In late July, the Woodland Daily Democrat reported that Woodland police had arrested a husband and wife who were suspected of slashing the face of Angelique Topete. Ms. Topete is the wife of Marco Topete, who was sentenced to be executed earlier this year for the 2008 killing of Sheriff’s Deputy Tony Diaz.
At the time, authorities argued that the attack had nothing to do with Mr. Topete or his crime.
“It had nothing to do with Marco Topete,” a police spokesperson told the media.
Published reports described the incident as a “severe but not life threatening injury.”
Now Ms. Topete has learned that the Yolo County District Attorney’s office – the same office that prosecuted and sought the death penalty for her husband – has declined to file charges against Jeffrey Card, 28.
Ms. Topete told the Vanguard on Monday that the victim’s advocate who is working with her said that the DA has sent the case to Napa County to review and that the Attorney General’s office believes that the Yolo DA is not acting in a biased manner. They cited a lack of evidence to prosecute the case.
“I don’t get how there is a lack of evidence when they have [the injury to] my face,” Ms. Topete told the Vanguard.
Ms. Topete had never met Jeffrey Card previously.
According to published accounts, the incident began at 2:19 a.m. on July 21 on Community Lane. A fight broke out among a number of people, and witnesses told police that a person had fled the 
scene in a silver smaller SUV-type vehicle.
Angelique Topete was not a participant in the fight, Rather, police described her as being “in the wrong place at the wrong time.”
She was a bystander, but suffered a several-inch-long gash to the left side of her face.
The suspect fled with another woman in the SUV following the assault.
Police told the Daily Democrat that, following a series of interviews with the witnesses and the victim, the silver Chevy Trailblazer was registered to Woodland resident Tara Card, and her husband Jeffrey Card was the man who injured Ms. Topete.
“Through interviews on scene it was determined in the course of an argument a white male adult in his 20s had slashed the face of the victim with a sharp cutting device,” said Sgt. Steve Guthrie to the Daily Democrat.
Ms. Topete was then able to identify Mr. Card out of a lineup of eight people the next morning.
“I will never forget him actually,” she told the Vanguard.
Identified by pictures, Mr. Card would run from authorities before turning himself in two days later.
Woodland police had booked the Cards on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon and mayhem charges.
Angelique Topete was concerned from the start that the DA’s animosity toward her and her husband would taint their ability to properly prosecute the matter. She said the victim’s advocate has requested the Attorney General take a look at it.
Authorities have up to a year to charge Mr. Card. Mr. Card was scheduled to be arraigned last Friday, but at that time the DA announced they were not filing charges.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
If she can identify the attacker, I dont see why there wouldnt be enough evidence to prosecute. Justice for all? Apparently not if you are the wife of a convicted cop killer.
David
Any way to get the records from Napa that might explain this? Seems unbelievable at surface.
This is Angelique Topete , part of th reason why i decided to tell me story is because this is a veryu scarey thing to me . I could not believe how the D.A. had decided not to charge this man who did such an awful thing to my face. I would like you to know that the surface is what is underneath. It is th truth. I know that what my husband did what beyone horrible but this should have no relivance on what happened to me.Mr.Jonathan Raven from the Yolo County District attorneys office Victims Advicacy , stated that he did not see any conflict with the case before with My husband and the one I had with Mr. Card. But yet the D.A. gives no reason as to why they did not charge this man that admitted to slashing my face. Mr. Card is trying to make it seems like I attacked his wife which comapltely false consifering that I did not know him or his wife! She was not hurt in any way , and that is because I did not attack her! And lets just say for arguments sake i did try to attack her . Does that give a man the right to take a sharp object and slash my face from ear to mouth? Leaving me with nerve damage that I might never get back? Doe that give the District attorney the right to refuse to give me the oppurtunity the have my day in court? I only told my story because it is a scarey story to tell. This District Attorney’s office decides whois guilty and who is innocent without reasons? He never gave me a reason. I felt victiimized all over again Friday when they let this man go without so much as a slap on the wrist!I am not allowed to be a victime just because of who I am married to? How is that Justice? People question what is undeneath because they find it hard to believe that the D.A. could do such a thing? Really have you seen his history? I watched this D.A. everday in action in order to crucify my husband for his crime. Just so you know I am not saying that my hus=band is innocent or should not pay , but should law enfporcements or the D.A. judges etc. be allowed to twist and turn the law to their advantage and not be called on it? Just because we feel that that person should pay? But like I said this is not about him nor his crime , This is about me and what this man decided to do that will impact me , my kids family froends for the rest of our lives ,. I have since moved out of this county because I wanted to give my kids a fair chance at life. because of this situation it makes me feel good to know that I made the right choice in doing so , Makes me wonder what they would do for my daughter who is Marco’s daughter? Would she never see justice just as me if something horrible happened to her ? You can ask any one with the name Topete or who they know is related to him how they hve been treated since the incident.I feel that people should take a good look at what is right in front of them , because (and I hope it never does )you may see yourself in the same situation you never know.
Sorry for the words I mispelled .
We’ll we know the Vanguard will dismiss the photo lineup.
I don’t understand what that means? Yea it was a photo lineup but I still picked him out. And he admitted to it that following Monday.
Mr Obvious please clarify your statement, it’s Obvious, she positively ID him the next day!
The Vanguard has consistently put forth that the use of photo lineups are flawed and that eye witness identification is regularly inaccurate and often coerced by the police. How do we know the the police didn’t tell Ms Topete who to identify in the line up.
Ms Topete says Mr Card confessed the next day. How do we know that wasn’t a coerced confession.
The innocence project points to many cases of erroneous photo lineup identification and coerced confessions.
I wonder if, since it seems to be agreed that “Angelique Topete was not a participant in the fight … that she was a bystander,” that the District Attorney’s office believes that the attack itself on her was entirely accidental and without malice and therefore not a criminal act?
I am not saying that is what I believe. Moreover, I think, even if the cut to her face was entirely accidental, it still likely would be a case of criminal negligence. My question is posed simply to get at what the DA’s office seems to believe.
An added point: My understanding is that in a case of felony assault (if that is what took place) the statute of limitations is 6 years. (That is the statute for all crimes punishable for 8 or more years which include a time limit on bringin charges). So even if this DA punts, perhaps Mr. Card could be prosecuted down the road.
Mr. Obvious makes some great points:
“The Vanguard has consistently put forth that the use of photo lineups are flawed and that eye witness identification is regularly inaccurate and often coerced by the police. How do we know the the police didn’t tell Ms Topete who to identify in the line up.
Ms Topete says Mr Card confessed the next day. How do we know that wasn’t a coerced confession.
The innocence project points to many cases of erroneous photo lineup identification and coerced confessions.”
Well David?
“The Vanguard has consistently put forth that the use of photo lineups are flawed”
That’s not completely accurate. Here’s a more accurate portrayal of my views on eyewitness identification ([url]https://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5173:do-field-admonishments-help-to-prevent-wrongful-convictions&catid=74:court-watch&Itemid=100[/url]).
But it’s also irrelevant. The relative point here is that it seems at least on the surface that there is enough evidence to charge the guy, they have certainly charged other people with less, and yet, why haven’t they here?
“Well David? “
We can evaluate the case if they charge and try him. The standard for charging is probable cause, there seems enough to have probable cause. The standard for trying someone is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, we can’t evaluate that at this point.
Angelique… no matter how I feel about the prosecution of the case (have not fully formed an opinion, but strongly tend to question why the matter is not prosecuted), please know that your injury was unjust.
I will keep you in my thoughts and prayers.
“I don’t understand what that means? Yea it was a photo lineup but I still picked him out. And he admitted to it that following Monday.”
Angelique: Don’t worry about it, they are giving me a hard time because I have been critical of the DA’s office for the way in which they charge cases and the techniques they use and therefore are throwing it back at me (although they apparently misunderstand the criticism).
[quote]Angelique: Don’t worry about it, they are giving me a hard time because I have been critical of the DA’s office for the way in which they charge cases and the techniques they use and therefore are throwing it back at me (although they apparently misunderstand the criticism). [/quote]With all due respect, David, this is about Angelique and justice. You seem to frame it as ‘all about’ you.
Hpierce: Read the comments by Mr. Obvious and Rusty again. I agree it should be about Angelique’s justice.
k…
David… please read my comment to Angelique… know that it was ‘heartfelt’. I recommend to any who believe in God, to keep Angelique and her family in their thoughts and prayers. For those who don’t believe in God, please keep Angelique in your thoughts.
Hpierce: I thought your comment to Angelique was good and the right message. No one should have to go through this and have to fight for justice.
We should support Angelique. Watch out for too much calling for “justice”… you oppose the death penalty, but understand that for Mr Topete,many would consider his sentence as “justice”.
In my world view, there is a serious question about whether any mortal person is qualified to truly determine “justice”. That being said, we have to make decisions to protect ourselves, and society in general. Hopefully, we will get that “right” more often than not.
David, I think you were the person who asked me if the guy who ran me over on Road 29 was criminally cited. And if I recall correctly, I told you then that I did not know. After that exchange, I got ahold of the CHP report and it says that he was in violation of the law, but he was not cited, despite the effects of his actions. Again, it’s possible that the authorities will choose to prosecute him down the road. I don’t know. But for now, that driver will have no criminal record of having run me over in his car that day.
Hpierce: Good points, one of my definitions of justice is equal treatment under the law in addition to fairness, equity, a punishment commensurate with the crime.
I understand that it is hard to believe that the D.A. did not press charges and I know that people might be looking for reasons as to explain why and not look at the whole picture. But it is what it is . He says that I was the aggressor. I do not understand for the life of me how I was the aggressor against him who he is bulky guy. Oh wait he said that he was defending his wife , who has no marks on her whatsoever.I will not defend myself for someone slashing my face open, and this District Attorneys office not acting to prosecute Mr. Jeffery Card. I thank you guys for the kind words and like I said the only reason that I wanted this story told was because I know I did nothing wrong!The bottom line is this man is free thinking he got away with almost killing me, and GOD help the next person he hurts, Because he will hurt someone else , I guarantee that , he has a history of viloence , But It will be on the D.A.’s head not mine.as far as the photo line up well let me tell you I would pick that man out of a million people any day. I can’t and will never forget that person just as no vistime forgets her/his attacker! And the police coersing him? Please It isn’t like they just snatched anyone up off the street , He had run , I had picked him out and he turned himself in. Also please rmemeber that I was with other people that knew him , and there were two witnesses who none of us knew that came forward who seen him attack me and I was just standing there . Is it really hard to believe this happened just the way I am telling you? What would I have to gain? I am the one making this public really. Does that sound like someone that initiated this?
By the way let me just say that the reason why I even bring up my husband is because they were always bringing him up when questioning me . What does this have to do with him? The detectives first words were “Look we obviously know who you are , Your Marco Topet’s wife;” No I am Angelique Marie Topete, I am a human who was almost killed and don’t deserve to be treated like I am the the one who did something wrong .
Angelique: Sorry this happened to you.
Well knowing many DA’s and how this office is run, here is what I think is going on. Since the husband was convicted of killing a cop, guess what, his chances or his wife’s chances of ever getting any police services is slim and none and slim left town.
Known crooks, trouble makers, drug people and other criminal elements are known to local police and the DA’s Office. When crimes occur and the DA looks at who is involved, many factors come into play. I would say this case is filed under NHI or too bad. I am sure this wife has either helped, protected or assisted her husband in his prior criminal activities and is not known for being a good up-standing citizen. It would be like a drug dealer filing a theft report when his buyer ripped him off of his drugs. This type of case will not be handled the same as a housewife with a baby getting beat up and having her purse taken. The victims are very different.
Many may not want to hear this or may not want to believe it, but here is what the comments and decision process may have sounded like. F that B, her f ing husband killed a cop, screw her, she deserves what she gets. Or, when her dirtbag piece of crap husband was out committing crimes, gang banging and making other victims this B was helping him or hiding him, tough she deserves what she gets.
So, you see the investigation was probably approached with a who cares attitude and maybe a “help the guy who did this” attitude. It is easy for DA or cops to make a case better or worse, asking the wrong questions, not asking the right questions, ignoring leads, discounting some witnesses and making other witnesses better than they are, etc.
So any review of the case by others may very well show a crap case with crap evidence and statements. Just as if when a cop is killed, no short cuts are taken, no money is spared and the investigation is more focused for charging and conviction, than if one gang banger shoots another gang banger.
The victim matters, I assure if you DA Reisig’s Partner had his face cut, there would be charges, if the Sheriff’s wife face was cut there would be charges, however if a parolee just got out of prison and got into a fight with a rival gang member then probably would be no charges filed.
Reisig already sees every Mexican as a drug dealing gang member anyway, add that you have a convicted cop killing as your husband and it is very easy to see why this case will not be charged. I assure you the word in the DA’s is, tough, she got what she deserved and it is good street justice for what her husband did. Will you ever get anyone to admit this, not likely. A more likely charge would be charging this woman with assault for hitting the man’s hand that was holding the knife with her face. Don’t shoot the messenger, not many want to hear this or believe it, but I assure you conversations such as this go on all the time and are SOP.
Roger Rabbit said “I am sure this wife has either helped, protected or assisted her husband in his prior criminal activities and is not known for being a good up-standing citizen.”
Moderator: I suggest you remove this defamatory comment ASAP. It is clearly way outside the bounds, and makes a clear accusation without a factual predicate that the wife/victim is at least a co-conspirator working with criminal activities.
Roger: you really should apologize to her. She did not shoot that cop.
I did not say I believe this, I said what I believe from my experiences that is what is being considered or talked about and that is how she is probably perceived.
I don’t know this lady and mean no disrespect to her and have no knowledge of her actions before, during or after this incident. I do know the inner workings of the DA’s office and the system, I know many DAs and have heard many comments such as these over many years. It is the reality of what goes on behind the scenes and if you or everyone wants to get upset and start calling for censoring, that is why it continues. No one wants to hear it or believe, so that way it does not happen. Hell, I am trying to do this lady a favor by giving her an inside idea on why this could possibly be happening.
This is my opinion from what I have seen in the past, I would think that was clear from my comment where I said [b]here is what I think is going on.
[/b]
[quote]Roger: you really should apologize to her. She did not shoot that cop. [/quote]
I did not say nor did I imply that that she shot the cop and for you to make that leap is not very responsible.
I think Roger was trying to paint a picture of the DA’s office and was not trying to disparage Ms. Topete.
Mr. Rabbit ahh where do I start before I begin let me just say that I do not take offense of the fact that this is in deed what has happened. I do however take offense that the public choose to ACCEPT this type of decision as acceptable . I have no criminal record and just because I fell in love with someone that has a criminal history does not make me an accessory. I am not ven going to stand up for my husband nor my marriage , I did that already when I stood by him in court everyday and let the public judge, and crucify me as a bad person, or a person who was molested or abused as a young girl. I actually do ok professionally and am a good mom and have never been to jail. I belive that people are much more than one act they committ. This D.A. did just what you are saying and I am voicing that I DO NOT ACCEPT IT . That I want a reason, even if it is a bogus one but the D.A. was not even required to do that . He was just like “Do not call us we will call you.” and expected me to bend over and take it! I will not do that I am voicing my story and hoping that someone anyone voices the same . I am hoping that they see what this person did to me and raise the same questiosn .Two voices are better than one. Can you imagine several? As far as people or this ignorant District Attorneys office believing that maybe I deserved this or people thinking I protected my husband in anything they believed he was doing , well then they should have charged me . But you know why they could not because Nothing could be further than the truth . ALOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT him as a gang mmeber but from when 1997? He never committed a crime other than the one that he was sentenced for while I was with him . And believe me they tried to arrest him for everything. The D.A. has the public so blind against my husband it wasn’t so much that they have hate for him but for his family who are also victims . It has blinded people so much that they actually believe I deserve this because of who I am married to. But the one difference between the people that think this way and the D.A. is that he is sworn to protect the victims of a crime no matter what!If he wants to believe like the common corrupted society then he should be a commoner, and not take an oath the defend and serve/protect. Was I asking him to sentence him without a fair trial ? NO of course not but I deserve to be able to speak . To confront my attacker don’t I? I just want my day as anyone else would so that I do not feel like the victim anymore over and over. Is that so much to ask for? And mark my words this guy is going to do something worse. But it will not be on my head because I will voice myself until someone anyone hears me.And if you choose to listen then thank you if not then well it must be nice to live in a glass house.
Did the DA refuse or hand the case off to others to decide? It looks as if he didn’t want the case because he prosecuted her husband not that he wants to deny her justice.
There is no doubt that I believe why this is happening and this is what is happening. The problem is the DA controls what he puts out to the press so they only hear what he wants them to. The Vanguard is one of the few that put out “the other side of the story” and the DA hates it. The DA has no love for David either and I believe David would have problems getting charges filed if he was a victim of a crime.
I think it is totally BS and I agree that the DA is sworn to uphold the constitution, but I also know that an oath from this DA means absolutely nothing. I have watched him, what I call lie, he would call it lack of memory, and Reisig has no problem saying under oath, I have no recollection of that or I don’t remember that, or I do not recall that. DA Reisig has been found several times doing things that is against the oath he took and nothing is done. The system protects the system. You will not get help from AG or Feds, they work together to ensure people do not lose faith in the system and to prevent a bunch of appeals and court cases that would tie up the courts and cripple the system. I have heard the phrase more than once, “if this gets out it will open the flood gates for appeals and over turned cases”, then what normally follows is how do we prevent this, how can stop this or how can we do damage control or spin this.
All over the country you see DA’s getting caught up in scandals from years ago, where they put the wrong people in jail and people’s convictions are over-turned for DA misconduct. For things from hiding evidence, losing evidence, ignoring evidence, coaching witnesses and soliciting favored testimony from cops or witnesses or cutting deals with felons who will say anything to get out of jail early. In every case no charges are filed and the DA walks, that is why they give them immunity. It is a huge flaw and loop hole in the system, it started with Politicians, then Judges, then got extended to DAs and soon it may be given to cops. If people are doing what they should do, why do they need immunity to do their job? And don’t say for honest mistakes, since most serious crimes require specific intent.
When DA’s start being held accountable for their failures to follow their oath and for the crimes they commit, then it may change, until them, you are just one of the many that will get No Justice. Then they wonder why people riot and get tired of the No justice. Until enough people are fed up, it will continue.
The Governor could step in and order his AG to investigate, the AG could do the right thing and investigate, the US Attorney could order the FBI to investigate, all of that would be whitewash. They would find exactly what the DA found and would say the DA did nothing wrong. And then they would label you as a trouble maker and say you can’t accept the facts. Their facts, their findings, their rules. How can any reasonable person believe that you have a victim of a stabbing by another person, so close and personal that the ID is pretty reasonable and then the suspect turns himself in and admits to the crime and with no other facts, the DA said they do not have enough to charge. Come on, if a cop was stabbed from behind in the dark of the night while blindfolded and said he could ID the suspect, the suspect would be charged.
Another saying in the DA’s office is the Victim can make or break a case, a good victim is much better for a case than a bad victim. A cop is a good victim. Everyone else has to prove what type of victim they are, kids are good, babies are good, old people or disabled are good, these are all known to have good jury appeal. The jury will like these victims and are more willing to convict so the DA can win. This is considered for suspects too. OJ was a tough suspect to convict, Michael Jackson was a tough suspect to convict. All these factors are discussed and considered. MY guess is Bin Laden’s wife could not get a very fair trail. NO I am not comparing anyone to that, I am trying to educate people on the inner workings of how the DA works.
My point is, the DA can easily make a case to any other DA or investigating agency by saying, even if it is not true, he can say I am not filing for various reasons and as soon as he says the victim husband is a convicted cop killer, drug user, gang member, high raking gang leader, or however he wants to describe him, everything that follows will not matter. Sorry, not saying it is right, but I am saying that is how the game is played.
I wish you luck, but have no faith in this DA or the system.
MR. Toad: District Attorney Reisig could be caught hiding a body in the truck of his car and you would say he was helping the police clear the road way and keeping the crime scene clean. lol
I think pushing the DA to file charges is a double edged sword and the type of thing the Vanguard stands against. The DA’s charging standard is stated that they do not take cases to trial where they do not believe they can prove the case to a jury. Apparently that is the feeling in this case.
Does the Vanguard want to take to position that the DA should lower the standard in which they will prosecute?
I’m not surprised Rabbit has not been admonished about making unsubstantiated claims that Reisig sees every mexican as a drug dealing gang member. The unsubstantiated claim from Rabbit is just as typical as the lack of being taken to task for such a claim.
angelique 121104
I wanted to write to express my support for you in this situation. It would seem that you may have fallen into a trap that many people, both men and women fall into. And that is guilt and judgement by association. I don’t know if you follow politics, but your situation reminds me of what happened to Hillary Clinton when President Clinton was being tried in the press and public for his infidelity and subsequent lies. I heard many comments about the “humiliation” of Hillary and negative comments about the reasons for her standing “by her man”. From my point of view there was nothing for Hillary to feel “humiliated” about. She had done nothing wrong. Her motives for standing by Bill Clinton were known to only her and in my opinion were no one else’s business.
Your actions, or lack there of, prior to this attack are also irrelevant and no one else’s business. Your case should be judged exclusively on its own merits. I do not know if there is such a thing as a DA recusing himself from a case, but if ever there was a situation where this would be appropriate, this would seem to be it.
I am especially sorry that this event will likely color your perception of the law and our society for the rest of your life. Please be aware that there are those amongst us who do not judge you by the actions of any other human being and wish you and your daughter nothing but the best.
When a family member is assaulted and left with permanent injuries, you expect that an investigation will be done and eventually the perpetrators prosecuted. However, you are disgusted to learn that the crime is being covered-up with the help of some police officers, a district attorney, and a judge because they have a relationship with the perpetrators. The evidence the police have is not included in their report. A police officer makes a phone call to only three of the individuals involved and one of them asks if the statute of limitations has ended as he thinks he can no longer be charged with a crime. That is the extent of the investigation. The police choose not to turn over all the evidence to the DA. The DA, in turn, refuses to obtain the missing evidence. Another police report is generated by someone else going to the police but if you ask for a copy of it you are told it doesn’t exist. Corruption is alive. Loyalty to those involved in the cover-up is more important to some than exposing the corruption and knowing the truth. When there is no legal and judicial integrity, the victim of a crime receives no justice. Perhaps, now is the time to bring in the media.
“Does the Vanguard want to take to position that the DA should lower the standard in which they will prosecute?”
Absolutely not. The Vanguard questions the lack of prosecution at this point – admittedly without knowing its rationale – because at least on the surface as has been described, I have seen cases with less evidence identifying the perpetrator that have been charged. If there is a reason why this one is different, I’m all ears.
[quote]However, you are disgusted to learn that the crime is being covered-up with the help of some police officers, a district attorney, and a judge because they have a relationship with the perpetrators. The evidence the police have is not included in their report. A police officer makes a phone call to only three of the individuals involved and one of them asks if the statute of limitations has ended as he thinks he can no longer be charged with a crime……………[/quote]
Rodger Rabbit has a soul mate.
To “Mr Obvious”: No victim of a crime sees the humor in your remark. You are obviously part of the problem and in support of the perpetrators and their allies. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have made such a sick comment.
Well Mr. Toad I can tell you that it does sound like the D.A. does not want me to get justice. And if he feels that he can not be fair in charging this man that did slash my face then he should just say so. Why should I have to wonder what his reasons are? And for you to assume that he is being fair.. Well please tell me where you see that ? I actually made the request through my Victims Advocate to have the Attorney General look at this. And I totally agree with Mr. Rabbit, I know I will probably not get anywhere with the efforts that I am making , but at least I can say I made an effort , when this guy does it again . Or worse! And I have no doubt that he will . Why not? He got away with it when he did it to me? Then the D.A. will want to blame his family or the fact that he was incarcerated , or a bad seed . Or whatever else they want to pawn it off on. Other than the fact that they ignored the fact that this man slashed my face from EAR to MOUTH, and they did NOTHING ABOUT IT!I am sure that when you see him on the news you will say “oh damn she was right. ” Unfortunetly someone else who is not married to a convicted Cop killer will have to suffer. So if you see after everything I have said anything positive regarding what this District Attorney has done for me , THE VICTIM then please enlighten me . Now as For Mr. rabbit I do appreciate you giving it to me straight up . I knew everyhthng you were saying right off the bat, which is why I requested for someone (anyone) else to hear it other than the District Attorney’s office of Yolo county since the beginning. I think that the D.A. should have been a big boy and said “Hey I can not charge this person.” for whatever reason and stepped the hell aside. But he never seems to do that does he? And you are right if it would have been a cops wife or judges or any Law officials loved one / wife , well we wouldnt be having this discussion now would we? But I am not I am the wife of someone that most people hate,and I accept that. MOST of the time but not this time. I just can not take it, I can not do that , maybe it will not change anything but it will change something for me saying that I did all that I could to bring this to surface . Imagine if no one ever spoke? Eventually hopefully someone will listen.
Medwoman Thank you for your kind words I really do appreciate it . I can not express to you how this has affected me personally . I cry all the time because of what has happened to me , Because this D.A. has made me feel that he believes I deserve this. And he is not voicing otherwise.The decision for this man not to be charged and me not know why makes me feel like the Law Officials in Yolo County are saying excatly what Mr. Rabbit has stated “F@#k That B@#ch she gets what she deserves.” Maybe that is not the case at all as Mr. Toad had implied but if not then let him explain it to me? The D.A. did not inform me of anything.They never put in the system that they were even the ones that requested it be herad by Napa County! From what I understand the Victims Advocate requested it to be heard by the Attorney Generals office. The Victims Advocay has stated the D.A. has up to one year to charge Mr. Card . What will have changed in a year? Are they saying they will wait to see if he does anything further, to me or someone else? Then they will want my testimony? Well forget that!Even the Police Dept. recommended the charges of Mayhem assault with a weapon to do great bodily harm. And they still refused to charge him???? How does that make even common sense? It doesn’t . Hopefully the next person that he attacks receives justice for the both of us. I am grateful though grateful that I still have my life.
lol, well I see Reisig has sent his minions out to cloud the issues and deflect from Reisig’s lack of ethics and character.
My beliefs are well known by many in the DA’s Office but no one will say it since they want to keep their job and not get black balled. That is the problem with unethical people, they create fear to control and that way no speaks out against them. Just one small case in point on how DA Reisig views Mexicans, the link below is to Hommie figues that are sold. Mr. Reisig used to display these openly on his desk at the DA’s Office when he prosecuting gangs and running for DA. When someone told him that it offensive and showed a lack of respect and stereotypes Hispanics. He told me them that he was tree hugger and left wing idiot, so he gave them to his buddy Lt. Bruce Nailboff who just retired as the Chief Investigator and Bruce displayed the figures on his desk to show support of Reisig and how Hispanics were viewed in Reisig’s DA Office.
[img]http://www.sellit.co.nz/au/store/media/homies8completeset.jpg[/img]
I still find that offensive and that is just one incident of many, I know Reisig better than most, so when I give my opinion of what he thinks and believes, I have many years experience watching Reisig show his true colors. Your choice to believe it or discount it.
More blathering from the rabbit, this time about the homies figurines. I did a little research on them and they are put out by a Hispanic artists. So a white guy having homies is racist? Then white people can’t listen to rap made by black people because of all the N bombs.
Mr Obvious
So why do you suppose the DA would have these figures ? Are you postulating perhaps that he purchased them in altruistic support of the
Hispanic artists ? Well, I don’t suppose we could exclude that possibility no matter how unlikely we might find it !
[quote]So why do you suppose the DA would have these figures ? …….[/quote]
It’s the same as a doctor having some type of medical device on his desk. My doctor collects all kinds of medical devices, pretty neat. I guess it would be the same with a gang instigator. I’d be willing to be that the homies weren’t the only gang related items on the desk.
This is just another attempt to discredit the DA’s office. Keep trying. I’d be careful with the info given by the rabbit. I have a feeling there may be a Brady issue.