in treating it as unimportant and insignificant that the defendant’s constitutional rights had been violated.
I bet if the defendant was representing himself he would have managed to ask for his family to be let into the courtroom before the hearing started.
There’s been a lot of talk about a change of venue but now I vote for a motion for new counsel! One can only hope that a change of venue leads to a change of defense counsel, or any conviction will certainly be reversed on appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel if Melton continues to provide his usual quality service.
It’s interesting to see that Melton gives special treatment to a notorious defendant whom Melton can expect to raise his own public profile. According to the transcript, Melton has already interviewed the man before the arraignment and before being appointed to represent him.
For everyone else,
http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=938
“Can I speak to a public defender before my arraignment (first court appearance)?”
“Our office can provide general information regarding the court process. The specifics of your case cannot be discussed unless we are appointed to represent you.”—a policy of highly dubious constitutionality.
Of course, there is a special fund from the state for capital cases that Melton and Company are draining for Yolo County’s financial benefit, but nobody is talking about that. Count on the Yolo County Superior Court to resist granting the constitutionally required change of venue because there is money to be made here.
The transcript shows Beronio meekly asked the sheriff for permission to let the defendant’s family into the room. Pathetic. It would appear law enforcement had her intimidated too.
Who is responsible for enforcing the contract for security services and what are its terms? Does the contract say the sheriffs can do as they please and boss the judges and commissioners around? I think the court is not getting the services for which it has paid. The Yolo County Sheriff should refund the money.
The transcript shows Beronio meekly asked the sheriff for permission to let the defendant’s family into the room. Pathetic. It would appear law enforcement had her intimidated too.
Who is responsible for enforcing the contract for security services and what are its terms? Does the contract say the sheriffs can do as they please and boss the judges and commissioners around? I think the court is not getting the services for which it has paid. The Yolo County Sheriff should refund the money.
The transcript shows Beronio meekly asked the sheriff for permission to let the defendant’s family into the room. Pathetic. It would appear law enforcement had her intimidated too.
Who is responsible for enforcing the contract for security services and what are its terms? Does the contract say the sheriffs can do as they please and boss the judges and commissioners around? I think the court is not getting the services for which it has paid. The Yolo County Sheriff should refund the money.
The transcript shows Beronio meekly asked the sheriff for permission to let the defendant’s family into the room. Pathetic. It would appear law enforcement had her intimidated too.
Who is responsible for enforcing the contract for security services and what are its terms? Does the contract say the sheriffs can do as they please and boss the judges and commissioners around? I think the court is not getting the services for which it has paid. The Yolo County Sheriff should refund the money.
Correction:
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on pages 11 and 12 of the transcript.
Correction:
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on pages 11 and 12 of the transcript.
Correction:
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on pages 11 and 12 of the transcript.
Correction:
Johansson only raised the issue of bringing in the defendant’s family after the hearing was over–on pages 11 and 12 of the transcript.
Hey, did anyone catch this reporting by the Daily Democrat on June 19 2008?
“However, a private security guard at the door of Department 9 later said he was indeed ordered to keep the public out.”
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/ci_9634769?source=most_emailed
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6815
Picked up the next day by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Hey, did anyone catch this reporting by the Daily Democrat on June 19 2008?
“However, a private security guard at the door of Department 9 later said he was indeed ordered to keep the public out.”
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/ci_9634769?source=most_emailed
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6815
Picked up the next day by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Hey, did anyone catch this reporting by the Daily Democrat on June 19 2008?
“However, a private security guard at the door of Department 9 later said he was indeed ordered to keep the public out.”
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/ci_9634769?source=most_emailed
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6815
Picked up the next day by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Hey, did anyone catch this reporting by the Daily Democrat on June 19 2008?
“However, a private security guard at the door of Department 9 later said he was indeed ordered to keep the public out.”
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/ci_9634769?source=most_emailed
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6815
Picked up the next day by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
This video makes it look like the door to the court was not locked at all; it makes it look like it was unlocked but guarded, and law enforcement was allowed in, while the public was intentionally and systematically kept out.
http://www.my58.com/video/16648179/index.html
This video makes it look like the door to the court was not locked at all; it makes it look like it was unlocked but guarded, and law enforcement was allowed in, while the public was intentionally and systematically kept out.
http://www.my58.com/video/16648179/index.html
This video makes it look like the door to the court was not locked at all; it makes it look like it was unlocked but guarded, and law enforcement was allowed in, while the public was intentionally and systematically kept out.
http://www.my58.com/video/16648179/index.html
This video makes it look like the door to the court was not locked at all; it makes it look like it was unlocked but guarded, and law enforcement was allowed in, while the public was intentionally and systematically kept out.
http://www.my58.com/video/16648179/index.html
It’s good to know that there has been no “request” to cease reports of the circumstances of the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office. What I am speaking about is the conversation that I had 3 days after the death occurred. An employee of the daily democrat and spoke briefly about the details of the incident. He than mentioned that there would not be much information offered. That the situation was “too controversial” and should “die down”.
By the way I missed the article regarding the Coroners report on the cause of death. Do you remember what day that was printed.
It’s good to know that there has been no “request” to cease reports of the circumstances of the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office. What I am speaking about is the conversation that I had 3 days after the death occurred. An employee of the daily democrat and spoke briefly about the details of the incident. He than mentioned that there would not be much information offered. That the situation was “too controversial” and should “die down”.
By the way I missed the article regarding the Coroners report on the cause of death. Do you remember what day that was printed.
It’s good to know that there has been no “request” to cease reports of the circumstances of the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office. What I am speaking about is the conversation that I had 3 days after the death occurred. An employee of the daily democrat and spoke briefly about the details of the incident. He than mentioned that there would not be much information offered. That the situation was “too controversial” and should “die down”.
By the way I missed the article regarding the Coroners report on the cause of death. Do you remember what day that was printed.
It’s good to know that there has been no “request” to cease reports of the circumstances of the death of an employee of the District Attorney’s office. What I am speaking about is the conversation that I had 3 days after the death occurred. An employee of the daily democrat and spoke briefly about the details of the incident. He than mentioned that there would not be much information offered. That the situation was “too controversial” and should “die down”.
By the way I missed the article regarding the Coroners report on the cause of death. Do you remember what day that was printed.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
This is such a mess. From what’s been written, Sheriffs Deputy Diaz was an uncommonly wonderful person. It is a shame that so much attention has been diverted from the tragedy of his death by the foulish and arrogant behavior of his comrades and the collapse of the legal process. Contempt begets contempt so they should stop whining.
The blogging suggests people don’t realize that the court is a state branch. It’s not controlled or funded by the county (or at least it hasn’t been funded by the county since the 1990s when the state took over the funding of all the state courts.) The sheriff’s dept. is a county agency. Two different chains of command.
The blogging suggests people don’t realize that the court is a state branch. It’s not controlled or funded by the county (or at least it hasn’t been funded by the county since the 1990s when the state took over the funding of all the state courts.) The sheriff’s dept. is a county agency. Two different chains of command.
The blogging suggests people don’t realize that the court is a state branch. It’s not controlled or funded by the county (or at least it hasn’t been funded by the county since the 1990s when the state took over the funding of all the state courts.) The sheriff’s dept. is a county agency. Two different chains of command.
The blogging suggests people don’t realize that the court is a state branch. It’s not controlled or funded by the county (or at least it hasn’t been funded by the county since the 1990s when the state took over the funding of all the state courts.) The sheriff’s dept. is a county agency. Two different chains of command.
to anonymous at 10:44 pm
perhaps you are the one who is confused–see government code 77000-77655–trial court unification under the state rubric did not create a fully state funded system but rather state responsibility for funding–counties still have to give money to the state for the courts –under gov code 77001 all trial court administration remains under local county control, money collected in the county at the court is used there too and furthermore yolo county superior court contracts with the yolo county sheriffs office so the chains of command are not separate, the sheriffs work for the court, and yolo county funds the yolo county sheriffs, funds the yolo county public defender, and funds the yolo county da–any money yolo can get from the state to pay for any of that benefits the county
moreover, the county makes money on the courts because it doesn’t turn over all the money it makes on fines and fees,but splits it 50-50 over a base amount gov code 772005(a)
to anonymous at 10:44 pm
perhaps you are the one who is confused–see government code 77000-77655–trial court unification under the state rubric did not create a fully state funded system but rather state responsibility for funding–counties still have to give money to the state for the courts –under gov code 77001 all trial court administration remains under local county control, money collected in the county at the court is used there too and furthermore yolo county superior court contracts with the yolo county sheriffs office so the chains of command are not separate, the sheriffs work for the court, and yolo county funds the yolo county sheriffs, funds the yolo county public defender, and funds the yolo county da–any money yolo can get from the state to pay for any of that benefits the county
moreover, the county makes money on the courts because it doesn’t turn over all the money it makes on fines and fees,but splits it 50-50 over a base amount gov code 772005(a)
to anonymous at 10:44 pm
perhaps you are the one who is confused–see government code 77000-77655–trial court unification under the state rubric did not create a fully state funded system but rather state responsibility for funding–counties still have to give money to the state for the courts –under gov code 77001 all trial court administration remains under local county control, money collected in the county at the court is used there too and furthermore yolo county superior court contracts with the yolo county sheriffs office so the chains of command are not separate, the sheriffs work for the court, and yolo county funds the yolo county sheriffs, funds the yolo county public defender, and funds the yolo county da–any money yolo can get from the state to pay for any of that benefits the county
moreover, the county makes money on the courts because it doesn’t turn over all the money it makes on fines and fees,but splits it 50-50 over a base amount gov code 772005(a)
to anonymous at 10:44 pm
perhaps you are the one who is confused–see government code 77000-77655–trial court unification under the state rubric did not create a fully state funded system but rather state responsibility for funding–counties still have to give money to the state for the courts –under gov code 77001 all trial court administration remains under local county control, money collected in the county at the court is used there too and furthermore yolo county superior court contracts with the yolo county sheriffs office so the chains of command are not separate, the sheriffs work for the court, and yolo county funds the yolo county sheriffs, funds the yolo county public defender, and funds the yolo county da–any money yolo can get from the state to pay for any of that benefits the county
moreover, the county makes money on the courts because it doesn’t turn over all the money it makes on fines and fees,but splits it 50-50 over a base amount gov code 772005(a)
2/27/2008 – Today we learn that the defense attorney has brought up allegations that all business at the Courthouse ceased for 30 minutes so that the deputies that provide security to the different courtrooms could attend the arraignment. In that this would require agreement to essentially close their courtrooms by the Judges it is a problem. The defense attorney has asked for the surveilance video tapes for the courtrooms covering the time period of the arraignment to see if that is indeed what happened.
What a mess.
2/27/2008 – Today we learn that the defense attorney has brought up allegations that all business at the Courthouse ceased for 30 minutes so that the deputies that provide security to the different courtrooms could attend the arraignment. In that this would require agreement to essentially close their courtrooms by the Judges it is a problem. The defense attorney has asked for the surveilance video tapes for the courtrooms covering the time period of the arraignment to see if that is indeed what happened.
What a mess.
2/27/2008 – Today we learn that the defense attorney has brought up allegations that all business at the Courthouse ceased for 30 minutes so that the deputies that provide security to the different courtrooms could attend the arraignment. In that this would require agreement to essentially close their courtrooms by the Judges it is a problem. The defense attorney has asked for the surveilance video tapes for the courtrooms covering the time period of the arraignment to see if that is indeed what happened.
What a mess.
2/27/2008 – Today we learn that the defense attorney has brought up allegations that all business at the Courthouse ceased for 30 minutes so that the deputies that provide security to the different courtrooms could attend the arraignment. In that this would require agreement to essentially close their courtrooms by the Judges it is a problem. The defense attorney has asked for the surveilance video tapes for the courtrooms covering the time period of the arraignment to see if that is indeed what happened.
What a mess.
Did you mean 6/27/08 rather than 2/27/08
Did you mean 6/27/08 rather than 2/27/08
Did you mean 6/27/08 rather than 2/27/08
Did you mean 6/27/08 rather than 2/27/08
yes
yes
yes
yes
here’s the link to the Bee article:
http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1044742.html
looks like the deputies, and not the judges, run that court
like I said last week, maybe they write the decisions, too
–Richard Estes
here’s the link to the Bee article:
http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1044742.html
looks like the deputies, and not the judges, run that court
like I said last week, maybe they write the decisions, too
–Richard Estes
here’s the link to the Bee article:
http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1044742.html
looks like the deputies, and not the judges, run that court
like I said last week, maybe they write the decisions, too
–Richard Estes
here’s the link to the Bee article:
http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1044742.html
looks like the deputies, and not the judges, run that court
like I said last week, maybe they write the decisions, too
–Richard Estes
I find it very interesting, when I first wrote on this story last Thursday one of the immediate responses was:
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?”
I wonder if that individual still thinks I was reaching by reporting on this story.
I find it very interesting, when I first wrote on this story last Thursday one of the immediate responses was:
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?”
I wonder if that individual still thinks I was reaching by reporting on this story.
I find it very interesting, when I first wrote on this story last Thursday one of the immediate responses was:
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?”
I wonder if that individual still thinks I was reaching by reporting on this story.
I find it very interesting, when I first wrote on this story last Thursday one of the immediate responses was:
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?”
I wonder if that individual still thinks I was reaching by reporting on this story.
It’s interesting to compare what is said in the comments to this topic on this blog to what is being said on the Woodland Journal thread on this same topic.
See also more recent comments on the same topic.
It’s interesting to compare what is said in the comments to this topic on this blog to what is being said on the Woodland Journal thread on this same topic.
See also more recent comments on the same topic.
It’s interesting to compare what is said in the comments to this topic on this blog to what is being said on the Woodland Journal thread on this same topic.
See also more recent comments on the same topic.
It’s interesting to compare what is said in the comments to this topic on this blog to what is being said on the Woodland Journal thread on this same topic.
See also more recent comments on the same topic.
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
” Anonymous said…
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
6/27/08 9:22 PM”
The problem is that the court system, including the sheriff’s office, created the possibility of a biased trial – which inured to the detriment of the family of the victim. If “locked doors” ends up translating to a constitutional violation in the eyes of higher courts or the state, it could lead to a plea deal or negation of charges against the alleged perpetrator. Doesn’t that bother you? It should.
Additionally, this is a pattern of conduct, not an isolated incident. If the state sees it that way, it could call into question the verdict of not only this case, but other cases. This was not a minor mistake, by any stretch of the imagination.
” Anonymous said…
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
6/27/08 9:22 PM”
The problem is that the court system, including the sheriff’s office, created the possibility of a biased trial – which inured to the detriment of the family of the victim. If “locked doors” ends up translating to a constitutional violation in the eyes of higher courts or the state, it could lead to a plea deal or negation of charges against the alleged perpetrator. Doesn’t that bother you? It should.
Additionally, this is a pattern of conduct, not an isolated incident. If the state sees it that way, it could call into question the verdict of not only this case, but other cases. This was not a minor mistake, by any stretch of the imagination.
” Anonymous said…
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
6/27/08 9:22 PM”
The problem is that the court system, including the sheriff’s office, created the possibility of a biased trial – which inured to the detriment of the family of the victim. If “locked doors” ends up translating to a constitutional violation in the eyes of higher courts or the state, it could lead to a plea deal or negation of charges against the alleged perpetrator. Doesn’t that bother you? It should.
Additionally, this is a pattern of conduct, not an isolated incident. If the state sees it that way, it could call into question the verdict of not only this case, but other cases. This was not a minor mistake, by any stretch of the imagination.
” Anonymous said…
It would be nice to have everyone get through the discussion of the “Locked Doors”. Then the trial can proceed and a guilty verdict can be reached. Did anyone go to Sgt. Diaz’s funeral today?
6/27/08 9:22 PM”
The problem is that the court system, including the sheriff’s office, created the possibility of a biased trial – which inured to the detriment of the family of the victim. If “locked doors” ends up translating to a constitutional violation in the eyes of higher courts or the state, it could lead to a plea deal or negation of charges against the alleged perpetrator. Doesn’t that bother you? It should.
Additionally, this is a pattern of conduct, not an isolated incident. If the state sees it that way, it could call into question the verdict of not only this case, but other cases. This was not a minor mistake, by any stretch of the imagination.