The Downfall of Paul Tanaka

9th Circuit Denies Paul Tanaka’s Appeal

Celeste Fremon
Written by Celeste Fremon

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the appeal by former Los Angeles County undersheriff, Paul Tanaka, to have his criminal conviction overturned for obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

As a result of that conviction, the former undersheriff is serving a five-year sentence in a low-security federal prison camp in Englewood, Colorado.

At the August 7 appeals hearing before a three judge panel, the attorney for the former powerful number two man of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, Charles Sevilla, talked mostly about the Lynwood Vikings and why the prosecution’s insistence on trying to paint Tanaka as a member of the notorious deputy clique meant his client could not get a fair trial.

But the 9th’s judicial panel—made up of circuit judges Stephen Reinhardt, Morgan Christen, and Alex Kozinski—didn’t buy the argument.

“Tanaka’s testimony on direct examination clearly opened the door to evidence impeaching his credibility,” the judges wrote in their four-page ruling (which you can find here). “Tanaka testified extensively about his commitment to upholding the law and the core values of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. He emphasized that he ‘had no tolerance for deputies who wore a badge and violated the law.'” Thus, “…evidence of his involvement with the Vikings is relevant to assessing the veracity of these statements.”

The second argument by Tanaka’s appeals attorney was the claim that former sheriff Lee Baca should have been given immunity and compelled to testify as a witness for Tanaka, purportedly in order to the contradict the damaging testimony that former Deputy Micky Manzo had given for the prosecution.

Again the panel disagreed finding that  Tanaka “did not demonstrate that Sheriff Baca’s testimony would have ‘directly contradicted’ that of immunized government witness Deputy Mickey Manzo.”

The three judges also noted that, during his trial, Mr. Tanaka’s attorneys did not “object to the introduction…of evidence of historic civil rights abuses in Los Angeles County jails.” And they didn’t agree with the former undersheriff’s contention in his appeal that “admission of this evidence “affect[ed his] substantial rights” or “seriously affect[ed] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”

The panel’s only concession to Tanaka’s attorney’s argument was their opinion that “the prosecutor’s reference to the Vikings as a “gang” in the government’s closing argument, however, “was error,”  but that mistake wasn’t what is known, in legal terms, as the more serious “plain error.” they wrote. Nor did the error “amount to a denial of due process.”


Back Story

Just to recap a bit, Paul Tanaka, if you’ll remember, was convicted of obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice. During his trial, the government alleged, among other things, that he helped hide a inmate/federal informant Anthony Brown from his FBI handlers in an effort to obstruct a federal grand jury investigation into corruption and brutality in the county’s troubled jail system.

At Tanaka’s trial, government prosecutors presented their case in two parts that they labeled “the crime” and “the context.” The context, according to the government, was Tanaka’s style of supervising, which—they suggested—favored a cowboy brand of law enforcement where toughness was allowed for— even required—and deputies were encouraged to step over the legal line, as needed, and subsequently protected from any consequences of their actions. This, according to the prosecution, was the larger context surrounding Mr. Tanaka’s actions during the summer of 2011 when the hiding of Anthony Brown and other events took place.

During his trial, Tanaka himself took the stand, where he worked to counter the prosecution’s dark portrait by presenting himself as someone with an “unwavering sense of right or wrong,” who attempted to impart that ethic to those working under him.

When it came time for cross-examination, prosecutor Brandon Fox worked to challenge Mr. Tanaka’s portrayal of himself as an outstanding supervisor who was above reproach. It was in this context that Fox brought up the Vikings, a deputy clique that the former undersheriff purportedly joined when he was a sergeant at the department’s Lynwood station from 1987 to 1991.

In the 62-page brief for Tanaka’s appeal to the 9th Circuit, Sevilla (who is highly regarded in the appeals world), focused on three issues.

The first was the prosecution’s use of the Vikings, and the fact that U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson allowed the subject to be brought into the trial at all.

The second issue was the contention that Anderson should have forced the prosecution to offer immunity to former LA County Sheriff Lee Baca and compel Baca to testify in Tanaka’s defense.

The third and final point of contention in the brief had to do with some disputed jury instructions.

On Thursday, the three-judge panel also denied that the jury instructions were problematic.

112 Comments

    • Tell that to “Maj Kong” who is the only supporter of Tanaka who feels that the “little man” has been punished enough. Actually Maj Kong is “Boomer” using another name with the same rhetoric prior to Tanaka’s conviction.

  • Still laughing, Im not a supporter of Baca or Tanaka but I do think 5 years in the federal joint is more than enough. What would be enough for you?

    • Ask those who had their career destroyed because of two people who wanted things their way. Even though my career was void of direct contact with Tanaka & Baca. I knew many who were shunned and kicked to the side by both of them. Many others can attest.

      • Careers destroyed? That’s what comes with working in the grey… Who is concerned about scum bag careers, what about the families that have been destroyed? Murderous actions of allowing inmate beatings? My career was destroyed by LACO, but I see that as post effects of my husbands murder by LASD and the LAPD cover-up that followed.

        • SPA7,
          Belated condolences to you. You are correct that families were also destroyed resulting from loss of jobs and life. You’re also correct about numerous cover-ups in LASD. Change can only be hoped for.

        • “…of my husbands murder by LASD….”

          There are any number of GOOD lawyers who will handle a wrongful death case on a contingency basis, meaning you don’t pay the lawyer anything unless you win the case.

          If there is any truth to your claim please consult one.

    • Kong: For conversation sake, what is YOUR view on O.J Simpson’s serving 9 of 33 years in a Nevada prison on the trumped up (no pun intended) bullshit charges.
      Keep your response 100% with all things considered. Did you think that was too much?

    • With no dog in the fight, five years is not too much. It’s a helluva wake up call, along with a message to others having the same dumb-ass mindset. The arrogance of some in LASD as well as law enforcement in general ends up crashing with no cushion.

  • Karma is and has always been a bitch. Keep appealing Paul, it will never offset the lives and careers you destroyed for personal gain…

  • The Sheriff sent out a department wide email advising LASD services were not requested in Texas.

    QUESTION: The department loves to publish feel good BS and fake success stories, so why wouldn’t they at least send some personnel to assist in TX?
    Why would they wait to be asked?

    • In the past, it was a given that LASD would respond to help any agency in any emergency or disaster. There was never a need to wait, and be “asked”. We expected to respond and assist. Of course we were always more that happy to help. And we did.

      Today, sadly, LASD mutual-aid assistance is not even an after-thought. And this is solely because of the more than a decade of corrupt leadership, and the current complete failure of leadership within the LASD.

      • Don’t worry, the sheriff has two civilian advisors to assist him in running the department now. No law enforcement experience, but one was a news correspondent, so that should help! This will restore confidence with the other departments.

        • Question: was that–two civilian advisors–the Sheriff’s idea, or was it something imposed on him?

          If imposed on him, who did it?

    • I read that email, it had pathetic written all over it. We sent Air 5 to Katrina, and it looks like by sheer numbers it could have been useful in relieving crews effecting TENS of THOUSANDS of rooftop rescues.

  • It appears that he’s been moved from minimum security Englewood FCI to medium security Florence FCI.

    PAUL TANAKA
    Register Number: 69032-112
    Age: 59
    Race: Asian
    Sex: Male
    Located at: Florence FCI
    Release Date: 05/24/2021

    So if you want to drop a kite to let him know how much you appreciate his service, here’s the address:
    INMATE NAME & REGISTER NUMBER
    FCI Florence
    FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
    PO BOX 6000
    FLORENCE, CO 81226

  • Wonder why Paul was rolled-up? Maybe he was telling everyone that he’s known as a shot caller on the west coast and should be shown respect. If anyone has any inside baseball on how Little T is doing, please share. I can’t wait to see the look on his face when he gets the final bill from his attorney, it should be a doozie. Probably marked, “Past Due,” kinda like all the karma checks that have yet to be written. [Cut made by Editor]

    So now we must wait for Leroy to step into his new throne room at the Bureau of prisons. Once that occurs, we can write one of the final chapters in the Baca/Tanaka leadership book called, “Train Wreck; How to destroy an empire through arrogance, ego, incompetence and corruption.” I say one of the final chapters, because no doubt, there will be more. Ok Paul, sleep tight, don’t let the bed bugs bite. You have a long ways to go.

    • @Calling it a Spade,

      I’m not so sure that Paul was ever “Rolled Up”. I recall his initial assignment as being the FCI at Florence. In addition to housing the Federal Admin Max facility, it also is the location of a federal prison camp.

      Paul is a smart man, even if his moral compass is way off. He’s knows enough to keep a low profile and not to screw up a good deal. The camp conditions are really quite good compared to those in hard lock-up. Paul’s used to running at very high RPM’s. The inactivity is gonna kill him more than anything else.

      The Ninth Circuit decision did leave him an open avenue for a Supreme Court appeal. I gotta see if he goes for it. He’ll be half-way through his sentence before that appeal would conclude, and that’s even if he’s granted certiorari. And the expense of that appeal is also gonna kill him.

      As a matter of basic decency, can we please leave discussion of Mrs. T off of a public forum. There’s not too many innocent victims here, but she very much is one. Her quality of life, income, and retirement security have all been greatly compromised by her knucklehead husband. How she elects to deal with it is a matter where she is entitled to a lot of privacy.

  • EDITOR’S NOTE:

    @Calling It a Spade—and everyone else—surely you know by now that it is against WLA’s commenting rules to ever bring family into these discussions. There’s no excuse ever to do so.

    RickD 427, thank you for bringing the matter to my attention through your comment. I’m truly very sorry that the remark slipped through.

    These are the moments when I am reminded that the easiest way to get rid of the thoughtless character assassinations, and small-minded acts of meanness that, of late, too often invade what are otherwise good and valuable discussions…is to simply shut down the comment section altogether.

    Your call.

    C.

    • Point taken, my apologies. But to claim innocence is laughable and I will leave it at that. As much disdain as I have for him, a hard cell is not what I think is warranted. Picking up cigarette and cigar butts along with gardening is quite appropriate. It is quite a story of the rise and fall of this tyrant, and individual and his jackals who literally destroyed a once great law enforcement organization with pure corruption. What is even more interesting is all of this was brought to light by a Commander who no one would listen to inside of LASD, to include Baca. So the only recourse was the FBI. Secondly, the relentless award wining, in-depth investigation by then, a little known website called Witness LA, shined a 50,000 watt searchlight into the roach infested executive floors of LASD and brought years of corruption and misconduct to the surface. Can you imagine where LASD would be today without those two powerful forces? Enough thanks can never be given. Although the Rocky Mountain air smells great with my morning retirement coffee, I know there is still some stench from a time I try to forget, floating around LASD.

      • Great post, especially concerning in-depth investigation and hard questions from WLA. The benefactors outweigh the detractors of Celeste and Witness LA. Trust and believe that more is coming down the pipe.

    • It is critical to never forget the real victims in all of this – those of us who paid the ultimate price, and became Baca/Tanaka victims. We are the LASD Sworn employees who dared to tell the truth, and were destroyed for doing so.

      • @Big Toe,

        No. Tanaka did not lose his pension. He retired prior to the act taking effect. Dr. Baca and Greg Thompson retired after that date, but LACERA has read the law to affect only those pension benefits accrued after the date of the felonious conduct. That would have a very minor effect on both pensions. There’s a big difference in what was preached to the voters about the act and what the text of the law actually provides for.

  • @Calling it a Spade,

    Thank you for your above posting. LASD, like any large organization has a lot of really good people, and a couple of knuckleheads. Any outfit that recruits from the human race is going to have the same.

    As distressed as I am by the conduct of Dr. Baca and Mr, Tanaka, we were also very honored to have some folks like Bob Olmstead and lot of others who stood up for what was right, and suffered the consequences.

    It’s good to drink coffee in retirement and look back at what occurred, but there’s also a certain part that is aching to get back and finish the job that remains to be done. But then there’s a long pipeline of folks already in the system capable of doing just that.

    The organizational health of LASD is really important here. It needs people of the right character to do the right things, and like any system of government, there needs to be the right system of checks and balances.

  • EDITOR’S NOTE:

    @Calling it a Spade, thank you very sincerely for your apology and your very kind words.

    Have a good Labor Day weekend, everyone.

    C.

  • Mr T was a good dude. Helped me get a great spot that I’m still at. I feel bad for him. Oh, time to hit the street, sleeves rolled up, ink showing, chewing my fav tobacco product. Don’t like it? Dime me off.

    • tt bad boy (cf troll) pro tip: no sleeved tough guy would ever call himself “tattooed bad boy” too effeminate , the fact you would chose that name to troll gives you away.

  • Maj Kong: The fact that you keep giving the child his wanted/needed attention is what keeps bringing him back and doesn’t say much for YOUR maturity level. Grow up and ignore him and just maybe he will go away.

  • PT & Baca are in prison for one reason, ARROGANCE. When they discovered the FEDs were in the house, they should have met with them. Instead, they went with some hair-brained idea which opened the door for J. McDonnell to take over the largest Sheriff department in the Country!
    McDonnell already had 2 departments under his belt.
    That in itself says a lot.

    • @Boat Load

      Just where did you get your information that Dr. Baca is in prison? I think you need to check your facts on this one.

      So far, he has been successful in his legal efforts to remain out of prison.

      For how long remains to be seen. But as of this morning he has yet to view the system from the wrong side of the bars.

  • Tanaka and Baca did less damage in 20 years than McDonnell has in 3. Wake up people. Our fight is not against them anymore. McDonnell, Teran and his congress or louse have fabricated evidence to fire employees sworn and civilian. 200 are ROD.

  • The majority of those neglected and affected are Deputy Sheriff Generalists who are represented by ALADS. With that being said, the undiluted raw truth is that ALADS has the money, millions mind you. They can effect the next election in a major way. The big question is will they? A David is needed in the land of Goliath. The current board will change somewhat in November.

    • It will never happen. ALADS will sit there and smile, slap the Sheriff on the back and whisper into his, “We got your back, boss.”

      LAPD’s union went full scale, balls to the wall, against Bernie Parks while he was up for consideration for a Chief’s second five year term. The union went all in; Times full page ads, radio and television, they spared no expense educating the residents of LA City that 1. Parks was a dick, 2. Morale was at an all time low and 3. The union had the results of a No Confidence vote, and Parks failed miserably. They were all in and Parks was shown the door. ALADS doesn’t have the will nor the backbone, collectively speaking, to make a move. So everyone, sit down and shut up because nothing is going to change. Nothing really has, right?

  • Bob Lindsey for Sheriff. Get rid of McDonnell and Teran. I agree with LArry, the fight is no longer Tanaka. McDonnell is worst….

    • I too agree with Larry, we have to let the past go, and look towards the future. We need to stand behind Bob Lindsey. Buckles and his team of misfits continue to destroy this once great organization. The Unions need to get off their ass and start paying attention to what the membership wants. Brian, are you listening? Ron, are you listening? Get together and unite and get Buckles out.

      • Lindsey is not the future. He had his chance before retiring six years ago to stand up and do the right thing, and he elected to remain silent. That was his moment to lead, and he took a pass. Villanueva took a stand when few dared, and paid the price. The fact he is still standing is a testament to his courage to lead, and his ability to take McDonnell head on.

  • Fed Up, You’re wrong about Lindsey. He tried as well as many others. Moving past the past, Alex is a nice guy, and I have no problems with him. I just don’t feel he has the backing that Lindsey already has. It is going to take a lot of money to remove buckles.

  • @Fed Up
    Totally mis-informed. Apparently you know nothing about the fact Tanaka wanting Lindsey to change test scores for Sgt’s and Lt’s. When he refused good old Tanaka tried to level him but it didn’t work. Tanaka moved him out of personnel and put his people in (Hebert and Gerhart). Hence, Tanaka followers got promoted. Additionally, once he retired, Tanaka went after his kid, who along with his partner were found factually innocent by a jury and now have a massive lawsuit.

    I agree with @Not again. Alex is a nice guy and did try as well. No bad blood against him. I would like to see whoever has more votes, the other drop out and get behind the top vote getter. Bring the other party on board and get this clown McDonnell out of here.

    • @Clam Chowder,

      Thanks much for setting the record straight with regard to Bob Lindsey. He would make an outstanding Sheriff. I also agree that Alex is a great guy, but he just doesn’t have the same level of experience.

      My real desire is to see Bob Olmstead make a second run. He was very much the “stand up” individual when things started to fall apart and his efforts to set things straight really demonstrate his potential to be a great Sheriff.

      But let’s remember history here. In almost every Sheriff’s election there has been the incumbent Sheriff, an insider candidate, and a “free dope for everyone” candidate. The names of the insider and doper candidates change from year to year, but the remain the same basic candidate. The insider runs on a platform of having a better capability to manage the department, but even if he convinces everyone on the department, he only gets 17,000 votes. The power of incumbency can’t be underestimated. Bob and Alex are going to have to convince the broader constituency in order to win.

  • An opinion from a recently but very retired individual formerly of rank. Unless ALADS and PPOA are willing to go “all in,” to support a viable candidate with money and media to replace McBuckles, then everyone just calm down and smile. Nothing is going to change. It hasn’t so far.

    • They also need to ask Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey and Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer how much it will cost to debut a new candidate for Sheriff with their political endorsements already sealed and attached.
      Its crass and rather ugly, and it must be quite pricey – the cost to buy out Lacey and Feuer’s endorsements weeks before the Sheriff candidate filing period has even closed.

    • The chance of uprooting McDonnell with the unity of unions are as good as getting 5 inches of snow on a sunny day in Los Angeles in August. We’re talking miracles with money literally falling from the sky. You get the picture. “Spade ” You called it ever so correctly.

  • Cognistator, I can tell you it is a fact that it was McDonnell’s idea to hire the two civilian advisors. He had no confidence whatsoever when he took over the LASD. He was in way over his head and basically was in shock at how big the department actually was. He didn’t do his homework before running for Sheriff. It was a last minute decision when he found out Baca was resigning/retiring. I think he just wanted to be in charge of a big inportant agency after losing the LAPD Chief job to Chief Beck. It’s all about the ego folks, not about LASD.

    • McDonnell’s idea?

      That is indeed an original thought, inasmuch as the Constitutional Policing Advisor apparently can initiate & prosecute personnel investigations without going through the established chain-of-command; almost as if McDonnell doesn’t trust his own promotees.

      The focus seems to be on falsified facts–lying–in official reports.
      I remember when I was a buck-private in the 101st Airborne Division my platoon leader, a West Point graduate, had a soldier spend the night atop a hill digging a six-foot square foxhole as a punishment for telling a minor lie during a barracks inspection.

      The reason is that a liar can’t be trusted–that’s obvious–so the practice, where prevalent, should be rooted out.

      Makes for a more trustworthy workforce.

      Evidently the idea–is it really McDonnell’s?–is catching on elsewhere:

      http://www.govtattorneyjobs.com/jobs/constitutional-policing-advisor

      • The day he started, he hired Miriam Krinsky, a liberal attorney who headed up the Jail Commission he was on, as his “transition team advisor” with a 6 month contract at $21,000 a MONTH. Soon after, he hired Carol Lin, a former journalist for CNN, to be his media advisor, then another civilian Gymeka to be his community outreach advisor. None of these “advisors” had any experience or background/working knowledge about the LASD. Then to top it off, when Miriam’s contract was up, I guess he needed more advising from her for his transition, so he renewed her contract for another 6 months at that enormous salary. Diana Teran was kept on by Baca and Tanaka after Gennaco’s group was disbanded. The new Sheriff has now brought her up to a newer level of advice and responsibility.

        • AHA!!!

          Miriam Krinsky did it!

          She is an Adjunct Law Professor at Loyola Law School–my daughter graduated from there–and was, among other things, a Federal Prosecutor for fifteen years.

          She probably personally vetted Diana Teran.

  • I’m curious to know what the payoff is to the ALADS and PPOA boards of directors for sitting on their hands and watching the agency that pays the salary of their members be systematically destroyed, while their membership is picked off one by one and fed into the wood chipper of political correctness. It’s got to be costing a fortune to defend so many employees in wrongful termination cases, excessive discipline, retaliation, and discrimination claims. My guess is the combined cost of both unions has to be in excess of $5 million and growing. For less than half that cost they could dump McDonnell just like LAPPL dumped Parks, so what is it Ron and Brian?

    Moriguchi has already committed himself to carrying McBuckles water by burying the morale survey results, a telltale sign of compromised ethics at PPOA members’ expense. Now it’s ALADS turn with their survey, we will have to wait and see. SEIU Local 721, the union that represents most civilians on the LASD, has a rubberstamp process where they can opt to continue the endorsement of McDonnell without asking questions, apparently because they endorsed him in 2014. What a sad position for a union, endorsing the head of the agency destroying it because they can’t admit they made a huge mistake in 2014. Hey SEIU, have you ever heard of a report card? You know, that little thing called PERFORMANCE once you land a new job? Pay attention to your membership for once.

    It will be an uphill battle to take out the worthless incumbent with a huge ego, but department members can take matters into their own hands if their unions fail them. If they elect to sit on the sidelines, well, as the saying goes you get the government you deserve.

      • No kidding. The money tab on that case is astronomical. It’s also the big topic that Ron & crew doesn’t want to get out to membership. Funny how some deputies forget that they’re still deputies when they get a position in ALADS. Let it be known that many of us are aware.

        • No Ron Hernandez, it’s not political but your personal hatred of one man, Armando Macias. Play coy all you want but the public transcripts tell a different story, including your deposition. You are no better than the previous one term ALADS presidents. No more excuses.

  • ALADS and PPOA members, demand your unions take a vote on who YOU support for Sheriff. Not who the board wants. The union is all of us, not just the board members. They should be doing what their members want, not what is best for them. IF they are not doing it, vote them out. ALADS has an election coming up, get involved. Same with PPOA, Brian, your days are numbered.

    Time to get McDonnell, Denham, LaBerge, Diana Teran and all the other weak politician leaders out of there!

    • Great wake-up to deputies. There is NO ALADS without deputies. Deputies are literally being fed to the wolves with no recourse. DEPUTIES WAKE UP!

  • Here’s a thought: every ALADS, PPOA, and SEIU member should do what their unions most likely will fail to do, and that is to support financially both challengers, Villanueva and Lindsey. That will at least even the playing field with the incumbent and improve the odds of dumping McBuckles once and for all.

  • Tanaka was convicted behind one case. They’re hundreds more behind ruined careers and lives. Baca and Tanaka should never be free for what they have done. There are countless former sworn members who lost everything including their retirements as a result of being victimized by Tanaka and Baca.
    I formed LASPA with Alex Villanueva as a result of the corruption within the Department and existing Employee groups. We both mortgaged our homes to create LASPA and get it recognized as a recognized labor representative.
    I was the only founding Director who refused a back room deal to end LASPA in exchange for promotion. I ended up filling the first lawsuit against all entities and Tanaka and Baca. One of my claims was RICO and at the time no one saw the forest through the trees.
    With politics being what they are, my retirement was destroyed by the LACERA board and the County had my federal case dismissed without comment after over three years of fighting and refusing to pay me.
    It’s been interesting watching how nothing has changes with LASD or ALADS and PPOA.
    The force for change – LASPA is still strong and ready to take on the issues. However, the apathy of department employees hasn’t changed and refuses to take control and fight.
    Many are now too young to even know about the founding of LEAPS and that there is a pathway forward.
    The other issue is that those that knew me saw my career and health destroyed by the Department and County who made an example out of me for anyone else looking to buck the system.
    Yes, Tanaka and Baca filled closets with skeletons of individuals careers, lives, benefits, and many criminal acts much worse than Pandora’s Box. The truth is much bigger than any closet or box…

    • Scott McKenzie

      “My retirement was destroyed by the LACERA Board….”

      Steven R. Pingel is an Attorney expert at dealing with LACERA.

      If you have a good case he will win it.

      His website can be Googled.

    • Scott, You are totally correct. I’m taken aback knowing that many in LASD, ALADS & POPA lack the intestinal fortitude to change in a positive way. I applaud you and ALEX VILLANUEVA to recognize and fight the innumerable wrongs from the aforementioned.

    • The conventional wisdom on primaries is that the more candidates there are on the ballot, the likelihood of the incumbent winning outright the 50% threshold diminishes accordingly. By having both Villanueva and Lindsey on the ballot, it improves the odds that McDonnell will be forced into a runoff in November, where voter participation increases dramatically from the primary, and conditions are far less favorable for the incumbent. Primaries tend to be dominated by conservative, establishment-oriented reliable voters, whereas general elections attract a wider group of voters. Both challengers are not competing against each other, they are siphoning off different segments of the electorate that would have otherwise voted for McDonnell. You many want to rethink your stance…

  • Bravo LATBG 》Basic political analogy which is usually covered in Politcal Science 101. That strategy is time tested and true. It will be interesting to see the power players and backers in that election. It will force the unions to show their true colors. Originally from the “other side” of Missouri, I’ll believe ALADS & PPOA when I see them actually do something. Until then……

  • I was once again alerted to the shots being taken at ALADS and myself. I have said this many times, I will not engage in political conversations on this site. We have unit representative meetings once a month, board meetings twice a month and I am more than willing to discuss these topics if requested, at those meetings or go where requested. That being said, go ahead and take your shots, I just want everyone to know I have nothing to hide, and if taking shots while hiding behind an anonymous screen name makes you feel powerful, or gives you credibility amongst your followers, then more power to you.

  • Ron, the goal is not to take shots at you, but hold your organization accountable for what it does and fails to do. You invited the sheriff, in full campaign mode, to speak to your unit reps recently. The membership will be expecting the same courtesy extended to his challengers. Likewise, you hold all the cards in terms of whether or not ALADS will get involved in a meaningful way in the sheriff’s race, or will revert to the usual doormat policy. PPOA will follow your lead or lack thereof, and likewise the other unions. It’s your call. Keep in mind that if agency shop goes down with the new SCOTUS, ALADS’ days of strong-arming union dues will be over, and most likely ALADS itself. Deputies will buy their own legal insurance, and will get whatever contract the BOS wants to throw their way to keep salaries competitive in the labor market.

    Be relevant, Ron. Don’t be a doormat.

    • LATBG, Your response is “straight with no chaser”. I also know Ron, who sometimes wears his feelings on his sleeve. Now is the time to , as you say “Be relevant”. His tour of minding the store is temporary. No offense to Ron, however it’s the truth.

  • I too agree with LATBG. I only hope the unions put on some debates, and then allow the membership to decide who should be supported. And by supporting they put forth the funds necessary to do what the membership wants. ALADS and PPOA boards need to leave their personal agendas at home.

  • LATBG I am fully aware of the looming SCOTUS cases regarding agency shop. I try not to worry about that which I can not control. We have chosen to address this by making the changes to better benefit the membership, thereby creating an organization members would willingly be part of. I will once again throw out an invite to all of you ALADS members, because this is your organization not mine. Come on down so we can have a meaningful discussion. I have said it from the very beginning, I am fully capable of making decisions which I can explain from my perspective, and so is the current board. When you make posts demanding an outcome which is not discussed, I don’t get the opportunity to try and convince you and you don’t get the opportunity to convince me. Once again, this is not the forum for open discussion regarding “our” organization.

  • @ Not again, Sorry, your post popped up after I sent my last. Good idea regarding the debate. I have a question regarding your statement (and many others’) which no one, at least during my tenure, has answered. What exactly do you believe is my (or the ALADS Board) “personal” agenda?

  • Ron, I will just say that often times Board Members of any organization have their own “personal/political” agendas. (I did not call out you or ALADS, just the two big Unions) I just ask that all Board Members think only of what the majority of the membership wants. I do agree with you that members should take you up on your offer to attend meetings. As far as the last meeting with the Sheriff, had the room been packed with Deps expressing their concerns, maybe the Sheriff would have understood that morale is not as great as he seems to think.

  • Please, enough with your “come to meetings”. Blah blah blah. It’s simple, send out a survey with every candidate running and see who wins. We all know McDonnell is not going to win. When he doesn’t win, Alads needs to fully support which ever candidate gets most votes. It’s called democracy. Same thing with PPOA.

    Time to move the Alads board members and PPOA members who do not do what their members want.

    • So, what I’m reading here is, you don’t want to come down and learn what is involved in making decisions, you want the board to do that, right up until you finally have an opinion, and then you want them to do what you say. That isn’t democracy, that is a dictatorship, and you would know that if you knew the percentages of people with your mindset. We have over 7500 members.

  • What a quandary….
    1) ALADS “screwed over” Lindsey’s son
    2) Villanueva co-founded LASPA which competes with ALADS.
    3) McDonnell has lost respect by deputies (also an “outsider”)
    This epic and true scenario puts tremendous pressure on ALADS to make a choice. Hmmmm.

    • Sounds like you need an update from “Lindsey’s son.” And, while you’re getting that update ask him if I helped him and his partner, because it’s “interesting” that no one knows.

  • I say we take it a step further Ron. It’s time for you to take ownership of the upcoming contest. You know very well most members will never show up at union hall, and if they could they wouldn’t all fit. Stop using it as a crutch, the problem we face is far bigger than the narrow interests of your board.

    Here’s a thought: give the two challengers the same accommodation you gave the incumbent no later than October. Come November host a debate with all three and livestream it on Facebook. No need to wait until next year, unless someone wants to give McBuckles a free ride to bash the department and terrorize deputies at his pleasure.

    Your call Ron.

    • Ron and 2 more of his cronies also have to run this November and win for another term on ALADS Board. It’s best that he secures a seat himself before he attempts anything worthwhile. Ron is a temp and that spot is up for grabs. There’s a reason why there are only six.

      • @Here’s One, yes, actually the whole board are temps, we are Deputies first! Please tell me the reason there are only six of us. I know the reason and will be more than happy to explain, but the spinning of the truth is always intriguing, so please tell me/us.

    • Mister candidate the curtain is partially open, and trying to manipulate ALADS as an “outsider” has been showing for quite some time. Not to say some or all of your suggestion may not be a bad idea, but for whose agenda? Yours?

  • I’ll leave you all with this, if I was only interested in getting re-elected and addicted to the power, as some have claimed, wouldn’t I bow down to those who are vocal here, and FB, thereby putting aside any consideration of the organization, for my own agenda!

    Yet here I am offering to discuss matters, in depth, anywhere but here. There’s a board meeting tomorrow. Come and listen in.

    ALADS board candidates. You might want to come to a meeting sooner or later especially if your goal is to run this organization, or do you plan to do away with meetings also, so there’s no need to learn how to conduct one?

  • Ron you should knock off the “I was once again alerted” bullshit. You know damn well that you along with many others check this blog site more than often. You’ve always had a big mouth, which you even stated about yourself.. Not trying to make this personal but if you’re going to lead, then lead. Lead like deputies lives depend on it because it does, period.

    • @Really: Ouch! That was a little personal, but I’ll admit to checking in frequently once I become aware of people calling me out. The need to defend myself is a character flaw I guess, and often times an opportunity to try and set the record straight.

      As far as leading, there have been some major changes in this last, year all of which past Boards didn’t want to change, or address. I will lead, but I will not lead people off a cliff.

      And, the problem with going back and forth here is we can’t have an in depth conversations.

      • So tell us how you helped lindsey and Rodriguez (you forget there was another deputy). I do know and you and Alads were no shows until they pressed the issue.

        Simple, if you and the board were doing such a great job, you wouldn’t have to come on a blog site and defend yourself.

        And yes, there are some new people running for Alads and your time is coming to an end.

        • @ Clam Chowder, your commentary is perplexing to me. We (deputies) are enraged daily by the misinformation the public spreads, yet we have no problem doing that to each other?

          You say matter of factly, “I do know you and ALADS were no shows.” I wasn’t even on the board when they pressed their issue, and as soon as I got on the board I helped them resolve it. So, that comment actually shows what you don’t know.

          The reality is, if people would speak the truth I wouldn’t have to defend myself. We know what we have accomplished, but no one pays attention to until their agenda is not being addressed.

          Comical how everyone feels the need to threaten me by saying, your time is coming to an end, back your bags, we’re coming after you. That’s the members’ prerogative, no problem. It’s really going to be hard to give up the 50-60 hour work weeks, constant phone calls, blogging to defend myself, learning politics, all for less pay than I would get for being retired.

          “And yes there are some new people running for ALADS,” as if you need to inform me! The only reason these “new” people can even run is because I made sure we changed the bylaws making it easier for them to run. I was warned people who have never been to meetings would run, but it was the right thing to do, for the membership and the ALADS board agreed to make themselves more vulnerable. I hope the new guys are ready and willing, if they prevail. Personally, I think once they deal with their agenda they won’t have any interest in the day to day operations!

  • Ron I will make it a point to acknowledge major changes have occurred on your watch, and that is to your credit. Getting rid of Dick Shinee and opening up the board to a true democratic process is a healthy move. The true test is what comes next

    • Yet that belated democratic process is in direct contrast with the prosecution of fellow deputy Armando Macias whose case is based on prior corrupt bylaws which were in direct violation of California Corporations Code. Ron Hernandez has the handle and the bill.

    • Lastly, be advised that “No man is an Island” Whatever advances or bad moves by ALADS is equally divided by the majority of yea’s and nay’s. One does not have to attend ALADS meetings to have the knowledge of “running a meeting” or defining true democracy.

  • Somebody suggested the deputy union should schedule and host Sheriff McDonnell and his electoral challengers for a debate so the membership can decide who they prefer to run LASD.

    That’s a great idea – except incumbent Sheriff McDonnell is not going to participate in any face-to-face discussion with other candidates unless he is compelled to.
    Which means the Sheriff will find his schedule already booked for most or all of the date/times proposed for this intended candidate confrontation.
    And if the union was successful in twisting a debate commitment from McD , then rest assured he’ll be a last minute no-show, for good reason. The good reason being that he doesn’t need to debate anyone unless it helps him win reelection.
    Don’t be offended that incumbent Sheriff McD won’t play stickball with a couple of no-names. This kind of campaign strategy decision is made for him by the same political consultants who were brought in to engineer his wire to wire winning performance in the 2014 election.
    Don’t expect McD to debate the challengers anytime this year or next year as long as the polling shows him winning reelection in the June California primary.
    Someone commented about the need to widen the field of candidates running for Sheriff in order to improve the odds of holding the incumbent under 50% to force a run-off.
    But it will take more than names on a ballot to force McD into a fight to hold his office.
    The voters need to see names of sufficient caliber to meet their perception as a legitimate alternative to the incumbent.
    Bob Lindsay and Alex Villanueva need to determine their priorities.
    What is most important to them? Winning election as Sheriff of L.A. County or replacing McDonnell with someone who is an improvement?
    If replacing McD is the priority than they need to devote their immedeate efforts to recruiting legitimate challenger(s);
    just like McD was recruited by Supervisors Knabe and Yaroslavsky with assistance from moneybag Rick Caruso to campaign as the replacement for the man they forced out – Lee Baca.

    • Don’t forget that ALADS political advisor Tim Yaryan in Sacramento. He was major in selecting McDonnell for the last election and is also the azimuth, guiding ALADS in many of their decisions. LASD needs a “Trump-like” upset victory to dump “Fresh Eyes”.

  • The determination of who constitutes a “legitimate” challenger should be left in the hands of voters, not the political establishment. They are hopelessly married to failure, sheriff after sheriff. They also have a financial interest in the status quo. Look no further than Baca, and now McDonnell – both product of the same process you advocate for so eloquently.

    I think replacing McDonnell is the priority, and LASD past and present, most importantly present, need to get off their ass and get involved in supporting the challengers. Their future livelihood is at stake. When you let the political establishment pick who your sheriff is, you deserve what you get. As has often been said, you deserve the government you get. Any challenger who surfaces at the last minute, just like McBuckles did in 2014, is already in the back pocket of some special interest.

    Polling is expensive, and if there was any good news I’m pretty sure McBuckles would already be boasting about it. I agree with you the incumbent will most likely be a debate no show, however he will make an appearance for the opening of an outhouse at the drop of a hat.

  • The next Sheriff election will be a classic example of “Putting your money (and vote) where your mouth is”. As stated before by someone, LAPD backed by LAPPL was on a mission with the to rid themselves of Bernard Parks.
    That mission was accomplished.

  • This is exactly why we need the unions to come together. If they coordinate a series of debates and “Fresheyes” no shows, then they have no other choice but to select who the memberships are behind and fully support that candidate. Commercials are very expensive, but they reach a huge amount of the voters. Social Media also needs to be included. Hell, call the Russians, whatever it takes we need to take a stand.

  • I agree that we should let the voters decide.
    But let’s also provide them with a range of choices in order to find a candidate they can feel secure about placing in charge of this huge multi-divisional agency LASD.

    Let’s be honest, no matter how many candidates file to run for L.A. County Sheriff, including those with a stellar career resume, there is probably only going to be one candidate with actual experience running an organization the size of LASD or even 1/10th the size of LASD.
    That person is the incumbent.

    The voters may perceive McD as mediocre and scoring below than their expectations of him, but that doesn’t reduce their anxiety over replacing him with a candidate who has never saddled up to ride a 10,000 plus employee LEO.

    Another thing – the voters are aware that not many people who might be qualified to do the job would actually want or be willing to accept the job and be willing to graciously endure all of the b.s. involved in getting elected and holding the office.

    They assume a certain percentage of individuals willing to go all out to get elected as Sheriff must have some character flaw or compulsive neurosis. The question would be whether it was benign to ethically and effectively fulfilling the job duties or what level of warped is tolerable ?

    Villanueva and/or Lindsey might have potential to perform admirably running LASD.
    They both may have honorable records within lASD and both may have earned respect of those who served above, below and alongside of them.
    That still leaves them with a difficult task to overcome assumptions by the general voting public about the genesis of their motivation to supersede Jim McD.
    Their appeal for votes is hindered if it seems their candidacy is a drive to correct an offense committed against them in the past or to vanquish uncouth enemies within the organization.
    We do need to hear about their experiences.
    We need to hear their insights and ideas for improvements.
    But voters will need more before they vote to ditch the goofball they know as Sheriff for an unknown quantity.

  • I don’t profess to assume as much as you do about what voters see in the race for sheriff. We can start by acknowledging who sits in the White House as a testament to how fickle the voter may be. My guess is your average voter doesn’t even know who McDonnell is, or if they have their own PD may not even know they vote for sheriff.

    You seem enamored by the incumbent’s resume, however his actual performance destroys your hypothesis. You can be a great NASCAR driver, but in Formula 1 you have to do more than left hand turns. There will always be cynics who point out flaws, real or imagined, but voters I believe don’t question motives for running for public office as much as you do.

    Be thankful good people are willing to step up to the plate and run for public office. If they didn’t we would not have the democracy we currently enjoy.

  • When hot water and pressure is applied to anyone, only then will their true character will be exposed. This thread will be remembered more so by names mentioned throughout, as we will hear their names again. Hernandez, Lindsey, McDonnell, Moriguchi, and Villanueva. The pot is boiling and the clock is running.

  • Great discussion and comments from all. Although this thread was regarding Tanaka who is yesterday news, it was a good thing to morph into the forthcoming Sheriff’s election. The anticipation will grow even more “after” ALADS own election in 8 weeks. That alone will be another topic of conversation. Only time will tell.

  • Hopefully the candidates in ALADS upcoming election will address the Pink Elephant that’s taking a shit on every deputy. That Pink Elephant is the May 2018 court date of ALADS VS. Macias, BC 540789. No need for discussion here, just a head’s up. All is quiet on the western front until the expenses and the story behind it is fully told.

    • I believe you meant to say “White Elephant” which would be applicable to your post. Even more, after perusing the subject matter, I would be apt to say “Big White Elephant”.

  • On it’s face, the pending ALADS- Macias court battle looks like bullshit within an internal pissing contest. While far from perfect (during the Sherman Block era), LASD along with ALADS has taken a turn for the worst. Between the two in addition to law enforcement in general, I’m confident that I left in the nick of time.

Leave a Comment