Santa Clara County Supervisors Want Feds to Investigate Sheriff, She Says ‘Bring It On’

Santa Clara County Supervisors this afternoon voted unanimously to ask the U.S. Justice Department, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the county civil grand jury and its own county counsel to investigate Sheriff Laurie Smith, her department and the county jail for possible violation of state and federal laws.

The supervisors’ action came one day after San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo called on Smith to resign immediately in the face of recent scandals and lawsuits. Smith said Monday she would not resign.

Four hours ahead of the supervisors’ Aug. 17 vote, Smith read a prepared statement at a morning press conference in which she welcomed all investigations of her and her office, and she added the FBI to the list of investigative agencies. In presenting his resolution at the board meeting, Supervisor Joe Simitian added the Justice Department to his list of agencies whose investigations of Smith the county will seek.

The supervisors stopped short of calling for Smith’s resignation.

This week’s bombshells ensured that Smith and the treatment of jail inmates plus related criminal justice issues will be in the spotlight in the 2022 elections.

Liccardo is termed out and Supervisor Cindy Chavez, a former city council member, is one of several mayoral hopefuls. District Attorney Jeff Rosen, who won murder convictions against three jailers in 2016 for the 2015 killing of inmate Michael Tyree, is seeking re-election.

Smith, 69,  was elected to a sixth term in 2018 when the jail was a top campaign issue, and has not said whether she will seek re-election.

“I want to make it very clear that I support all of the investigations,” Smith said this morning. “I am fully prepared to move forward and since there continues to be a lot of speculation and certainly inferences, I welcome any and all investigations. It really is important to have experts providing an in-depth review of some of the things that have been stated, so we can get the true facts.”

This won’t be the first investigation of the operations of the jail, which Smith took over responsibility for in 2010. Both the FBI and a local Blue Ribbon Commission, as well as Rosen’s criminal probe, conducted investigations after the 2015 killing of Tyree, who suffered from mental illness.

Simitian, who co-sponsored the county resolution with Supervisor Otto Lee, told the board today he was prompted by “a very disturbing pattern of behavior, raising questions about the apparent lack of accountability and the potential for undue political influence.”

“It is our responsibility to provide oversight,” Simitian said.

Smith also spoke briefly to the board before the vote. “We have got to know the true facts,” she said, repeating her support for the new investigations of her performance.

Supervisors indicated that today’s discussion likely will prompt a new debate over possible changes in the administration of the main jail in downtown San Jose, where conditions are strained because of overcrowding and court dockets stalled by COVID-19.

Some of the approximately 20 speakers before the vote called for the county to reconsider plans to expand the South County Jail in Morgan Hill, and use the money to expand mental health services. Representatives of the Care First, Jails Last Coalition said they would continue to press for alternatives to incarceration for the mentally ill and for those who cannot afford bail on misdemeanor charges.

In a news release Monday, Liccardo said, “During the past six years of Smith’s 23-year tenure as sheriff, the county has endured: repeated severe beatings of inmates resulting in death and serious injury; repeated concealment of facts relating to those incidents and persistent noncompliance with independent oversight; tens of millions of taxpayer dollars paid to litigants for civil rights violations by deputies; two consent decrees resulting in $450 million in public expenditure to improve jail operations and conditions; an ongoing bribery criminal investigation which has resulted in three indictments of two of her top aides and a campaign fundraiser; and a play-to-pay scandal relating to $300,000 in union contributions for her 2018 re-election.”

“When a grand jury indicts the sheriff’s top assistants and campaign fundraiser on bribery charges relating to contributions to her own re-election efforts, we should have serious concerns," Liccardo said in a statement. "But when that same sheriff, the top law enforcement officer in the county, then refuses to cooperate with the bribery investigation for fear of incriminating herself, the time for concern is long past. Sheriff Smith must resign."

In her press conference, Smith made no reference to Liccardo’s call for his resignation or his reasons for the unprecedented move. Liccardo is a former assistant district attorney and city councilman.

The supervisors voted to request that County Counsel James WIlliams release a Feb. 10, 19-page report plus 38 audio/video recordings relating to the case of Andrew Hogan, whose family settled a lawsuit with the county for $10 million. Hogan was a mentally ill man who was severely disabled after repeatedly injuring himself while riding unrestrained in a jail transport van.

A comparable or larger settlement looms in another case. Juan Martin Nunez alleges he became quadriplegic after deputies and paramedics failed to take action when he suffered a fall in his jail cell. The county paid a $3.6 million settlement to Tyree’s family in the 2015 jail death.

The supervisors also today voted to direct the Office of Correction and Law Enforcement Monitoring (OCLEM) to “review, assess, describe, comment, and make recommendations on the issue of disciplinary action and/or lack thereof (to the maximum extent allowed by law), undertaken by the Sheriff's Office in connection with the Hogan case.”

County staff were directed to pass along any new information to the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) for possible violation of state statutes, and also to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury for evaluation of possible “misconduct in office” by Smith.

The Justice Department investigation will seek to identify possible “unconstitutional corrections conduct and/or civil rights violations and/or other violations of state or federal law.”

“We can't just keep going along business as usual and expect that things are going to get better,” Simitian said. “It has been six years since a mentally ill man was murdered in our jails. And yet the tragedies keep coming.”

38 Comments

  1. Another reason to Vote YES to RECALL Elitists like Crooked Gavin Newsom.
    “Gov. Newsom RELEASING 63,000 VIOLENT FELONS Back Onto CA Streets to Create ‘Safer Prisons’”
    Why do Criminals have more rights than the TaxPaying Productive Residents of CA and the Bay Area?

    Thanks to DEM Policies and Liberal Judges All Manners of Criminals are promptly released as soon as they are arrested to continue acts of Violence and Criminal Activity in the community.

    The ZERO Dollar Bail Stupidity was scheduled to expire on 20 June 2021…

    “The Santa Clara County Superior Court Bench has voted to EXTEND the emergency ZERO BAIL schedule until January 31, 2022…”
    “The court voted Tuesday to issue the $0 bail schedule extension;
    Presiding Judge Theodore C. Zayner signed the order requiring bail be set at $0 for ALL Misdemeanor and ALL FELONY Offenses, with exceptions for specific offenses listed in the order.”

  2. Minor quibble: the correct expression is “pay-to-play”.

    SJI is aware of their own ties to another of Smith’s criminal enterprises, yet they won’t acknowledge it.

    It would seem that independent, investigative journalism doesn’t exist in this county.

  3. “the top law enforcement officer in the county, then refuses to cooperate with the bribery investigation for fear of incriminating herself, the time for concern is long past…” — Sam Liccardo

    The “time’ for concern? The “time” was a year ago when Smith took the fifth, which makes it very clear that what it is really “time” for is for the dismal Sam Liccardo to elevate his name, grasp at a piece of low-hanging integrity, and hope everyone forgets his gross negligence in managing this city.

  4. I FOR ONE AGREE WITH THE FACT THIS “OFFICER” SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AND IF POSSIBLE IMPRISONED.

    BUT UNDERSTAND THAT LICCARDO CANNOT SIGN AN ORDER TO FIRE HER WITHOUT A CONVICTION, OR AN INDICTMENT.

    AND THAT IT MAY TAKE EITHER A STATE OR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION BECAUSE OF THE ENTANGLEMENT REGARDING HER BEING A SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHERRIFF, SHE HAS A LOT OF “FRIENDS” LOCALLY.

    BUT FOR ONCE I DO AGREE WITH MOST OF THE ABOVE, AND WISH THIS ONE GETS WHAT SHE DESERVES. SHE IS AN INSULT TO ALL PROFESSIONAL LAW ENGFORCEMENT

  5. NO BAIL? EARLY RELEASE for Psychopaths? Vagrants & criminals walking into stores – looting bags of merchandise? CA Politicians are FAILING to Keep Citizens Safe.
    “Gov. Newsom Allows PAROLE For Man Who BURIED Victim ALIVE…”
    Newsom is accused of siding with criminals: “The man who tortured and murdered a mentally disabled young man goes free while his family is forced to relive the horror.”

    “Weidert received a LIFE Sentence for killing 20yr old Fresno resident Michael Morganti in 1980 to cover up a $500 burglary.”

    “Newsom blocked Weidert’s parole last year, saying then that he
    “currently poses an UNREASONABLE DANGER to society if released from prison at this time.”
    FmrGov. Jerry Brown similarly reversed release recommendations for Weidert in 2016 and 2018.

    “Newsom, a Democrat, faces a RECALL ELECTION …opponents have criticized his emphasis on prisoner rehabilitation amid a 31% INCREASE in HOMICIDES in CA in the past year.

  6. “Santa Clara County Supervisors this afternoon voted unanimously to ask the U.S. Justice Department, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the county civil grand jury and its own county counsel to investigate Sheriff Laurie Smith, her department and the county jail for possible violation of state and federal laws.”

    Typical, they aren’t doing an investigation themselves. Then, in addition to appealing to Sacramento, the proper other party, they inappropriately look to the federal government directly as well. Do they want the latter, to use words that have made American shudder with politicized Dem administrations before, to “open a federal civil rights investigation”? (Even in valid cases Americans are wary.)

    Where is the county grand jury, unless little will be done, as with the VTA?

  7. FIRST WORK90, CA PATRIOT, AND ANYONE ELSE, STICK TO THE SUBJECT AND STOP USING THIS WEBPAGE AS A POLITICAL BILLBOARD. IT IS NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION AT ALL.

    LOCAL YOKEL REPRISE You wrote:

    “Typical, they aren’t doing an investigation themselves. Then, in addition to appealing to Sacramento, the proper other party, they inappropriately look to the federal government directly as well. Do they want the latter, to use words that have made American shudder with politicized Dem administrations before, to “open a federal civil rights investigation”? (Even in valid cases Americans are wary.)”

    SIMPLY PUT THE LOCAL RESOURCES HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THUS WOULD BE AN AUTOMATIC 5TH AMENDMENT FAILURE REGARDING ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTION. YOU APPEAR TO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT SO WHEN YOU WROTE:

    “Where is the county grand jury, unless little will be done, as with the VTA?”

    WHEN INVESTIGATING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, THE LOCAL COUNTY SIMPLY IS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION ESPECIALLY IN A CRIMINAL MATTER. SO IT HAS TO BE “HANDED” OFF TO A PARTY THAT IS INDEPENDENT OF ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL INFLUENCE, EVEN LICCARDO KNOWS HE COULD NOT DO AN INVESTIGATION. BUT YOU APPEAR TO BE NOT AWARE OF IT.

  8. My friend, Charles Anthony Reyes was killed while in jail. They told us that he fell from his bunk. He suffered fatal injuries.

  9. Once again Steven Goldstein is trying to control the comments section despite his obvious ignorance of the matter at hand. Consider:

    “BUT UNDERSTAND THAT LICCARDO CANNOT SIGN AN ORDER TO FIRE HER WITHOUT A CONVICTION, OR AN INDICTMENT.” — Steven Goldstein

    Sam Liccardo has no more authority over the sheriff than anyone commenting here. Laurie Smith is a county official elected by the people; Sam Liccardo is a city boob elected by the people. His criticism of her has nothing to do with his job of running San Jose, and under no circumstances can he fire her.

    “LOCAL RESOURCES HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THUS WOULD BE AN AUTOMATIC 5TH AMENDMENT FAILURE…” — Steven Goldstein

    Pure gibberish. Conflicts of interests are typically judgment calls and have nothing to do with the 5th amendment.

    “WHEN INVESTIGATING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, THE LOCAL COUNTY SIMPLY IS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION ESPECIALLY IN A CRIMINAL MATTER.” — Steven Goldstein

    Every fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer in this county is investigated locally (police agency, DA’s office, Grand Jury).

    Personally, I am much less bothered by a commenter stretching the relevance of a political issue to the subject at hand than I am by someone arrogantly spouting off a bunch of nonsense.

  10. PHU TAN ELLI You wrote:

    “Sam Liccardo has no more authority over the sheriff than anyone commenting here. Laurie Smith is a county official elected by the people; Sam Liccardo is a city boob elected by the people. His criticism of her has nothing to do with his job of running San Jose, and under no circumstances can he fire her.”

    UPON CONVICTION, THE CITY MAYOR CAN ISSUE A DEMAND FOR TERMINATION OF THE SHERIFF TO THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY. AND BY THE BYLAWS OF THE COUNTY, IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE GRANTED. SO YES, THERE IS A PROCESS, AND YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT AWARE OF IT. You wrote:

    “Pure gibberish. Conflicts of interests are typically judgment calls and have nothing to do with the 5th amendment.”

    ACTUALLY THE “APPEARANCE” OF ANY BIAS ON THE PARTS OF THE COURTS AND THE PROSECUTORS WOULD VIOLATE THE 5TH AMENDMENT. BUT AGAIN, YOU REALLY DO NOT HAVE ANY UNDERSTANDING ABOUT IT. IT ALSO IS INVOLVED WITH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION PRINCIPLE 5 IN EFFECT NOT ALLOWING ANY ATTORNEY WITH EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST TO BE INVOLVED. AND YOU KNOW THIS. You wrote:

    “Every fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer in this county is investigated locally (police agency, DA’s office, Grand Jury).”

    BUT A SHERIFF IS NOT A REGULAR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. PLEASE SHOW ME ANY CASE WHERE A SHERIFF IS PROSECUTED BY THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR EVER. THE ONLY THING THAT THE LOCAL PROSECUTOR CAN DO IS PROVIDE A REPORT TO THE STATE DOJ WITH RECOMMENDATIONS AT BEST. AND YOU KNOW THIS.

  11. “UPON CONVICTION, THE CITY MAYOR CAN ISSUE A DEMAND FOR TERMINATION OF THE SHERIFF TO THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY. AND BY THE BYLAWS OF THE COUNTY, IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE GRANTED.” — Steven Goldstein

    Why no reference to the authority? Is it hidden in the dark recesses of the Municipal Code of Uranus? I’d be interested in seeing evidence the mayor of a city can order county supervisors to do fire anyone.

    “ACTUALLY THE “APPEARANCE” OF ANY BIAS ON THE PARTS OF THE COURTS AND THE PROSECUTORS…” — Steven Goldstein

    And what is involved in determining an appearance of bias? A judgment call, just like I said. The “AUTOMATIC 5TH AMENDMENT FAILURE” you cited is more of your make-believe knowledge, an automatic product of your misfiring brain.

    “BUT A SHERIFF IS NOT A REGULAR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER…” — Steven Goldstein

    Setting aside the fact that you’ve altered your absolute claim about “A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,” what exactly is irregular about a sheriff? Does Laurie Smith carry an irregular pistol, have irregular arrest powers, buy her uniforms off the irregular rack? Again, you’re just making things up when you should just shut up.

  12. PHU TAN ELLI You wrote:

    “Why no reference to the authority? Is it hidden in the dark recesses of the Municipal Code of Uranus? I’d be interested in seeing evidence the mayor of a city can order county supervisors to do fire anyone.”

    WOW, THE ONLY RESPONSE IS ANOTHER PERSONAL ATTACK, SHOULD I HAVE EXPECTED ANYTHING ELSE? You wrote:

    “And what is involved in determining an appearance of bias? A judgment call, just like I said. The “AUTOMATIC 5TH AMENDMENT FAILURE” you cited is more of your make-believe knowledge, an automatic product of your misfiring brain.”

    AGAIN, YOU ARE PLAYING THE SAME SONG, WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE TO PROVE OTHERWISE, SIMPLY SAYING I AM INCORRECT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. You wrote:

    “Setting aside the fact that you’ve altered your absolute claim about “A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,” what exactly is irregular about a sheriff? Does Laurie Smith carry an irregular pistol, have irregular arrest powers, buy her uniforms off the irregular rack? Again, you’re just making things up when you should just shut up.”

    AGAIN, I SIMPLY POINTED OUT THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF SHERIFFS BEING PROSECUTED CRIMINALLY, THEY ARE NEVER INVESTIGATED OR PROSECUTED BY THE “LOCAL” AGENCIES BECAUSE THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND BIAS MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE EVEN AN CONVICTION BE ABLE TO SURVIVE APPEAL. YOU ARE JUST ANGRY THAT YOU CANNOT DISPROVE ME OTHERWISE

  13. WORK90

    NO YOU WOULD NOT BE BETTER OFF. LIVING IN A WORLD OF DELUSION IS NOT HEALTHY. AND NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU CALL MY WRITING “FAKE” OR “MAKE BELEIVE” IS GOING TO ACTUALLY PROVE IT. UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY SHOW SOMETHING THAT PROVES ME WRONG IN THE REAL WORLD.

  14. Mr. Goldstein,

    Asking for a reference to an alleged law cited by you, especially one unknown to anyone else on this planet, is not a personal attack. The truth is there is no law and you have no credibility, just a keyboard.

    Also, you did not “simply” point out anything about sheriffs, you stated, “WHEN INVESTIGATING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, THE LOCAL COUNTY SIMPLY IS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION ESPECIALLY IN A CRIMINAL MATTER.” That statement is absolutely incorrect. So, did you misquote yourself, Steven, or did you stick your foot in your mouth again?

  15. Question (for everyone except Steven Goldstein):

    Is it me or has Laurie Smith hung on to the job so long she’s morphed into a dead ringer for Gary Busey?

  16. Vote the bumess out!

    I would like to see both Steven Goldstein and Phu Tan Elli meet down at St James Park to settle CAPITALS debate, I would even pay $$$

  17. STEVEN GOLDBRICK,
    STOP YELLING AT EVERONE THAT POSTS A COMMENT. YOU DON’T RUN SAN JOSE INSIDEOUT, YOUR NOT THE MAYOR, YOUR NOT ON THE COUNTY BOARD OF SOUP’S. YOUR DEFENATLY NOT ALL THE VOTERS OF SCC. YOUR NOT THE BOSS.
    SO SHUT UP, GO STAND IN THE CORNER ON YOUR HEAD. YOUR CANCELED. I CANCEL YOU!

  18. VirgilS,
    Do you have a “Bubble” container large enough to protect one fragile participant while he travels in the dangerous COVID laced “outside” environment? ..Will you supply the hand sanitizer bath and misting set?
    And
    How would this work when 1 person is wearing 2 sets of rubber gloves, 3 masks to talk through, and a Severely Fogged up whole-head encompassing face-shield and glasses.

    I don’t see it coming to fruition.. maybe if you make the option to “pay” in paper-towels and toilet paper rolls?

  19. Interesting that Smith says, “I support all of the investigations,” yet she has refused to participate in, and actively blocked, previous investigations. If Smith does step down or is fired, doesn’t she have layers and layers of cronies ready to step in? What would change?

  20. IF ANYTHING, I BETTER REITERATE THIS.

    I DO BELEIVE THIS PERSON SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED, AND PROSECUTED AND HOPEFULLY WINDS UP IN HER OWN JAIL CELL.

    I AM NOT DEFENDING HER ACTIONS, ONLY DISCUSSING THE PROCESS.

    IN THE END I STILL AGREE WITH MOST OF THE THINGS SAID HERE, I JUST TRY TO APPROACH IT SO THAT SHE GETS WHAT SHE DESERVES. I THINK MOST OF YOU WILL NOT ARGUE WITH THAT.

  21. CA PATRIOT You wrote:

    “Do you have a “Bubble” container large enough to protect one fragile participant while he travels in the dangerous COVID laced “outside” environment? ..Will you supply the hand sanitizer bath and misting set?

    And

    How would this work when 1 person is wearing 2 sets of rubber gloves, 3 masks to talk through, and a Severely Fogged up whole-head encompassing face-shield and glasses.”

    WILL YOU PLEASE STICK TO THE TOPIC, YOU KEEP GOING OFF ON TANGENTS.

  22. CA PATRIOT,

    Don’t you realize that by writing about bubble containers for fragile participants you all but guaranteed Steven will be having nightmares again?

    Oops. I think I failed to stick to the topic. Steven, feel free to penalize me one demerit.

  23. This Sheriff has turned a blind eye to ongoing systemic corruption. Recall how evidence went missing in the Brock Turner case by Stanford Public Safety Dept., an arm of the Sheriff’s Dept.

  24. Steven says “LIVING IN A WORLD OF DELUSION IS NOT HEALTHY”.
    Seems to me he should be following his own advice.

  25. Yes, but the FBI is a spy agency. We need a criminal investigation. In the absence of a Federal investigative agency CA should step up and create a state level agency that has the competence to investigate banks, insurance companies and difficult crimes. And do it now before the corruption overtakes CA.

  26. “Recall how evidence went missing in the Brock Turner case by Stanford Public Safety Dept., an arm of the Sheriff’s Dept.”

    This seems like two falsehoods at once. Stanford PD is independent of the Sheriff’s Office and there was no missing evidence. The victim was blotto. Two Scandinavian grad students apprehended Brock Turner and stayed at the scene until Stanford PD arrived.

    Also, anyone thinking local DAs can’t prosecute local LEOs might consider San Francisco DA George Gascon and Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi.

  27. VACANCY VAQUERO You wrote:

    “Also, anyone thinking local DAs can’t prosecute local LEOs might consider San Francisco DA George Gascon and Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi.”

    JUST TP CLEAR THAT PICTURE UP GASCON PARTICIPATED IN THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HE WAS NEVER INVOLVED WITH A CRIMINAL MATTER LIKE THIS ONE. HE BROUGHT A CASE TO HAVE THE SHERIFF REMOVED. THAT IS ALL. HERE IS A REPORT, MIND YOU I AM USING A SECONDARY RESOURCE:

    “Ethics Commission and Board of Supervisor Hearings

    On April 23, 2012, misconduct hearings commenced at the San Francisco Ethics Commission to decide whether to recommend removing Mirkarimi from the sheriff’s office.[57] Mirkarimi’s lawyers attempted to prevent the video of Mirkarimi’s wife crying and pointing to the bruise on her arm from being played at the hearings, but on May 14 a judge ruled that the video could be played.[58] The Commission ruled significant portions of Ivory Madison’s sworn statement inadmissible.[36][59][60]

    On August 16, the Commission ruled by 4 to 1 that Mirkarimi committed official misconduct by falsely imprisoning his wife, but delayed until September the decision to recommend whether he should be removed from office.[61] OF THE SIX CHARGES BROUGHT BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCÓN, FIVE WERE OVERRULED AND NOT SUSTAINED, including the charge that Mirkarimi dissuaded witnesses and that he abused the power of his office.[62] The San Francisco Commission on the Status of Women recommended by a vote of 5 to 2 that the Board of Supervisors remove Mirkarimi as sheriff.”

    SO A CRIMINAL CASE WAS NOT PROSECUTED BY THE DA GEORGE GASCON. AND THE CASE AGAINST MIRKARIMI WAS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND NOT THE USE OF HIS OFFICE TO ARRANGE WEAPONS PERMITS. THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE THERE

    BUT THE IRONY IS THAT SHERIFF PLEAD GUILTY TO FALSE IMPRISONMENT, WHICH TECHNICALLY MEANS NO PROSECUTOR ACTUALLY PROSECUTED HIM, HE CONFESSED TO THE CRIME. WHICH IS A BIG DIFFERENCE. PLEASE FIND ANOTHER ONE?

  28. “BUT THE IRONY IS THAT SHERIFF PLEAD GUILTY TO FALSE IMPRISONMENT, WHICH TECHNICALLY MEANS NO PROSECUTOR ACTUALLY PROSECUTED HIM, HE CONFESSED TO THE CRIME. WHICH IS A BIG DIFFERENCE. PLEASE FIND ANOTHER ONE?” — Steven Goldstein

    It is the prosecutor who institutes legal proceedings, either directly or through the grand jury; without legal proceedings there can be no plea entered. A person can confess to a cop, a judge, or high heaven, but without a prosecutor there will be no arraignment, no charges to answer, no crime to plead to. This is just one more example of Steven Goldstein talking out of his unemployed backside.

    Also, let’s remember Goldstein’s original claim was “WHEN INVESTIGATING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, THE LOCAL COUNTY SIMPLY IS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION…” He only claimed “a law enforcement officer” meant sheriff after he was called out for his ignorance.

    How’s that for “irony,” Big Mouth?

  29. PHU TAN ELLI,

    YES LEGAL PROCEEDINGS ARE INVOLVED, BUT IF A PERSON PLEAS GUILTY, THERE IS IN FACT NO PROSECUTION.

    IT IS A VOLUNTARY PROCESS WHERE THERE IS NO PROSECUTION NOR DEFENSE ENTERED INTO THE COURT RECORD, IT IS BY DEFAULT THE DEFENDANT CONVICTING THEMSELVES IN THE EYES OF THE COURT.

    SOMEONE CLAIMED THAT GASCON PROSECUTED MIRKARIMI, BUT THAT WAS NOT THE TRUTH NOR IN THE RECORD. IF YOU ARE GOING TO EVEN DRAW ANY COMPARISONS, YOU CANNOT COMPARE A MISDEMEANOR TO A FELONY IN ANY CASE. WHAT REALLY IS HAPPENING HERE IS YOU ARE JUST BEING ARGUMENTATIVE.

    IN THE END THIS SHERIFF WILL GET WHAT SHE DESERVES. I AM FOR SEEING SHE GETS TO LEARN HOW IT FEELS TO BE A CONVICT.

  30. JUST ANOTHER NOTE TO CONSIDER

    THE BASICS ON FEDERAL FRAUD CONSPIRACY CHARGES:

    Federal law describes fraud as the intentional deception of another person for illegal gain. Federal conspiracy charges are covered generally by 18 U.S.C. 371. Fraud conspiracy charges are distinct from standalone fraud charges. If an individual commits fraud on his own, he may be charged with the underlying offense of fraud. However, if the defendant acts in agreement with at least one other person to commit a fraudulent activity, this qualifies as fraud conspiracy. Even if the defendant does not follow all the way through with the fraudulent act underlying the conspiracy, he can still be charged and convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud under federal law. This area of law is very complex, so if you believe that you have run afoul of federal fraud statutes, you need to speak with a fraud attorney as soon as possible.

    The most important elements to keep in mind that the government must prove in a federal conspiracy case are the intention of the defendant to commit the crime and the involvement of at least one other person in the agreement to commit the crime. Another important aspect of federal fraud cases is that there must be at least one overt act taken by one or more members of the conspiracy to further the crime. A defendant who has been charged with federal fraud conspiracy does not necessarily have to be the individual who took a step in furtherance of the crime. By speaking with one of our fraud lawyers, we can evaluate the facts of your conspiracy to commit fraud case to determine if this overt act has occurred.

    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §371, the penalty for a person convicted of federal fraud conspiracy can be up to five years in federal prison in addition to applicable fines. If the underlying fraud crime would be classified as a misdemeanor instead of a felony, the maximum amount of time that a defendant would have to serve on a conspiracy conviction is up to one year in jail.

  31. “YES LEGAL PROCEEDINGS ARE INVOLVED, BUT IF A PERSON PLEAS GUILTY, THERE IS IN FACT NO PROSECUTION.” Steven Goldstein

    Note the deceptive change from “no prosecutor” to “no prosecution.” But it doesn’t matter, Goldstein is still trying to cover up his glaring ignorance. It is the prosecutor who:

    — prepares the charging document (the complaint read by the court)
    — is responsible for confirming the existence of probable cause (after arrest by law enforcers)
    — is accountable for insuring the rights of the accused have been honored (right and opportunity to obtain counsel)

    Once again, without a prosecutor there is no arraignment (at which to enter a plea), there is no court date, there are no charges. Goldstein’s stupid claim is like saying that in a restaurant in which there is no server, where customers get their food from the counter, there is “in fact” no cook involved.

  32. PHU TAN ELLI,

    AGAIN, GASCON WAS NOT THE PROSECUTOR OF THE CRIMINAL CASE, PLEASE LOOK MORE CAREFULLY.

    BY THE WAY FEDERAl LAW MEANS DOJ PROSECUTION, I CAN IMAGINE THERE IS A STATE LAW EQUIVELANT SO THE STATE PROSECUTION WILL BE NEEDED FOR THAT.

    IN THE END YOU ARE ACTUALLY DEFENDING THE SHERIFF, WHY?

  33. Only in Steven Goldstein’s bizarro world can one feel confident offering these contradictory statements.

    1. GASCON WAS NOT THE PROSECUTOR OF THE CRIMINAL CASE,

    2. OF THE SIX CHARGES BROUGHT BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCÓN, FIVE WERE OVERRULED AND NOT SUSTAINED

    Here’s a relevant news story… read the last seven words and weep, Professor Goldstein.

    https://www.kqed.org/news/59023/ross-mirkarimi-art-agnos-rory-little

    Agnos believes bad blood between San Francisco D.A. George Gascon and Mirkarimi is helping to drive the prosecution. But Professor Little says that given the evidence against the sheriff, Gascon had no choice but to prosecute.

  34. Wait, we have supervisors in Santa Clara County? I hadn’t heard anything from any of them since the beginning of covid 2 years ago. Are they coming out of hiding now? If so, why? I liked it better when they were invisible.

  35. Is the corruption referred to regarding the CCW (Concealed Carry Weapons) permit that showed you had about an 85% chance of getting concealed carry permit if your contributed to her campaign, but otherwise, only a 5% chance???

  36. 2016 My son Ernest Jordan was in custody at Main Jail two inmates stabbing my son over and over and officer’s on duty refused to help my son Ernest Jordan . officer standing watching inmates stabbing my son. We need Justice ASAP. SANTA Clara County is the worst and so corrupted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *