Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Monday, April 20, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Who Killed Biggie Smalls? An Interview With Detective Russell Poole
Who Killed Biggie? A Throwback Interview w/ LA dective Russell Poole and Rollingstone Editor Randall Sullivan
http://odeo.com/episodes/550763-Breakdown-FM-Who-Killed-Biggie-A-Throwback-Interview-w-LA-dective-Russell-Poole-and-Rollingstone-Editor-Randall-Sullivan
http://odeo.com/episodes/550763-Breakdown-FM-Who-Killed-Biggie-A-Throwback-Interview-w-LA-dective-Russell-Poole-and-Rollingstone-Editor-Randall-Sullivan
Monday, March 30, 2009
How Do You Turn A Suicide Into A Snuff Movie? Hire Alan Jackson
Los Angeles Times Ignores Bill Pavelic's Allegations that he, Dr. Lee, and Dr. Baden Were Set Up - By LAPD's Grotesque Burglary/Homicide Unit ... Opts to Undermine the Experts Further (they are not lying; it's partisanship - "states" the Lost Angeles Times):
Editorial
Spector -- and expert witnesses -- on trial
Because money often changes hands for their testimony, such witnesses don't have much credibility. There may be better ways to get at the truth.
March 30, 2009
» Discuss Article
At Phil Spector's murder trial last week, Deputy Dist. Atty. Alan Jackson flatly dismissed the testimony of a series of experts for the defense, calling them "pay-to-say" witnesses who received more than $400,000 in return for doing just what was expected of them. "How does a homicide become a suicide? You write a big, fat check," Jackson told jurors. "If you can't change the science, you buy the scientist."That's a standard argument in courtrooms across America. One side brings in expert witnesses to explain something complicated or technical; the other side shoots them down by attacking their credibility.
It's a cynical tactic, but it works because, unfortunately, it's basically true. Expert witnesses don't have much credibility. Generally they have been carefully selected by sophisticated lawyers who know exactly what they're looking for. The experts (primarily doctors, but also bloodstain specialists and ballistics whizzes as well as all sorts of other scientists and scholars) are then prepped by the lawyers so that the bulk of their testimony is worked out even before the trial starts. Finally, they're paid -- in the Spector case, one witness received what Jackson called a "horse-choking $181,000" -- by the very lawyers who hope to get a particular answer out of them and who, in many cases, they hope to work for again in the future. We're not saying these witnesses are liars; most, no doubt, tell the truth as they believe it to be. But they are, by the very nature of the system, partisan. The more reasonable, measured or objective an expert is, the less desirable he is to those who do the hiring. As the famed litigator Melvin Belli once said: "If I got myself an impartial witness, I'd think I was wasting my money." The result is that when two hired experts go up against one another, it's often the best performer who wins -- if, that is, the judge and jurors don't dismiss the whole exercise out of hand. This is not a recent glitch in the legal system. In 1848, in his "Treatise on the Law of Evidence," Judge John Pitt Taylor noted that "skilled witnesses" were less credible than any other kind because their views could be "made to correspond with the wishes and interests of the parties who call them." (For what it's worth, he also singled out enslaved people, women and foreigners for skepticism.) In 1923, the jurist John Henry Wigmore wrote that "professional men of honorable instincts and high scientific standards look upon the witness box as a Golgotha, and disclaim all respect for the law's methods of investigation."
Still, it doesn't have to work this way. Many countries have opted for entirely different approaches. In Germany, for instance, only the judge may select expert witnesses. Australia is experimenting with a system known as "hot tubbing," in which the experts are chosen by the two sides but are then required to testify at the same time -- so they can discuss the case and ask each other questions. The British have recently adopted a system in which both sides must agree on a single expert. If they can't come up with a mutually acceptable person, the judge decides for them. This not only cuts costs but creates incentives to find experts who are moderate and credible -- rather than well-paid showboats. Our own system isn't likely to change soon, mostly because the powerful trial lawyers lobby has little interest in reforming it. But the Spector trial arguments suggested, yet again, that we'd be better off with an approach that seeks truth rather than one that encourages partisanship and devalues expertise.
Editorial
Spector -- and expert witnesses -- on trial
Because money often changes hands for their testimony, such witnesses don't have much credibility. There may be better ways to get at the truth.
March 30, 2009
» Discuss Article
At Phil Spector's murder trial last week, Deputy Dist. Atty. Alan Jackson flatly dismissed the testimony of a series of experts for the defense, calling them "pay-to-say" witnesses who received more than $400,000 in return for doing just what was expected of them. "How does a homicide become a suicide? You write a big, fat check," Jackson told jurors. "If you can't change the science, you buy the scientist."That's a standard argument in courtrooms across America. One side brings in expert witnesses to explain something complicated or technical; the other side shoots them down by attacking their credibility.
It's a cynical tactic, but it works because, unfortunately, it's basically true. Expert witnesses don't have much credibility. Generally they have been carefully selected by sophisticated lawyers who know exactly what they're looking for. The experts (primarily doctors, but also bloodstain specialists and ballistics whizzes as well as all sorts of other scientists and scholars) are then prepped by the lawyers so that the bulk of their testimony is worked out even before the trial starts. Finally, they're paid -- in the Spector case, one witness received what Jackson called a "horse-choking $181,000" -- by the very lawyers who hope to get a particular answer out of them and who, in many cases, they hope to work for again in the future. We're not saying these witnesses are liars; most, no doubt, tell the truth as they believe it to be. But they are, by the very nature of the system, partisan. The more reasonable, measured or objective an expert is, the less desirable he is to those who do the hiring. As the famed litigator Melvin Belli once said: "If I got myself an impartial witness, I'd think I was wasting my money." The result is that when two hired experts go up against one another, it's often the best performer who wins -- if, that is, the judge and jurors don't dismiss the whole exercise out of hand. This is not a recent glitch in the legal system. In 1848, in his "Treatise on the Law of Evidence," Judge John Pitt Taylor noted that "skilled witnesses" were less credible than any other kind because their views could be "made to correspond with the wishes and interests of the parties who call them." (For what it's worth, he also singled out enslaved people, women and foreigners for skepticism.) In 1923, the jurist John Henry Wigmore wrote that "professional men of honorable instincts and high scientific standards look upon the witness box as a Golgotha, and disclaim all respect for the law's methods of investigation."
Still, it doesn't have to work this way. Many countries have opted for entirely different approaches. In Germany, for instance, only the judge may select expert witnesses. Australia is experimenting with a system known as "hot tubbing," in which the experts are chosen by the two sides but are then required to testify at the same time -- so they can discuss the case and ask each other questions. The British have recently adopted a system in which both sides must agree on a single expert. If they can't come up with a mutually acceptable person, the judge decides for them. This not only cuts costs but creates incentives to find experts who are moderate and credible -- rather than well-paid showboats. Our own system isn't likely to change soon, mostly because the powerful trial lawyers lobby has little interest in reforming it. But the Spector trial arguments suggested, yet again, that we'd be better off with an approach that seeks truth rather than one that encourages partisanship and devalues expertise.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Cooley Gives Bhandari A Run For His Money
http://karmapa-issue.org/politics/bhandari.htm
The role of N.B. Bhandari in the controversy
IIIIIIIII Date: August 14, 2005
(excerpt from "Setting the Records Straight#2" which was published here earlier) ...What Rights Did Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches Have Over Rumtek?
To answer this question, it is necessary to understand something about the legal structure of Tibetan monastic administrations.
Traditionally, each high lama has his or her own labrang , or administration, to govern the monasteries and other properties under his control. The Karmapas have had their own labrang which has always been separate from the labrangs of other high lamas. Situ Rinpoche led the Palpung Labrang while Gyaltsab led his own Chogong Labrang, named respectively after each rinpoche's traditional monastic seat.
Under the Tibetan system, lamas from one labrang had no administrative authority in another administration. Thus, the two rinpoches, Situ and Gyaltsab, would never have been able to legally gain control of Rumtek Mona stery, which was part of the Karmapa Labrang rather than part of either of their own administrations.
So the only way open to lamas to take property from an outside labrang would be, simply put, to conduct a kind of coup d'état there. They found a powerful ally in the Sikkim state government of NB Bhandari.
Why Did the Sikkim State Government Assist the Rumtek Take-over?
We believe that Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches secured the assistance of Chief Minister Bhandari's government by making two large contributions to his party totaling $2.5 million.
We believe that an initial payment of $1 million was made to Bhandari before his police went into Rumtek. While we lack direct evidence, the indirect evidence for a large advance payment seems very strong. The Indian Constitution established India as a secular state and prohibits government officials from interfering in religious affairs. So, we have to wonder, why would Bhandari violate the Constitution and assist Situ Rinpoche's group in seizing Rumtek? We can come up with no other explanation than that Situ Rinpoche bribed Bhandari to do this.
However, we do have direct evidence that another payment was made by Situ Rinpoche's group to Chief Minister Bhandari after Rumtek was seized by Situ Rinpoche's group in 1993. This payment was delivered by the Taiwanese millionaire Chen Lu An, a follower of Situ Rinpoche. The payment was for $1.5 million. This donation has been documented by newspapers and government investigators in both Gangtok and New Delhi . The ensuing scandal led to investigations by the New Delhi government against Bhandari that helped bring about Bhandari's ouster in 1995.
How Could a Whole State Government Be Bought?
It is an understatement, as Terhune says, to call Chief Minister Bhandari “a controversial figure.” History shows that the Sikkim government during the Bhandari years, from 1979-1995, was perhaps the most corrupt in India . Through a combination of payoffs and intimidation, the chief minister ran Sikkim as his own private fiefdom.
Throughout Sikkim , stories of those bold enough to risk Bhandari's wrath during this period abound. First, there was the opposition leader, Madan Tamang, who dared to circulate pamphlets accusing Bhandari of corruption and womanizing. In response, Mandan was arrested and died in custody. His body was later found in bushes alongside the Rongpo River . Shortly after this, a reporter in Siliguri, RK Baid, published a story detailing some recent examples of corruption in Bhandari's administration. After this, Bhandari sent undercover police into the neighboring state of West Bengal —outside of their legal jurisdiction—to kidnap Baid and bring him to Gangtok. There he was held in prison and tortured. Afterwards, he was offered an amount of money said to be as high as five million rupees to sign a statement denying that he was kidnapped or mistreated. This reporter later opened a hotel in Siliguri using this hush money. Finally, Hamelal Bhandari (no relation to the chief minister), an attorney in Gangtok, took it upon himself to circulate posters again criticizing the chief minister's actions. In responses, he was abducted by party bullies, taken to prison, tortured, and then thrown naked off a truck the next day onto the main street of Gangtok. He was lucky to escape with his life.
Such was the atmosphere of open corruption and intimidation in the state in the eighties, that these heinous acts and many others were well known to the Sikkim public. Yet, all were afraid to take any action since they knew that the police were his personal enforcers and any action in the courts would be punished.
Against this background the elections of 1989 took place. Bhandari's systematic campaign of intimidation had so terrified the opposition that no other candidates stood against his party—something quite unusual in a democracy as lively as India 's. Sikkim is one of India 's smallest states, with a population of only 400,000, and the couple hundred opposition leaders who might have run for office were easy to intimidate. As a result, Bhandari's party won all 32 seats in the Sikkim parliament, giving him a third term in office with unprecedented power over all branches of government, including of course, the judiciary. All of these events are a matter of public record in Sikkim.
Why Didn't the Karmapa Charitable Trust File Its Case Sooner?
Though Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches' group seized Rumtek with Chief Minister Bhandari's help in 1993, the Karmapa Charitable Trust did not successfully file its first case against them until 1997, a full five years later. Why the delay?
Even before Bhandari's rule ended, there were those who were bold enough to file cases against his new friends Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches. Karma Gunbo, a former member of the Sikkim parliament and a devoted student of the late Sixteenth Karmapa, filed a case in Gangtok District Court in 1993 against Situ Rinpoche for forging his Karmapa-prediction letter. Once Chief Minister Bhandari was informed of this, he arrested Karma Gunbo's family, including wife and children, and held them in prison for two weeks during which they were subjected to physical and psychological torture.
Meanwhile, perhaps to ensure that they would not make trouble for Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches, Bhandari initiated an intimidation campaign against all the trustees of the Karmapa Charitable Trust. He expelled from Sikkim the two members who were not Indian citizens, Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche. And against the two trustees who were residents of Sikkim , TS Gyaltsen and JD Densapa, both formerly high officials in the state government, Bhandari sent thugs to stone their houses and cars.
Chief Minister Bhandari's campaign of intimidation against the trustees was successful. JD Densapa in particular became so afraid to file a case in Gangtok that he attempted instead to file the case at the High Court in New Delhi in 1994 on behalf of the monastic community of Rumtek led by Ngedon Tenzin. The High Court responded that since this was a civil case, it should be submitted in the local state court, in Sikkim (the case was not in fact dismissed as Terhune stated in her book). Filing in Sikkim of course was out of the question while Chief Minister Bhandari remained in office.
How Could a Case Be Filed in 1997?
June 1992 was the beginning of the end for Bhandari. While Bhandari began interfering in Rumtek's affairs, PK Chamling, one of Bhandari's ministers, began to plan a campaign to replace the chief minister. He publicly accused Bhandari of corruption and began to refer to him as a “dictator.” In response, Bhandari arrested Chamling's assistants and tortured them in prison. Fortunately, Chamling himself escaped and went into hiding.
At this time, Shamar Rinpoche's secretary, Khedrub Gyatso, met with Chamling to offer his support, presenting a loan to assist with Chamling's election campaign, and requesting Chamling's future assistance in regaining Rumtek for the Karmapa Charitable Trust. Chamling, however, had quite a different character than Bhandari. He responded that he was not in a position to remove Situ and Gyaltsab's monks, but that he would guarantee that the Karmapa Charitable Trust would receive a fair hearing in the courts.
“Once Bhandari is defeated, then the courts in Sikkim will be approachable,” Chamling said. “You should then file a case in the court. My duty is to defeat Bhandari--to end his dictatorial rule and return democracy to Sikkim --let you file your case in Sikkim and then pay you back the money you have loaned me. This is my job for now. I will not remove Situ Rinpoche's monks from Rumtek—that would be illegal, and I am determined to abide by the law.”
Chamling began working with the New Delhi government to put pressure on Bhandari for his cooperation with the Taiwanese millionaire Chen Lu An and for shady dealings with the Chinese government. Pressure continued to mount and the central government asked more and more questions that Bhandari could not answer. By August 1995 things had gotten so bad for Bhandari that he was forced to resign in disgrace. This was an event of such import to the Karmapa controversy that devout Buddhists in Sikkim said at the time that Karmapa's protectors must have inspired Chamling to conceive his coup.
But still the Karmapa Charitable Trust could not file its case because its trustee JD Densapa was afraid that Bhandari's party would return and exact revenge. Tired of waiting, in August of 1996, the legitimate monks of Rumtek held a hunger strike to call on the state government to restore them to their monastery. New Chief Minister Chamling invited 40 senior lamas to his residence for a conference. There he suggested that there was “no point in sleeping on the road” and continuing their protest. The government could not legally remove the monks of Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches from Rumtek. Instead, their only remedy was to request a court order to return them to their monastery.
...
K. Wangchuk Secretary of the International Karma Kagyu Buddhist Organization
The role of N.B. Bhandari in the controversy
IIIIIIIII Date: August 14, 2005
(excerpt from "Setting the Records Straight#2" which was published here earlier) ...What Rights Did Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches Have Over Rumtek?
To answer this question, it is necessary to understand something about the legal structure of Tibetan monastic administrations.
Traditionally, each high lama has his or her own labrang , or administration, to govern the monasteries and other properties under his control. The Karmapas have had their own labrang which has always been separate from the labrangs of other high lamas. Situ Rinpoche led the Palpung Labrang while Gyaltsab led his own Chogong Labrang, named respectively after each rinpoche's traditional monastic seat.
Under the Tibetan system, lamas from one labrang had no administrative authority in another administration. Thus, the two rinpoches, Situ and Gyaltsab, would never have been able to legally gain control of Rumtek Mona stery, which was part of the Karmapa Labrang rather than part of either of their own administrations.
So the only way open to lamas to take property from an outside labrang would be, simply put, to conduct a kind of coup d'état there. They found a powerful ally in the Sikkim state government of NB Bhandari.
Why Did the Sikkim State Government Assist the Rumtek Take-over?
We believe that Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches secured the assistance of Chief Minister Bhandari's government by making two large contributions to his party totaling $2.5 million.
We believe that an initial payment of $1 million was made to Bhandari before his police went into Rumtek. While we lack direct evidence, the indirect evidence for a large advance payment seems very strong. The Indian Constitution established India as a secular state and prohibits government officials from interfering in religious affairs. So, we have to wonder, why would Bhandari violate the Constitution and assist Situ Rinpoche's group in seizing Rumtek? We can come up with no other explanation than that Situ Rinpoche bribed Bhandari to do this.
However, we do have direct evidence that another payment was made by Situ Rinpoche's group to Chief Minister Bhandari after Rumtek was seized by Situ Rinpoche's group in 1993. This payment was delivered by the Taiwanese millionaire Chen Lu An, a follower of Situ Rinpoche. The payment was for $1.5 million. This donation has been documented by newspapers and government investigators in both Gangtok and New Delhi . The ensuing scandal led to investigations by the New Delhi government against Bhandari that helped bring about Bhandari's ouster in 1995.
How Could a Whole State Government Be Bought?
It is an understatement, as Terhune says, to call Chief Minister Bhandari “a controversial figure.” History shows that the Sikkim government during the Bhandari years, from 1979-1995, was perhaps the most corrupt in India . Through a combination of payoffs and intimidation, the chief minister ran Sikkim as his own private fiefdom.
Throughout Sikkim , stories of those bold enough to risk Bhandari's wrath during this period abound. First, there was the opposition leader, Madan Tamang, who dared to circulate pamphlets accusing Bhandari of corruption and womanizing. In response, Mandan was arrested and died in custody. His body was later found in bushes alongside the Rongpo River . Shortly after this, a reporter in Siliguri, RK Baid, published a story detailing some recent examples of corruption in Bhandari's administration. After this, Bhandari sent undercover police into the neighboring state of West Bengal —outside of their legal jurisdiction—to kidnap Baid and bring him to Gangtok. There he was held in prison and tortured. Afterwards, he was offered an amount of money said to be as high as five million rupees to sign a statement denying that he was kidnapped or mistreated. This reporter later opened a hotel in Siliguri using this hush money. Finally, Hamelal Bhandari (no relation to the chief minister), an attorney in Gangtok, took it upon himself to circulate posters again criticizing the chief minister's actions. In responses, he was abducted by party bullies, taken to prison, tortured, and then thrown naked off a truck the next day onto the main street of Gangtok. He was lucky to escape with his life.
Such was the atmosphere of open corruption and intimidation in the state in the eighties, that these heinous acts and many others were well known to the Sikkim public. Yet, all were afraid to take any action since they knew that the police were his personal enforcers and any action in the courts would be punished.
Against this background the elections of 1989 took place. Bhandari's systematic campaign of intimidation had so terrified the opposition that no other candidates stood against his party—something quite unusual in a democracy as lively as India 's. Sikkim is one of India 's smallest states, with a population of only 400,000, and the couple hundred opposition leaders who might have run for office were easy to intimidate. As a result, Bhandari's party won all 32 seats in the Sikkim parliament, giving him a third term in office with unprecedented power over all branches of government, including of course, the judiciary. All of these events are a matter of public record in Sikkim.
Why Didn't the Karmapa Charitable Trust File Its Case Sooner?
Though Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches' group seized Rumtek with Chief Minister Bhandari's help in 1993, the Karmapa Charitable Trust did not successfully file its first case against them until 1997, a full five years later. Why the delay?
Even before Bhandari's rule ended, there were those who were bold enough to file cases against his new friends Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches. Karma Gunbo, a former member of the Sikkim parliament and a devoted student of the late Sixteenth Karmapa, filed a case in Gangtok District Court in 1993 against Situ Rinpoche for forging his Karmapa-prediction letter. Once Chief Minister Bhandari was informed of this, he arrested Karma Gunbo's family, including wife and children, and held them in prison for two weeks during which they were subjected to physical and psychological torture.
Meanwhile, perhaps to ensure that they would not make trouble for Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches, Bhandari initiated an intimidation campaign against all the trustees of the Karmapa Charitable Trust. He expelled from Sikkim the two members who were not Indian citizens, Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche. And against the two trustees who were residents of Sikkim , TS Gyaltsen and JD Densapa, both formerly high officials in the state government, Bhandari sent thugs to stone their houses and cars.
Chief Minister Bhandari's campaign of intimidation against the trustees was successful. JD Densapa in particular became so afraid to file a case in Gangtok that he attempted instead to file the case at the High Court in New Delhi in 1994 on behalf of the monastic community of Rumtek led by Ngedon Tenzin. The High Court responded that since this was a civil case, it should be submitted in the local state court, in Sikkim (the case was not in fact dismissed as Terhune stated in her book). Filing in Sikkim of course was out of the question while Chief Minister Bhandari remained in office.
How Could a Case Be Filed in 1997?
June 1992 was the beginning of the end for Bhandari. While Bhandari began interfering in Rumtek's affairs, PK Chamling, one of Bhandari's ministers, began to plan a campaign to replace the chief minister. He publicly accused Bhandari of corruption and began to refer to him as a “dictator.” In response, Bhandari arrested Chamling's assistants and tortured them in prison. Fortunately, Chamling himself escaped and went into hiding.
At this time, Shamar Rinpoche's secretary, Khedrub Gyatso, met with Chamling to offer his support, presenting a loan to assist with Chamling's election campaign, and requesting Chamling's future assistance in regaining Rumtek for the Karmapa Charitable Trust. Chamling, however, had quite a different character than Bhandari. He responded that he was not in a position to remove Situ and Gyaltsab's monks, but that he would guarantee that the Karmapa Charitable Trust would receive a fair hearing in the courts.
“Once Bhandari is defeated, then the courts in Sikkim will be approachable,” Chamling said. “You should then file a case in the court. My duty is to defeat Bhandari--to end his dictatorial rule and return democracy to Sikkim --let you file your case in Sikkim and then pay you back the money you have loaned me. This is my job for now. I will not remove Situ Rinpoche's monks from Rumtek—that would be illegal, and I am determined to abide by the law.”
Chamling began working with the New Delhi government to put pressure on Bhandari for his cooperation with the Taiwanese millionaire Chen Lu An and for shady dealings with the Chinese government. Pressure continued to mount and the central government asked more and more questions that Bhandari could not answer. By August 1995 things had gotten so bad for Bhandari that he was forced to resign in disgrace. This was an event of such import to the Karmapa controversy that devout Buddhists in Sikkim said at the time that Karmapa's protectors must have inspired Chamling to conceive his coup.
But still the Karmapa Charitable Trust could not file its case because its trustee JD Densapa was afraid that Bhandari's party would return and exact revenge. Tired of waiting, in August of 1996, the legitimate monks of Rumtek held a hunger strike to call on the state government to restore them to their monastery. New Chief Minister Chamling invited 40 senior lamas to his residence for a conference. There he suggested that there was “no point in sleeping on the road” and continuing their protest. The government could not legally remove the monks of Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches from Rumtek. Instead, their only remedy was to request a court order to return them to their monastery.
...
K. Wangchuk Secretary of the International Karma Kagyu Buddhist Organization
Los Angeles District Attorney - Pattern of Abuse of Power
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 5:35 PM, wrote:
JUST A NOTE,I WORKED ON THE SWEDISH WOMAN'S CASE AND IT IT ONE OF THE MOST DISGUSTING EXAMPLES OF ABUSE OF POWER THAT THAT THE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS ENGAGED IN. HERE CASE IS EVEN MORE PROFOUND THAN PHIL SPECTOR'S MATTER.BEST,BILL PAVELIC
JUST A NOTE,I WORKED ON THE SWEDISH WOMAN'S CASE AND IT IT ONE OF THE MOST DISGUSTING EXAMPLES OF ABUSE OF POWER THAT THAT THE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS ENGAGED IN. HERE CASE IS EVEN MORE PROFOUND THAN PHIL SPECTOR'S MATTER.BEST,BILL PAVELIC
Cooley Waves The Magic Wand Of Corruption - Killer King
Thursday, August 02, 2007
2 prosecutors had sought hospital probe - Senior officials denied the 2005 request for a grand jury inquiry into two deaths at troubled King/Drew, saying no crime had been alleged.
By Charles Ornstein August 02, 2007 in print edition B-1
Two Los Angeles County prosecutors unsuccessfully sought a grand jury investigation in 2005 into deaths at Martin Luther King Jr./Drew Medical Center, igniting a behind-the-scenes debate about whether alleged misconduct merited a wide-ranging criminal investigation.
The prosecutors' recommendation, which was outlined in a confidential April 8, 2005, memo, grew out of frustration with the slow pace of their inquiry into two patient deaths. In particular, they cited trouble obtaining hospital records and the county coroner's removal of autopsy findings that suggested substandard care by King/Drew nurses.
The memo, which was recently obtained by The Times, went on to propose a broad look by a grand jury at the King/Drew deaths, possible cover-ups of misconduct at the hospital and whether the coroner was properly examining deaths involving medical wrongdoing.
Senior officials in the county district attorney's office said they rejected the request because no specific crime had been alleged and problems at the troubled hospital were best addressed by county leaders.
Two years later, strong feelings persist on both sides of the debate. The senior prosecutor behind the recommendation said he wonders how many lives might have been saved at King/Drew had the district attorney acted aggressively.
"I did say that this could come back to haunt us," said Jeffrey Jonas, a 38-year veteran in the D.A.'s office who was then head deputy over specialized prosecutions. "I did say that this isn't the last we're going to hear about Martin Luther King. And sure enough it's been an ongoing thing."
King/Drew, now known as King-Harbor, faces possible closure because of continued lapses, including a recent high-profile death in the emergency room.
Jonas' views were heatedly disputed Wednesday by top district attorney officials.
"To think that the D.A.'s office can put on a cape and wave a magic wand and make MLK OK is absurd," said Richard Doyle, bureau director for specialized prosecutions, one of two officials who rejected the grand jury request. "We are here to prosecute crime that we can prove. That's our job. We're not here to cure the social ills created by other people."
And even when crimes may have been committed, he said, his office generally relies on other law-enforcement agencies to investigate first.
Criminal grand juries, which are generally impaneled for one month, have the power to subpoena documents, listen to witnesses and hand up indictments.
The district attorney's office began a preliminary inquiry into two deaths at King/Drew in January 2005 in response to a written request by county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky.
"These two incidents cry out for a review of whether any of the involved personnel bear criminal responsibility for their conduct," the supervisor wrote at the time.
In both cases, nurses were alleged either to have ignored patients' heart monitors or failed to ensure that they were audible.
The D.A.'s office assigned the matter to a deputy prosecutor, Vesna Maras, who was then handling medical-legal matters. Working with state regulators, she accumulated thousands of pages of records.
In an interview, she said she determined that a broader investigation was needed to understand what was happening.
"The situation is sad at that hospital, and it's sad that that standard of care is somehow acceptable -- because it isn't to me," Maras said. "It really bothered me."
Among other hurdles, Maras wrote in the 2005 memo, county Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran ordered the removal of part of an autopsy report on a patient who died at King/Drew on Nov. 18, 2004.
Sathyavagiswaran and his office did not return repeated calls and e-mails seeking comment.
According to Maras' memo, deputy medical examiner Dr. Louis Pena had found that "there was a failure to provide the most basic nursing or medical care" to a 47-year-old patient who died. But the coroner deleted that opinion and ruled the manner of death "undetermined." (The memo refers to the patient as Jane Doe; her name was Sandra Sagastume.)
Pena had told Maras that "he was having trouble dealing with the working conditions at the coroner's office and did not want to challenge Lakshmanan constantly because of 'political ramifications,' " Maras wrote.
"Pena stated that other deputy medical examiners and coroner investigators also felt that they could not contradict Lakshmanan and expressed concern regarding his managerial style within the context of their ethical responsibilities."
Maras wrote that during an earlier meeting, the coroner "firmly pronounced that it is 'not his job' to analyze whether or not 'quality of care' issues contribute to a death."
When asked to explain his reasoning, "his attempt to answer this question was nothing short of surreal," Maras wrote.
Later, Maras wrote, "Lakshmanan's demeanor during our tempestuous 'dialogue' could best be described as dictatorial. He clearly stated that he was free to overrule the opinion of any deputy medical examiner and had the final say
Summarizing her concerns, Maras wrote, "It is not possible, in my opinion, to do an honest evaluation of those cases without simultaneously examining the coroner's conduct."
Doyle said he did not believe that the coroner's office did anything wrong. Defining cause of death is the coroner's job, he said, not the district attorney's.
"That's his call," Doyle said. "There's nothing that even smells faintly of a crime there. That is a purely procedural thing that is so far out of our expertise and has nothing of a crime written on it."
In an unusual turn of events, the memo surfaced this week during the trial of Phil Spector, the music producer who is accused of murdering a woman in his Alhambra home in February 2003. Prosecutors gave Spector's defense team a redacted copy of the memo because Pena was the deputy medical examiner who performed the autopsy of Lana Clarkson and testified about it in court. The judge in the trial, Larry Paul Fidler, said the document was irrelevant and could not be raised.
Doyle said he made the decision to reject the grand jury recommendation with special operations assistant D.A. Curt Hazell. Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley did not participate in the decision, but did not raise any objections. Doyle said decisions not to bring a case before a grand jury are fairly common.
Jonas, who now oversees the major fraud division, said he was told at the time by a senior official in the district attorney's office: "We don't want another Belmont."
Cooley closed a lengthy investigation into the handling of potential safety problems at the Belmont Learning Complex in 2003 without filing any criminal charges even though he had criticized his predecessor for what he called a "whitewash" of the problems.
Doyle said the reference to Belmont, if it occurred, did not have political overtones.
"We can't go getting into something that we don't have a focus on, that there isn't a goal and a target, that's just going to eat up valuable grand jury time with no result," he said.
After rejecting a grand jury probe, the district attorney's office continued to investigate the conduct of two nurses who cared for the two patients who died at King/Drew in 2004. Maras and a new supervisor, Dan Murphy, ultimately decided not to file criminal charges because the documentary evidence was insufficient and no witnesses were available, Murphy said.
Murphy, the current head deputy for specialized litigation, said the district attorney's office should not have to clean up King/Drew's messes. That responsibility rests elsewhere, he said.
"I don't know how the people that are responsible for governing this county can sit there and can have watched that place fester and erupt and boil over time after time after time after time after time and still be afraid because of, I guess, politics to do what needs to be done."
--
charles.ornstein@latimes.com
2 prosecutors had sought hospital probe - Senior officials denied the 2005 request for a grand jury inquiry into two deaths at troubled King/Drew, saying no crime had been alleged.
By Charles Ornstein August 02, 2007 in print edition B-1
Two Los Angeles County prosecutors unsuccessfully sought a grand jury investigation in 2005 into deaths at Martin Luther King Jr./Drew Medical Center, igniting a behind-the-scenes debate about whether alleged misconduct merited a wide-ranging criminal investigation.
The prosecutors' recommendation, which was outlined in a confidential April 8, 2005, memo, grew out of frustration with the slow pace of their inquiry into two patient deaths. In particular, they cited trouble obtaining hospital records and the county coroner's removal of autopsy findings that suggested substandard care by King/Drew nurses.
The memo, which was recently obtained by The Times, went on to propose a broad look by a grand jury at the King/Drew deaths, possible cover-ups of misconduct at the hospital and whether the coroner was properly examining deaths involving medical wrongdoing.
Senior officials in the county district attorney's office said they rejected the request because no specific crime had been alleged and problems at the troubled hospital were best addressed by county leaders.
Two years later, strong feelings persist on both sides of the debate. The senior prosecutor behind the recommendation said he wonders how many lives might have been saved at King/Drew had the district attorney acted aggressively.
"I did say that this could come back to haunt us," said Jeffrey Jonas, a 38-year veteran in the D.A.'s office who was then head deputy over specialized prosecutions. "I did say that this isn't the last we're going to hear about Martin Luther King. And sure enough it's been an ongoing thing."
King/Drew, now known as King-Harbor, faces possible closure because of continued lapses, including a recent high-profile death in the emergency room.
Jonas' views were heatedly disputed Wednesday by top district attorney officials.
"To think that the D.A.'s office can put on a cape and wave a magic wand and make MLK OK is absurd," said Richard Doyle, bureau director for specialized prosecutions, one of two officials who rejected the grand jury request. "We are here to prosecute crime that we can prove. That's our job. We're not here to cure the social ills created by other people."
And even when crimes may have been committed, he said, his office generally relies on other law-enforcement agencies to investigate first.
Criminal grand juries, which are generally impaneled for one month, have the power to subpoena documents, listen to witnesses and hand up indictments.
The district attorney's office began a preliminary inquiry into two deaths at King/Drew in January 2005 in response to a written request by county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky.
"These two incidents cry out for a review of whether any of the involved personnel bear criminal responsibility for their conduct," the supervisor wrote at the time.
In both cases, nurses were alleged either to have ignored patients' heart monitors or failed to ensure that they were audible.
The D.A.'s office assigned the matter to a deputy prosecutor, Vesna Maras, who was then handling medical-legal matters. Working with state regulators, she accumulated thousands of pages of records.
In an interview, she said she determined that a broader investigation was needed to understand what was happening.
"The situation is sad at that hospital, and it's sad that that standard of care is somehow acceptable -- because it isn't to me," Maras said. "It really bothered me."
Among other hurdles, Maras wrote in the 2005 memo, county Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran ordered the removal of part of an autopsy report on a patient who died at King/Drew on Nov. 18, 2004.
Sathyavagiswaran and his office did not return repeated calls and e-mails seeking comment.
According to Maras' memo, deputy medical examiner Dr. Louis Pena had found that "there was a failure to provide the most basic nursing or medical care" to a 47-year-old patient who died. But the coroner deleted that opinion and ruled the manner of death "undetermined." (The memo refers to the patient as Jane Doe; her name was Sandra Sagastume.)
Pena had told Maras that "he was having trouble dealing with the working conditions at the coroner's office and did not want to challenge Lakshmanan constantly because of 'political ramifications,' " Maras wrote.
"Pena stated that other deputy medical examiners and coroner investigators also felt that they could not contradict Lakshmanan and expressed concern regarding his managerial style within the context of their ethical responsibilities."
Maras wrote that during an earlier meeting, the coroner "firmly pronounced that it is 'not his job' to analyze whether or not 'quality of care' issues contribute to a death."
When asked to explain his reasoning, "his attempt to answer this question was nothing short of surreal," Maras wrote.
Later, Maras wrote, "Lakshmanan's demeanor during our tempestuous 'dialogue' could best be described as dictatorial. He clearly stated that he was free to overrule the opinion of any deputy medical examiner and had the final say
Summarizing her concerns, Maras wrote, "It is not possible, in my opinion, to do an honest evaluation of those cases without simultaneously examining the coroner's conduct."
Doyle said he did not believe that the coroner's office did anything wrong. Defining cause of death is the coroner's job, he said, not the district attorney's.
"That's his call," Doyle said. "There's nothing that even smells faintly of a crime there. That is a purely procedural thing that is so far out of our expertise and has nothing of a crime written on it."
In an unusual turn of events, the memo surfaced this week during the trial of Phil Spector, the music producer who is accused of murdering a woman in his Alhambra home in February 2003. Prosecutors gave Spector's defense team a redacted copy of the memo because Pena was the deputy medical examiner who performed the autopsy of Lana Clarkson and testified about it in court. The judge in the trial, Larry Paul Fidler, said the document was irrelevant and could not be raised.
Doyle said he made the decision to reject the grand jury recommendation with special operations assistant D.A. Curt Hazell. Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley did not participate in the decision, but did not raise any objections. Doyle said decisions not to bring a case before a grand jury are fairly common.
Jonas, who now oversees the major fraud division, said he was told at the time by a senior official in the district attorney's office: "We don't want another Belmont."
Cooley closed a lengthy investigation into the handling of potential safety problems at the Belmont Learning Complex in 2003 without filing any criminal charges even though he had criticized his predecessor for what he called a "whitewash" of the problems.
Doyle said the reference to Belmont, if it occurred, did not have political overtones.
"We can't go getting into something that we don't have a focus on, that there isn't a goal and a target, that's just going to eat up valuable grand jury time with no result," he said.
After rejecting a grand jury probe, the district attorney's office continued to investigate the conduct of two nurses who cared for the two patients who died at King/Drew in 2004. Maras and a new supervisor, Dan Murphy, ultimately decided not to file criminal charges because the documentary evidence was insufficient and no witnesses were available, Murphy said.
Murphy, the current head deputy for specialized litigation, said the district attorney's office should not have to clean up King/Drew's messes. That responsibility rests elsewhere, he said.
"I don't know how the people that are responsible for governing this county can sit there and can have watched that place fester and erupt and boil over time after time after time after time after time and still be afraid because of, I guess, politics to do what needs to be done."
--
charles.ornstein@latimes.com
Who Has The Clout To Back Down The IRS?
1) THE LAUSD BOARD, THE NAVY BOYS LAUSD FACILITIES ,CONTRACTORS, LAW FIRMS, CONSULTANTS, AND RETAIL STORES INVOVLED WITH THE BELMONT (CONSPIRACY TO ROB THE PUBLIC PURSE) SHOULD ALL BE PROSECUTED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS TO STEP UP IN ORDER TO BREAK UP THE ORGANIZED CRIME THAT HAS EMBEDDED ITSELF IN THE LAUSD STRUCTURE. WE ALSO HAVE TO GET RID OF THE THREE STOOGES PETER SOBEROFF, DICK RIORDON, AND ELI BROAD, AKA THE GODFATHERS OF MONEY LAUNDERING, LAND GRABS, AND BILLION DOLLAR CONTRACTING. THE CROOKS THAT HAVE STOLEN THE CHILDRENS MONEY AND THOSE WHO CONTINUE TO HARBOR THEM AND THEIR MONEY LAUNDERING SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AND PLACED IN THE GENERAL PRISON POPULATION. ? LESLIE DO THINK THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO DEMAND THAT THE BROKERS THAT SELL OUR PUBLIC BONDS ( TO THE INSIDERS) BEFORE THEY HAVE FULLY MATURED SHOULD HAVE THIER LICENSES REVOKED AND THAT THEY BE LOCKED UP? ? WHO ARE THE INSIDERS AND ARE THEY CONNECTED TO PETER SOBEROFF, RICHARD RIORDON,AND ELI BROAD? 2) Leslie... Why hasn't the grand jury entered into this matter, or at least the CDE who would have to take over the District if the voters don't pass the Bond bail out measures? Thanks, Steve Burt
3) DA cooley is corrupt.
4) Please hold the school accountable to it's part of this problem. There seems to be a piece missing on their part and until they step up to the plate to respond, there doesn't seem to be any question who to believe
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlog5.htm
3) DA cooley is corrupt.
4) Please hold the school accountable to it's part of this problem. There seems to be a piece missing on their part and until they step up to the plate to respond, there doesn't seem to be any question who to believe
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlog5.htm
Steve Cooley - Corruption's Protectorate
THE HUNT FOR DR. HENRY LEE - DR. MICHAEL BADEN AND BILL PAVELIC "....After years of grabbing negative headlines for losing the OJ Simpson double homicide case and other celebrity trials, involving the same three participants, it was inevitable and predictable that the Los Angeles criminal injustice system via Robbery Homicide Division would administer their personal vendettas against me, Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Michael Baden. That moment arrived in 2007 when music mogul Phil Spector was charged with the murder of Lana Clarkson and the case was "assigned" to judge Larry Fidler. Revenge by the LAPD Robbery Homicide Division would be a "MF"and "MF" didn't stand for Mark Fuhrman...." "....Exposing the truth is never in the interest of those who suppressed it and eliminating the messenger would have to be carried out with precision by the Los Angeles Police Robbery Homicide Division and their protectorate, the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office. Knowing that it was only a matter of time before the OJ Simpson facts would be re-calibrated in my "Guilty of Incompetence" expose, the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office and the LAPD Robbery Homicide Division in the Phil Spector's (2007) murder trial usurped the Los Angles Superior Court and Jude Larry Fidler, to falsely allege that Dr. Henry Lee, myself, and Dr. Michael Baden, were involved in a bogus "obstruction of justice" crime...." "....The judge in the televised Phil Spector trial, on behalf of his friend Deputy District Attorney Patrick Dixon, creatively, albeit injudiciously, granted the LAPD Robbery Homicide Division the commensurate authority to "investigate" the disappearance of non existent "evidence" that was allegedly removed and or discarded by member(s) of the defense team, while conducting an examination of the Lana Clarkson's accidental suicide shooting scene...." "....The "missing evidence" and or the "obstruction of justice" investigation was conveniently assigned to Robbery Homicide Division (RHD) investigator Victor Pietrantoni, a key player in the OJ Simpson criminal investigation. What a "happy coincidence" that this case would end up in the lap of Detective Victor Pietrantoni the RHD stud who was nicknamed "Casanova" because of his steamy relationship with a high ranking Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney. As my old LAPD Puerto Rican partner would say, "F----g a lawyer, especially a district attorney is the ultimate high for a cop and the fastest way to climb the ladder of success...." To be fair, Victor Pietrantoni is just one of many LAPD officers who are incestuously connected and or married to members of the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office, The City Attorney's Office and or to the jurists assigned to the Los Angeles and Orange County Superior Courts. Allowing Victor Pietrantoni (on behalf of his wife, DDA Patrick Dixon and Judge Fidler) to conduct an impartial obstruction of justice investigation was tantamount to allowing the fox to investigate who broke into the hen house...." "....Instead of recusing himself and or convening the Grand Jury to investigate the false allegations which were revolting, contemptible and based on perjurious witnesses, the luminous Judge Larry Fidler took a page from the "Spanish Inquisition" period and used his black robe, minus the hood, to lunch a personal, vicious, unethical and unrelenting smear campaign against Dr. Henry Lee, with one objective in mind; to publicly humiliate and destroy Dr. Henry Lee's professional reputation, knowing that he can do it with impunity while hiding behind his judicial immunity...." "....It should have come as no shock to Judge Fidler that dishonesty was compulsory in much of Robbery Homicide Division and that Judge Fidler's colleagues at the Los Angeles District Attorneys Office have shown an affinity for using the grotesque Robbery Homicide Division to once again, dispense their own form of perverted justice trough manufactured and rigged investigations...."
http://www.guiltyofincompetence.com/viewtopic.php?t=98&view=previous&sid=c891725fe65976badec1df274e3d5d1b
http://www.guiltyofincompetence.com/viewtopic.php?t=98&view=previous&sid=c891725fe65976badec1df274e3d5d1b
Steve Cooley - Belmont Crime Scene For Children
D.A. DECLARES BELMONT SITE A 'CRIME SCENE'.
Byline: Beth Barrett and Harrison Sheppard Staff Writers District Attorney Steve CooleyStephen Lawrence ("Steve") Cooley (born May 1, 1947 in Los Angeles, California) is a veteran prosecutor who was elected as Los Angeles County's 36th District Attorney on November 7, 2000. He was sworn in for his second term on December 6, 2004. ..... Click the link for more information. has designated the Belmont Learning CenterThis Belmont Learning Center contains information about a building currently under construction.It may contain information of a speculative nature, and the content may change dramatically as construction progresses and new information becomes available. ..... Click the link for more information. a ``crime scene'' and warned Superintendent Roy RomerRoy R. Romer (born October 31, 1928 in Garden City, Kansas, United States) was the 39th governor of Colorado and served as the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District from 2001 to 2006. ..... Click the link for more information. to restrict access to the 35-acre site even as he seeks a private firm to finish it as a school or buy it.
The warning letter from Cooley - who reopened a criminal investigation into Belmont after his election in November - was sent Wednesday, a day after the district released its proposal to solicit bids from private developers interested in completing the $175 million abandoned high school or buying the site. The letter elicited a harsh response from Romer, who called it preposterous and accused the district attorney of grandstanding. The letter, undersignedun·der·signed adj.1. Having signatures or a signature at the bottom or end. Used of documents.2. Signed or having signed at the bottom or end of a document: ..... Click the link for more information. by Cooley's special assistant Anthony G. Patchett, said that due to the past grading and movement of contaminated contaminated,v 1. made radioactive by the addition of small quantities of radioactive material.2. made contaminated by adding infective or radiographic materials.3. an infective surface or object. soil, ``it appears the LAUSD LAUSD Los Angeles Unified School District (Los Angeles, CA) and others have created the illegal storage and disposal of hazardous wasteHazardous wasteAny solid, liquid, or gaseous waste materials that, if improperly managed or disposed of, may pose substantial hazards to human health and the environment. Every industrial country in the world has had problems with managing hazardous wastes. ..... Click the link for more information. at the Belmont Learning Complex (Center).'' ``Therefore, the Belmont Learning Complex (Center) is considered a 'crime scene' and should be treated as such. Access should be restricted and care should be taken not to tamper with the monitoring wells,'' it concluded. The letter means prospective bidders may be limited in their access to the site and their ability to evaluate its environmental conditions until the criminal investigation is completed. Patchett said the instructions do not necessarily bar prospective bidders from the site, but do provide the parameters for their access. But Romer, who reinstated five suspended administrators involved in the Belmont fiasco and has pushed for its completion, issued a statement questioning why the district attorney was not being more constructive in trying to help Romer with the Belmont issue. Romer said: ``In my 40 years of public service, including 12 as governor, I can't remember receiving a letter from a public official that is as strange as this one. ``To try to intimidate this school district from finding a solution to Belmont by declaring Belmont a crime scene is preposterous. We have already said we will fully cooperate with any investigation or prosecution of wrongdoing wrong·do·er n.One who does wrong, especially morally or ethically.
wrongdo relating to relating to relate prep → concernantrelating to relate prep → bezüglich +gen, mit Bezug auf +acc Belmont. ... This letter is below the standard this community deserves from a district attorney.'' Armed with dozens of investigative documents ignored by his predecessor, Cooley in January announced he was reopening a criminal probe of the Los Angeles Los Angeles (lôs ăn`jələs, lŏs, ăn`jəlēz'), city (1990 pop. 3,485,398), seat of Los Angeles co., S Calif.; inc. 1850. Unified School District's abandoned high school - the nation's costliest school, built atop an old oil field seeping potentially deadly and explosive gases. Patchett said the letter to Romer was to underscore the depth of concern regarding Belmont. ``I don't believe Mr. Romer knows the seriousness of this situation,'' Patchett said. ``He's an out-of-state person, and while some people may have brought him up to speed, I don't think he realizes what occurred at that site when the dirt was moved around.'' To build the school, developers scooped away part of a hillside, drawing closer to the shallow oil field that lies below. Patchett added that neighbors continue to complain of the rotten smell associated with hydrogen sulfide hydrogen sulfide, chemical compound, H2S, a colorless, extremely poisonous gas that has a very disagreeable odor, much like that of rotten eggs. It is slightly soluble in water and is soluble in carbon disulfide. . The gas, which has been detected in the soil beneath Belmont, is potentially deadly. Because no barrier was built beneath the school, critics have charged the buildings are vulnerable to both hydrogen sulfide accumulations and methane, which can explode at certain concentrations if ignited. Patchett said he doubts the structures as they stand today could pass inspection and that the Belmont Task Force is trying to determine if the site is located on a quake fault line. Patchett declined to comment on what step prosecutors might be prepared to take if Belmont is disturbed in defiance of prosecutors' instructions. School board members said the letter will complicate efforts to allow bidders to evaluate the site. ``Belmont has been a problem from Day One,'' said board member Julie Korenstein, a staunch Belmont opponent. ``It can't do anything but continue to present problems. There are those that are madly trying to find ways of remediating it. It's going to be extremely difficult and complex, and this makes it even more difficult.'' Board member Caprice ca·price n.1. a. An impulsive change of mind.b. An inclination to change one's mind impulsively.c. Young said officials should heed the district attorney's directive. ``He's doing a very important job that is critical to regaining public integrity around this project,'' Young said. ``And I would not want to tamper with or thwart his investigation in any way.''
Byline: Beth Barrett and Harrison Sheppard Staff Writers District Attorney Steve CooleyStephen Lawrence ("Steve") Cooley (born May 1, 1947 in Los Angeles, California) is a veteran prosecutor who was elected as Los Angeles County's 36th District Attorney on November 7, 2000. He was sworn in for his second term on December 6, 2004. ..... Click the link for more information. has designated the Belmont Learning CenterThis Belmont Learning Center contains information about a building currently under construction.It may contain information of a speculative nature, and the content may change dramatically as construction progresses and new information becomes available. ..... Click the link for more information. a ``crime scene'' and warned Superintendent Roy RomerRoy R. Romer (born October 31, 1928 in Garden City, Kansas, United States) was the 39th governor of Colorado and served as the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District from 2001 to 2006. ..... Click the link for more information. to restrict access to the 35-acre site even as he seeks a private firm to finish it as a school or buy it.
The warning letter from Cooley - who reopened a criminal investigation into Belmont after his election in November - was sent Wednesday, a day after the district released its proposal to solicit bids from private developers interested in completing the $175 million abandoned high school or buying the site. The letter elicited a harsh response from Romer, who called it preposterous and accused the district attorney of grandstanding. The letter, undersignedun·der·signed adj.1. Having signatures or a signature at the bottom or end. Used of documents.2. Signed or having signed at the bottom or end of a document: ..... Click the link for more information. by Cooley's special assistant Anthony G. Patchett, said that due to the past grading and movement of contaminated contaminated,v 1. made radioactive by the addition of small quantities of radioactive material.2. made contaminated by adding infective or radiographic materials.3. an infective surface or object. soil, ``it appears the LAUSD LAUSD Los Angeles Unified School District (Los Angeles, CA) and others have created the illegal storage and disposal of hazardous wasteHazardous wasteAny solid, liquid, or gaseous waste materials that, if improperly managed or disposed of, may pose substantial hazards to human health and the environment. Every industrial country in the world has had problems with managing hazardous wastes. ..... Click the link for more information. at the Belmont Learning Complex (Center).'' ``Therefore, the Belmont Learning Complex (Center) is considered a 'crime scene' and should be treated as such. Access should be restricted and care should be taken not to tamper with the monitoring wells,'' it concluded. The letter means prospective bidders may be limited in their access to the site and their ability to evaluate its environmental conditions until the criminal investigation is completed. Patchett said the instructions do not necessarily bar prospective bidders from the site, but do provide the parameters for their access. But Romer, who reinstated five suspended administrators involved in the Belmont fiasco and has pushed for its completion, issued a statement questioning why the district attorney was not being more constructive in trying to help Romer with the Belmont issue. Romer said: ``In my 40 years of public service, including 12 as governor, I can't remember receiving a letter from a public official that is as strange as this one. ``To try to intimidate this school district from finding a solution to Belmont by declaring Belmont a crime scene is preposterous. We have already said we will fully cooperate with any investigation or prosecution of wrongdoing wrong·do·er n.One who does wrong, especially morally or ethically.
wrongdo relating to relating to relate prep → concernantrelating to relate prep → bezüglich +gen, mit Bezug auf +acc Belmont. ... This letter is below the standard this community deserves from a district attorney.'' Armed with dozens of investigative documents ignored by his predecessor, Cooley in January announced he was reopening a criminal probe of the Los Angeles Los Angeles (lôs ăn`jələs, lŏs, ăn`jəlēz'), city (1990 pop. 3,485,398), seat of Los Angeles co., S Calif.; inc. 1850. Unified School District's abandoned high school - the nation's costliest school, built atop an old oil field seeping potentially deadly and explosive gases. Patchett said the letter to Romer was to underscore the depth of concern regarding Belmont. ``I don't believe Mr. Romer knows the seriousness of this situation,'' Patchett said. ``He's an out-of-state person, and while some people may have brought him up to speed, I don't think he realizes what occurred at that site when the dirt was moved around.'' To build the school, developers scooped away part of a hillside, drawing closer to the shallow oil field that lies below. Patchett added that neighbors continue to complain of the rotten smell associated with hydrogen sulfide hydrogen sulfide, chemical compound, H2S, a colorless, extremely poisonous gas that has a very disagreeable odor, much like that of rotten eggs. It is slightly soluble in water and is soluble in carbon disulfide. . The gas, which has been detected in the soil beneath Belmont, is potentially deadly. Because no barrier was built beneath the school, critics have charged the buildings are vulnerable to both hydrogen sulfide accumulations and methane, which can explode at certain concentrations if ignited. Patchett said he doubts the structures as they stand today could pass inspection and that the Belmont Task Force is trying to determine if the site is located on a quake fault line. Patchett declined to comment on what step prosecutors might be prepared to take if Belmont is disturbed in defiance of prosecutors' instructions. School board members said the letter will complicate efforts to allow bidders to evaluate the site. ``Belmont has been a problem from Day One,'' said board member Julie Korenstein, a staunch Belmont opponent. ``It can't do anything but continue to present problems. There are those that are madly trying to find ways of remediating it. It's going to be extremely difficult and complex, and this makes it even more difficult.'' Board member Caprice ca·price n.1. a. An impulsive change of mind.b. An inclination to change one's mind impulsively.c. Young said officials should heed the district attorney's directive. ``He's doing a very important job that is critical to regaining public integrity around this project,'' Young said. ``And I would not want to tamper with or thwart his investigation in any way.''
Steve Cooley - Full Disclosure
Los Angeles, CA -- The L.A. County District Attorney and the L. A Superior Courts have declined immigration enforcement actions such as deportation of criminal alien gang members, as a matter of policy.The Full Disclosure Network® is releasing a three minute Video News Blog, featuring statements from the official spokespersons for the Superior Court and the District Attorney's office who tells Full Disclosure that "our prosecutions don't have anything to do with immigration policy".Much like the Los Angeles Police Department's Special Order 40 "don't ask, dont' tell" policy, the Los Angeles Superior Court spokeswoman, Geri Ann Haslet states their policy is "we do not treat undocumented persons any differently than anyone else".The Full Disclosure Network® Video News Blog provides insight into the hands off policy of local law enforcement and the courts where illegal criminal aliens apparently have equal rights and protections under the law. This Video News Blog is featured on the Full Disclosure Network website at http://www.fulldisclosure.net/ and is to be featured on 45 cable television channels as part of a Video News Blog Special Series.Steve Ipsen, President of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, who is a critic of the hands off immigration policy, told Full Disclosure that "illegal alien gang members who are released from jail, on probation in Los Angeles County, must have the approval of the District Attorney's office and in fact are ordered by the Courts to stay in the United States and to obtain employment".
Following the March 2, 2008 murder of a popular high school football star, Jamiel Shaw, II, a criminal gang member by the name of Pedro Espinosa, was arrested for the crime. Espinosa had been early released from L. A. County jail after service four months on assault and weapons charges.
Neither the District Attorney’s office or the Courts raised any questions as to whether or not he should be removed from the country. The L. A. County Sheriff’s Department failed to notify Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) that Espinosa was in the country illegally.
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/news/archives/2008_05_01_archive.html
Following the March 2, 2008 murder of a popular high school football star, Jamiel Shaw, II, a criminal gang member by the name of Pedro Espinosa, was arrested for the crime. Espinosa had been early released from L. A. County jail after service four months on assault and weapons charges.
Neither the District Attorney’s office or the Courts raised any questions as to whether or not he should be removed from the country. The L. A. County Sheriff’s Department failed to notify Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) that Espinosa was in the country illegally.
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/news/archives/2008_05_01_archive.html
Corruption and District Attorney Steve Cooley
DISTRICT ATTORNEY CORRUPTION?: TWO VIEWS ON DA COOLEY’S RECORDInternet exclusive: On Full Disclosure® Video News BlogVideo Preview Time: Preview 7:30 min.Release Date: May 14, 2008
participate in survey & leave your comments below
Los Angeles, CA Is it a co-incidence that it has been almost 20 years, since the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office prosecuted a big dollar, white collar crime? Or could it be there are no more big corruption cases or major crimes committed by powerful and prominent people in Los Angeles?
In a Full Disclosure Network® two-part series Steve Ipsen, President of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys (L. A. County) and Albert Robles, Constitutional Attorney who serves as an elected member of the So. California Water Replenishment Board both contend that corruption is alive and well in Los Angeles County. These two challengers running against Cooley in the June 2008 election, point out that the current DA has refused to prosecute the rich and powerful while successfully lobbying for a $55,000 pay raise bringing his salary to $292,300, making him one of the highest-paid government officials anywhere.
Watch this seven minute preview from the series that is featured on 45 cable systems and the internet. The full two-part programs will be available for viewing (for a limited time up to the election) from the Full Disclosure website from the following links:
Preview (7:30 min)
Segment #1 (8 min)Candidates provide background on their careers and qualifications. They present a summary of issues for why they are running against the Incumbent DA Steve Cooley.
Segment #2 (8 min)Candidates discuss why Steve Cooley is not participating in the U. S. Department of Justice Gang Initiative and address the following issues:
DA non-action policy on deporting illegal alien gang members
Mexican Drug Cartels in City of Cudahy
Impact of Criminal Defense lobby on DA prosecution policies
DA Cooley's campaign contributions from Criminal Defense lobby
Segment #3 (8 min)Candidates describe the failures and demoralization of the DA's office, and of DA Investigators as body guards and chauffeurs for questionable personal activities.
Segment #4 (8 min)Both candidates noted the following:
DA's refusal to prosecute pedophile priests in the Catholic Church
DA's non-prosecution policies of powerful people, i.e. Board of Supervisors
Called DA's pay raise "pay back" for looking the other way.
Ethics Violation: Cooley called Jury members "stupid" following the Blake Verdict
Segment #5 (8 min)Candidates detail issue where there is Corruption in the DA's office:
Belmont Learning Center scandal
Criminal Defense Attorneys influence
DA disbanded environmental crimes unit
Manipulated cases by transfer of expert Deputies
Segment #6 (8 min)Video disclosure of how DA Investigators were used to conduct an unofficial and unauthorized investigation. Candidates describe DA's failure to investigate MacArthur Park beatings gross negligence at Martin Luther King Hospital.
Challengers Quotes on DA Cooley’s record:Steve Ipsen:“The corruption that exists in the county that I'm aware of, that I can state here today is with the District Attorney's office.”“This DA doesn't deserve to be paid when he isn't doing his job.”
Albert Robles:“He has refused to prosecute the pedophiles and child molesters that work and still work in the Catholic Church”.“Steve Cooley takes untold amounts of money from the criminal defense sector”.
This series is to be featured on 45 cable systems starting May 14, 2008. A complete listing of channels and airtimes, by community can be found from this link.
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Programs/515.php
participate in survey & leave your comments below
Los Angeles, CA Is it a co-incidence that it has been almost 20 years, since the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office prosecuted a big dollar, white collar crime? Or could it be there are no more big corruption cases or major crimes committed by powerful and prominent people in Los Angeles?
In a Full Disclosure Network® two-part series Steve Ipsen, President of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys (L. A. County) and Albert Robles, Constitutional Attorney who serves as an elected member of the So. California Water Replenishment Board both contend that corruption is alive and well in Los Angeles County. These two challengers running against Cooley in the June 2008 election, point out that the current DA has refused to prosecute the rich and powerful while successfully lobbying for a $55,000 pay raise bringing his salary to $292,300, making him one of the highest-paid government officials anywhere.
Watch this seven minute preview from the series that is featured on 45 cable systems and the internet. The full two-part programs will be available for viewing (for a limited time up to the election) from the Full Disclosure website from the following links:
Preview (7:30 min)
Segment #1 (8 min)Candidates provide background on their careers and qualifications. They present a summary of issues for why they are running against the Incumbent DA Steve Cooley.
Segment #2 (8 min)Candidates discuss why Steve Cooley is not participating in the U. S. Department of Justice Gang Initiative and address the following issues:
DA non-action policy on deporting illegal alien gang members
Mexican Drug Cartels in City of Cudahy
Impact of Criminal Defense lobby on DA prosecution policies
DA Cooley's campaign contributions from Criminal Defense lobby
Segment #3 (8 min)Candidates describe the failures and demoralization of the DA's office, and of DA Investigators as body guards and chauffeurs for questionable personal activities.
Segment #4 (8 min)Both candidates noted the following:
DA's refusal to prosecute pedophile priests in the Catholic Church
DA's non-prosecution policies of powerful people, i.e. Board of Supervisors
Called DA's pay raise "pay back" for looking the other way.
Ethics Violation: Cooley called Jury members "stupid" following the Blake Verdict
Segment #5 (8 min)Candidates detail issue where there is Corruption in the DA's office:
Belmont Learning Center scandal
Criminal Defense Attorneys influence
DA disbanded environmental crimes unit
Manipulated cases by transfer of expert Deputies
Segment #6 (8 min)Video disclosure of how DA Investigators were used to conduct an unofficial and unauthorized investigation. Candidates describe DA's failure to investigate MacArthur Park beatings gross negligence at Martin Luther King Hospital.
Challengers Quotes on DA Cooley’s record:Steve Ipsen:“The corruption that exists in the county that I'm aware of, that I can state here today is with the District Attorney's office.”“This DA doesn't deserve to be paid when he isn't doing his job.”
Albert Robles:“He has refused to prosecute the pedophiles and child molesters that work and still work in the Catholic Church”.“Steve Cooley takes untold amounts of money from the criminal defense sector”.
This series is to be featured on 45 cable systems starting May 14, 2008. A complete listing of channels and airtimes, by community can be found from this link.
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Programs/515.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)