FBI Jail LA County Jail LASD Sheriff Lee Baca U.S. Attorney

Sentencing Postponed for Six Members LA Sheriff’s Department Convicted of Obstruction of Justice


Sentencing has been postponed for six members of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department who were convicted
of obstruction of a federal investigation in connection with hiding FBI informant Anthony Brown from his fed handlers.

The six defendants—LASD deputies Gerard Smith and Mickey Manzo, sergeants Scott Craig and Maricela Long, Lieutenant Stephen Leavins, and Gregory Thompson, a now-retired department lieutenant—were originally scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Percy Anderson next Monday, September 8. But on Wednesday afternoon Anderson signed the order to postpone sentencing for two weeks, until Sept. 22.

The postponement was granted at the request of Deputy James Sexton and his attorneys, led by Thomas O’Brien, who contended that the sentencing of the six LA Sheriff’s Department members was bound to draw extensive press attention, thus making it challenging for Sexton—who is about to be retried for the same obstruction of justice charges of which the six were convicted—to find the kind of untainted jury pool necessary for a fair trial.

Sexton’s trial (or rather his retrial, since he was already tried for this whole mess once, resulting in a 6-6 hung jury) is set to begin on September 9, the day after the six defendants were originally scheduled to be sentenced.

The prosecutors objected to the postponement, pointing out, in essence, that there had been plenty of press about the indictments, et al, before the previous trials of Sexton and of the six, and yet no one had complained of a tainted jury. “In neither trial did any juror indicate that they had been prejudicially exposed to media coverage of the trial…” the prosecutors wrote. And Sexton’s attorneys hadn’t given any reasons why this trial would be any different.

Yet, it didn’t appear that their hearts were really into their objections.. After all, with the sentencing postponed they could use that same day for trial prep, which presumably wouldn’t hurt.


SO WHAT KIND OF SENTENCES COULD THE SIX LASD DEFENDANTS RECEIVE?

The government filed its sentencing reports and recommendations for each of the six defendants last month, and the sentences requested are sobering.

The suggested sentences for the two deputies and one of the sergeants are the lowest.

For Deputy Mickey Manzo who, together with Deputy Gerard Smith, was on the team that reportedly hid Anthony Brown from his FBI handlers, the feds requested 30 months, or two and a half years.

The recommendation for Gerard Smith, who has a special needs child, is slightly shorter at 28 months, or two years and four months.

When it came to Sergeant Maricela Long, who—along with Sgt. Scott Craig—was involved in the investigation of FBI Special Agent Leah Marx, the feds went back up to 30 months.

They viewed Long’s partner, Sergeant Scott Craig, with far more severity. Craig was the person who threatened FBI Agent Marx with arrest, and also appeared to deliberately try to persuade deputy Gilbert Michel not to talk to the FBI. (Michel was the guy who accepted a bribe to smuggle a cell phone into Anthony Brown.) Craig also took the stand in his own behalf and said things that the prosecutors maintained were “demonstrably false,” thus were “further acts of obstruction.”

With all that in mind, the government asked that Craig’s sentence be 51 months, or 4 years, three months.

Surprisingly, the government requested a longer sentence for Craig than they did for retired Lt. Gregory Thompson, who actually ran the Operation Safe Jails team that hid Anthony Brown, and he was the guy for whom Smith, Manzo and Sexton worked. Thompson’s suggested sentence was 48 months, or 4 years.

The feds reserved its very longest suggested sentence for Lt. Stephen Leavins. Leavins, who was the supervisor for Craig and Long, also allegedly attempted to persuade Michel and others not to talk to the FBI. Like Craig, Leavins took the stand for himself, and denied wrong doing, for instance, claiming that he moved Anthony Brown only for Brown’s own safety, when other factors suggested the main purpose was to keep Brown away from the feds, all of which added up to perjury said the prosecutors in their sentencing memo. More than Craig, according to the feds, Leavins told some true doozies when he was on the stand, claiming to be at meetings where others testified he could not have been, claiming other officials said things that, they and others flatly denied, and other alleged falsehoods.

For Leavins, the feds requested a sentence of 60 months or 5 years.

38 Comments

  • Green and Shinee could have never pulled off a move like this. Once again Thomas O’Brien is not to be underestimated.

  • Looks like karma for Craig and Leavins. Sad that not one of the Sgts or lieutenants went to bat for Manzo or Smith. They (along with Sexton) did the grunt work and we’re ignored at the end. Truly sad.

  • Karma hurts! The Tanaka six are paying for the sins of their fathers past and present. How many times have investigations been compromised by executive interference. Hopefully these verdicts will put the brakes on future misconduct by IAB personnel. Try saying no…..it works!

  • The Feds want to make an example and ride the high horse, but they left the two biggest criminals walk away for political reasons? What a F#93inG joke! I hope they feel like they accomplished something.
    But to those of us “local guys” that is like busting the guy with the $10.00 baggy and watching the 400 lbs of speed drive away. This is truly mind boggling. But it would appear that someone made Federal Judge from this caper and a few “Special” Agents made another GS spot or transferred to the promotion spot.
    So is this justice or just more political BS allowing the corrupt to say who can and cannot be corrupt? Just an opinion folks.
    Thanks for the investigation Celeste you did some good work at what you did, but at the end of the day it is always the same, the Feds come in on their golden horse, stir up the pot, and walk away saying they have now solved the problem, but they never even scratched the surface.
    Two years of an investigation and they want to lock up someone for saying they were going to arrest a Fed? Meanwhile back at the scene of the crime, the two biggest people walk away unscathed with all the loot. Wow just wow!

  • MTA contract: Assaults up 75% and robberies up 43% in 2013. MTA save you money and contract with LAPD. Put the deputies back into patrol where they are needed! TSB has been a black hole since it’s inception.

  • But the good news is that Paul Tanaka continues to campaign for Sheriff. So, y’know…every cloud…silver lining.

  • Even though all of those involved to be sentenced, had different degrees of input…..The idiot award has to go to Sgt . Craig for “Threatening a FBI Agent” with an arrest. (Real Bad Ass)

    Not only an Idiot but a Coward also. Trust me, he would have never threatened a “Male” FBI Agent. Regardless, he will pay the price.

  • I waiting for former Sheriff Lee Baca to stand up and take responsibility! It seems inconceivable that the Feds will not go higher but it sure appears that they will not. These six worked in the gray area and are going to Federal prison. They pushed the envelop on this investigation and are taking the fall. So if you are working Century, Compton, South LA, or MCJ don’t listen some goofy peer group or some want-to-be tough guy executive… Follow your training and the Constitution!

  • Is it me or are the Feds recommending “light” sentences ? It seems awfully light the recommendations……Maybe some people are co-operating ?

  • LeftAtTheBall,
    Correct 100% in #4.
    Sending low level guys to prison over a pissing match between Baca/Tanaka and the FBI? Really? Is this “justice” in anybody’s eyes?
    It’s posturing and muscle flexing at it’s worst.

  • The ones that should be indicted and sentenced are Baca and Tanaka. They are the ones that pushed all the buttons to start this act of defiance with the feds. The others just went along with the direction of the bosses. The old military rule “obey all LAWFUL orders, and report all UNLAWFUL ones.”

  • YES “Oh Well”, it is justice. These sworn officers knew the law and took matters into their own hands. Common sense dictates you dont do this type of behavior. Shame on those that can’t see this.

    The only injustice I see is the light recommended sentence……

  • My opinion, Pandora’s Box was NOT “a pissing contest” between B&T and the FBI. To say so is a ridiculous attempt to justify what all of these people did. Pandora’s Box was an overt attempt to Obstruct Justice, period !!!!! Once Tanaka found out that the FBI was doing a covert criminal investigation inside of MCJ regarding the “beating of inmates for sport and ink” he shit his pants. Tanaka went into an absolute panic of the first order. Remember, Tanaka was the first to be told by Thompson, not Baca. Tanaka panicked because he and he alone had created the environment of “kicking ass, taking no names” inside of MCJ and now the panic was, “They are going to come after me for Pattern and Practice.” I don’t work that Division, but all of this was laid out in countless WLA “factual” investigations, the CCJV testimony and court testimony. My guess is Tanaka went to Baca and spun this entire FBI inmate informant (Brown) (which I think was a stupid operations, much better ways to have done this to prove/disprove the allegations, whatever) as a “front against you, Sheriff. We can’t let them get away with this.”

    From there, the dominoes fell, Tanaka took the handle on all of this, with Baca playing a supporting role. Tanaka was the QB in this operation and has long ago, back peddled and let everyone take the fall. This was NOT a pissing contest, this was a pure and unadulterated operation to find out what Brown told the FBI, PERIOD. All of this talk about B&T walking away from this, don’t buy that for a minute. The Feds ain’t done, they are just starting and those two clowns are in their crosshairs. Read it and weep.

  • Read and Weep,
    How do you explain the meeting between Baca and the feds where Baca was told to “butt out” of the investigation? How do you explain his failure to do so?
    Baca’s ego got the best of him. I agree that Tanaka QB’d the operation. That’s a given.

  • Green and Shinee is a big joke. I had used Mitch Kander from that firm to represent me…..what a bag of shit.

  • #10, Light sentences? Really? All of these personnel have no criminal histories and all of these crimes with which they were charged are non violent. Nobody was hurt, they “interfered” with an investigation which had no hope of really going anywhere anyway (smuggling a cell phone into MCJ? Would of been found eventually). I don’t agree with what they did but at most this should be a probation case. Not to mention they’re all losing their careers and quite possibly their pensions. Prison is totally not necessary.

  • @ #14 – your opinion sounds a lot like the truth. Tiny T finally spun one tale too long. His lie(s) finally caught up with him. And it’s not even close to being over. This is the gift that keeps giving. The face of law enforcement will never be the same. Imagine what it takes to take down a sitting sheriff in one of the nation’s largest and most political population centers. The peripheral investigations and collateral damage have to be mind boggling. Is there anything these guys weren’t into? Arrogant, rank amateurs – contracts, kickbacks, drivers collecting campaign contributions, sex scandals, real estate fraud, seems like a criminal enterprise running amuck. John Scott doesn’t have a plug big enough. Wonder if the feds have the IRS looking at these guys.

  • @ 13 & 14……..Amen to the truth. I get tired of these opinionated cry babies that fail to call a spade……a spade.

  • We as Cops should very well know, that Baca & Tanaka are cooperating. Does anyone think they’re just walking away?

  • I don’t know if Baca or Tanaka will walk away, but it’s rumored, and has been been repeated by a commenter that Baca made a deal with the feds. and that he retired in lieu of indictment. No, it’s not solid info., just rumor. But one has to ask themselves why Baca hasn’t been indicted already. Who in their right mind thinks the feds. don’t have a better case against Baca for obstruction of justice than they did the six? Baca himself didn’t even deny he gave the orders when interviewed by the media. Why? Because he can’t. Everybody, including the feds., knows Baca had a hand in Pandora’s Box. A jury would plainly see it. But they haven’t indicted him yet. Why? The commenters here who speculate that Baca and or Tanaka are in the crosshairs of the feds. and there are indictments coming don’t know any more than the people who speculate that Baca retired in lieu of indictment. It’s ALL just theory and speculation.
    As it stands right now, here’s what we KNOW. Leroy Baca was involved in the Pandora’s Box cluster. As of right now, six underlings have been found guilty and are facing prison. As of right now, Leroy Baca hasn’t even been indicted. As of right now, that’s bullshit!
    Commenters can speculate until the cows come home and it doesn’t mean a fucking thing to me. I have a bad habit of going with what I know, and discounting speculation and rumor.
    I don’t have the answers and don’t claim to.
    It appears I’m just simply not near as intelligent as those that have it all figured out already.
    Those of you that claim it’s a sure thing that Baca and or Tanaka will be indicted, would you bet your house on it?
    That’s what I thought.

  • @ Save our Six,

    Don’t you think that your former “Top Two” should “Man Up” for a parting shot before sentencing, for those six?

  • @ 16) Shinee (Green is deceased) has ALADS wrapped around his “Golden” hand. Until members wake up and demand more competent Attorneys. ….He will always build his empire on the monthly dues of (8000 plus) deputies.

    No rep or board member has brought up the fact that deputies personal information was compromised when his computer system was hacked and breeched. Don’t cry later if Alads never brings it up.

  • At the end of the day everyone convicted played a role in illegal activity. The federal government was conducting an investigation. Under the Supremacy Clause of our constitution where applicable Federal Law is supreme to state law. In this case the investigation was about civil rights violation which is governed by federal law ie our constitution. When these officers proceeded to move brown they obstructed the federal investigation. Regardless of the reason ie applicable state law they had for moving brown the federal law is supreme to any state law under which the deputies were operating and because of that they broke the law. Also, even if the officers were not aware of the supremacy clause, in the eyes of the law in our country they are just as culpable. In other words under our laws ignorance is not a defense. The only relevant question in any criminal prosecution is did the defendants have notice of the law. Notice is given provided it is published in a reliable source like a penal code book. In this case it is published in our U.S. Constitution, in our Califonia Constitution among other sources. They had notice. Also the excuse that they were just following orders doesn’t work in our legal system. Imagine if it did. Every defendant would point the finger at someone else as the ring leader and say “I didn’t know it was against the law I just did what he told me to do”. Well that just goes back to having notice and because they had notice even if they were told to move brown you don’t follow orders when those orders are to break the law. Each person is responsible for their own actions when it comes to unlawful acts. Finally saying it’s unfair that the little guys got caught because the big fish got away is completely illogical. It’s like saying if the big fish doesn’t get caught then we should let the little fish get away. So if the drug king pin doesn’t get caught the drug mule gets a free pass. For some of these officers it is really unfortunate that they probably were truly ignorant of the law and never had any intentions of knowingly breaking the law. It is a really difficult price to pay. Some of these other officers however even after being made aware of the law took steps ie testimony to continue to lie to further their goal to cover up their actions. From a juror’s perspective can you imagine what they were thinking for these to get up there and pretend not to know they were doing wrong? It had the exact opposite effect. From a common sense perspective most jurors probably looked at that and thought “these guys obviously make a habit of getting on the stand and lying, it’s a pattern”. A juror is your everyday person. That is all s/he has is common sense. And at the end of the day when things get to convoluted they will put things into perspective using common sense. The prosecution must have been having a party when they learned those two officers’ testimony strategy. From the defense side they had nothing to lose because they had no other defense so might as well sling and see if it sticks. Everyone is entitled to a defense and they should have put up a dog fight in court. No one would expect anything less but for those that continued to lie ie testimony it is apparent that knowing or not knowing of the applicable law made no difference. They were intent on following through with their lies and the jury saw through that and I think that probably convinced the jury that they were not ignorant of the law and knew what they were doing all along. Usually when deals are made it’s to catch the big fish not the other way around. If the investigators had enough on Baca they would prosecute. Also right now as far as baca giving the orders you have testimony denying it and one person leavins saying he did. A prosecutor isn’t going to take that risk and lose. It’s better to go with where there is more solid evidence and build a case. In this case they had evidence on the involvement of the six officers. Remember Baca is an elected official and if there is enough evidence there is a sleuth of charges Only time will tell whether Baca is also prosecuted.

  • @Baffled- Pertaining to the obstruction charges I would agree. However your logic is flawed with regards to the little fish and the king pin. In this case you do have evidence that Baca had knowledge (his calender-his meetings with the FBI, and testimony)
    We also have knowledge of Tanaka’s involvement, witness statements the day he received the call (not indicted folks), emails, and multiple testimony from those involved. You also have reports of a wire being used with Baca but no information on what was recorded. There is a plethora of circumstantial evidence that any decent prosecutor could convict a regular person on, but since it is the Sheriff and is the Under Sheriff, then politics are involved. Why did Baca hold a fundraiser two days before he removed himself from the race? Why did he tout the “finessing” of Tanaka and then resign himself? What happened to Tanakas memory? So save the lack of evidence speech.
    As for the jury having common sense care to examine the Simpson jury, Melendez brothers or a slew of other cases where there was plenty of evidence, but the jury went the other way?
    Juries don’t think just evidence they are persuaded by lawyers. Court is not about right and wrong, it is a theater and the best performance often wins. You would agree the D.A. or A.U.S.A. doesn’t file a case unless they feel they have a 85 to 90% chance of conviction right?

  • @Baffled, you are making an academic lecture, but I agree with your statement. “I was only following orders” was really the only defense they could come up with, and yes, they threw it on the wall but none of it stuck. You should have heard the self proclaimed Tanaka insiders talk smack, “They will all beat this, they were only doing what they were told. Even Paul had concerns.” Really? Paul was concerned? Oh he is NOW concerned, for his own ass, and he should. He has a lot to be concerned about.

    Everyone very early on, knew exactly what they were doing, they knew they were obstructing justice. But they were 200% on board because “Paul takes care of his people.” LOL, oh yea, he took care of you guys alright. Say that when when you go through the Federal Prison IRC, get your showers and set of clothes, mug shot and fingerprints. Think about how Paul took care of you on your very first night in your facility looking at the ceiling wondering how in the hell did all of this happen. Think about how Paul took care of you over the holidays and during that first family visit when you assure your family “I’m fine, don’t worry about me.” Yea, Paul really took care of you.

  • @Baffled, your Jurisprudence class at the local university failed to impress. You call that “illegal activity?” What did your professor say about breaking the law to enforce the law? Ie- Illegal contraband to a convicted felon in a secure facility? All for the purposes of civil rights violations? Where’s the civil rights charges? Oh, I’m sorry, couldn’t find any so we better go with conspiracy and obstruction. I’m sorry fellas but Camp MCJ is a cakewalk in my eyes. The guys carry 2 inch flashlights now and it’s run by weak sisters. The required therapy ended years ago. This caper was nothing more than a fishing expedition that led to nothing but undeserved heartache for our brothers, sister and their families. One of the biggest travesties of justice in modern times. So yes @Huh, count me in on saving our 6 and you should step up too. I’m 10-8, rolling hard, Region 2 style in the radio car of trust. Just in case you were wondering. Boomer!

  • They rolled the dice and they took their chances. Yes, they knew what they were doing. Yes, they were on board because they wanted to be in the car.
    In my opinion, every bit of that is valid.
    Obstruction of “Justice”?
    Unless Baca and Tanaka are indicted, the feds will have abandoned seeking justice in this case. They have a solid case against the two ringleaders of Pandora’s Box. They don’t need either one to testify against the other. They’ve got a solid case against both of them. They haven’t taken it to the Grand Jury.
    Why?
    For those speculating they are trying to get them on even bigger things, could they not indict them for Pandora’s Box and continue investigations into the other crimes? Is their some federal law I’m not aware of that precludes the feds from charging them with another crime because they’ve been indicted on a different charge previously?
    Why did Baca retire at the drop of a hat?
    It causes one to contemplate the claims that he made a deal with the feds and retired in lieu of. Tanaka? Maybe he started cooperating early on too, so they are cutting him a break. I don’t know, and neither does anyone else who comments here.
    What we do know is that “justice” hasn’t been served up to this point.

  • @Oh Well. 100% agree with you, “Justice” is still a long way off. But this I know, the Feds are cut from a different cloth than you and I. Baca and Tanaka are not a flight risk and we are not talking about a Part One crime, and both of these losers are off the payroll, so to speak. So to the Feds, there is no sense of urgency. The AUSA and FBI virtually stop everything for weeks to ” Trial Prep,” something I have never figured out. It is in their DNA, not ours, and they have five or so MCJ and TTCF cases on the horizon to include this trial

    What will be telling is if Baca and Tanaka take the stand and hear those chilling words, “Are you aware you are the focus/subject/target of an ongoing Federal investigation?” Baca, it remains to be seen what criminal investigation he is subject to besides this case. Tanaka, oh that boy has some serious problems. But this I can tell you, they are not walking simply because they retired. Far from it. They will have their day of reckoning. Perhaps one more than the other, but the Feds do in a year, what we do in a month.

  • Here’s a question. How can the deputies be guilty of interfering with an FBI investigation if they had no provided evidence that an investigation was occurring?

    I know, because I was in the audience during the trial of the six convicted, that no writ was ever seen by or delivered to line guys like Manzo, Smith and Sexton. The feds actually admitted that before any writ or order was delivered to the LASD, it was recalled and canceled.

    I also remember specifically hearing read transcripts grand jury testimony where Rathbun and Sexton had both agreed with each other that if the feds arrived and presented a writ or removal order, they would comply with said order. But none of that ever happened from what I know. No FBI agent or US Marshal or A/US Attorney ever confronted or contacted Sexton, Manzo or Smith and said “hey, there is an investigation going on here, and you’re screwing with it.”

    So I’m not seeing the elements of the crime present. At least not for the guys on the Deputy level.

    I’m sorry, but I don’t see that the feds can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Sexton knew enough of what was going on at the time.

    See I’ve never suggested that the feds NOT go after the little guys just because there are bigger guys to go after. I suggest the feds not go after the little guys because the little guys had no evidence in hand that there was an ongoing FBI investigation. Now, Lt-above? I bet they had documents in hand.

    I know I’ll get a lot of negative feedback for this post. But there is reasonable doubt present that Sexton knew at the time he was obstructing an investigation. Same for Manzo and Smith.

  • @Boomer: you really need to go back and read some of your own posts. You have continuously insinuated that as a hard charging “ghetto gunslinger” you do what you have to do to get the job done, and that is how you have used the “radio car of trust” on numerous occasions. Yet, now you don’t condone the FBI using that same mentality! I don’t either, but then I have never had to become a criminal to get a criminal. Out smarting them has usually worked for me.

    And thanks for the adding to the invite to “save our six,” but I’ll pass on this one and continue to donate to the numerous Deputies, in need, who did not create their own grief!

  • @LeftAtTheBall- I am not quite certain what you intend to say when you use the word evidence. The items you have listed are potential evidence. The California rules of evidence governs what is evidence and admissible or not admissible. Is it relevant? (both legal and logical), does it meet personal knowledge requirements? (there are specific requirements that need to be met), If documents exist, are they subject to the best evidence rule? (there are specific requirements that need to be met), is it hearsay or not hearsay? Is Proposition 8 applicable? If the items meet the evidence requirements and therefore make it admissible, is there an exception to that rule that would exclude the evidence (ie inadmissible)? Is there an exception to the exception that would allow the evidence to be admitted? Many of the items you listed seem to have been in the control of a very small group of people all of whom would probably assert the same as to their nature and purpose. Evidence that could actually be used against Baca or Tanaka is what is important. It is more than successfully having evidence admitted. It must serve its purpose. It must weigh against or for the person the attorney represents. If the prosecution believed it had enough damming evidence it seems to me given this particular case that they would prosecute. It is true that prosecutors make deals. It is part of our judicial system and therefore perfectly valid. It is also true that someone could negotiate a deal to avoid prosecution. In this particular case and the charges brought against the officers however it seems unlikely that if the prosecution had what they believed to be evidence that they would avoid prosecuting Baca or Tanaka. The officers were prosecuted for obstruction of justice and to allow Baca or Tanaka to get away with the same would fly in the face of the very principles the prosecution is advocating. You say political advancement but the other side of the coin is political suicide. If it was ever revealed the federal government negotiated a deal with someone, like Baca, who obstructed justice when they were prosecuting for the same would be political suicide. Which is more valuable one promotion but the possibility of other promotions or no promotions ever for the rest of your career? If a deal was negotiated it was because the prosecution believed they had no evidence or weak evidence. If it is weak evidence then yes negotiate the deal and get Baca to work for the prosecution would be the goal. It is my opinion that it more likely than not that Baca cooperated, but when is the better question. I believe he was cooperating almost from the very beginning soon after the feds figured there was not enough to charge him.

    One interesting thing to note here. The question is whether Baca was involved. Presumably all eyes were on him. His every move was being watched. He was under a microscope. If he were involved and there was what he believed to be damming evidence one would think that he would stay employed because he would want to micromanage everything and keep a lid on things. In fact as sheriff he would maintain ultimate control and power. Instead, what did he do? He relinquished all control. When there was speculation about whether he was attempting to cover up any investigation of him he answered by making himself powerless. The statement is clear, the feds were invited to investigate with the guarantee that he had no power to meaningfully influence anyone.

    I have no meaningful knowledge of the Simpson or Melendez cases therefore have no reply for you.

    Yes you are right, it is an attorney’s job to “persuade” as you say. I think “convince” is a more accurate description of what an attorney must do. They advocate for their side.

    You are wrong. A court room is about right and wrong. The average person is not an expert in law. The average person has a perception of fairness without actually engaging in analytical logical thinking much less how it all relates to our laws. Who has time for that? Mostly attorneys, professors and law students, but not the average person. That is why the realities of fairness hit hard in a courtroom. The education is abrupt and harsh. Courtroom is a little bit of a theater. Attorneys are advocates and they must be convincing. There are rules about court room decorum that limit an attorney’s behavior. Also, I do not believe that you truly believe trials are a theater more than they are about right or wrong. That would seem to imply that you believe most defendants on charges drug dealing, murder and rapists never had a fair trial because it was more drama than about right or wrong. The only other possibility to your statement is that you believe that somehow attorneys who are great at theater join the prosecution’s office which is simply not true. Equally talented lawyers advocate for both sides.

    Prosecutors want to be relatively confident of a conviction so I guess I generally agree with you, although I will avoid committing to the 85% certainty requirement you stated. However I will make say this about the percentage value you used. What is the 85% based on? If you say evidence well then you just proved my point. That would mean that the prosecution had really convincing evidence against the officers not Baca or Tanaka.

    @OhWell- I agree with your thought process. I do not believe that the prosecution believed they could convict Baca. Also, in the case that Baca did negotiate a deal there are conditions attached to that deal and if he violates them then the prosecution has wiggle room to prosecute for the very charges promised not to be brought against him. The investigation is on going and so is the prosecution so new evidence could bring new charges which is probably what they are hoping for. No there is no law stating that once a person negotiates a deal s/he is protected against any other charges. And YES, everything with respect to Baca is all speculation. They may bring charges. I do not believe that the prosecution has enough evidence now yet is refraining from prosecution.

    @Wild Turkey- Under the federal code for Obstruction of Criminal Investigations no court order is required in these circumstances. A court order is required in some forms of investigations so the defense was probably making an argument that it was required in this case. Sounds like the judge did not agree. The other option is that it was determined that it was required and not provided but that it made no difference because at some point the officers did realize the investigation and proceeded to, as the jury saw it, to obstruct thereby violating the law.

    @IthacaBoomer- Our country was founded on the principles invoked in our Constitution. Our founding fathers felt it was so important they committed it to paper so that we would not forget them and abide by them. The genius in there writing is that to this day the Constitution survives. Truly genius. Civil rights are a part of our Constitution. They are our rights. They are at the core and are a birth mark of the principles we stand for. This was not just an investigation. It was an investigation into the possibility that someone’s civil rights were being violated. The danger in not investigating and prosecuting is that civil rights violations will go unchecked. What is the point of having protections if they are not really protections. You are right that no civil rights violations had yet been discovered (at least regarding these officers). I understand that other officers are being investigated out of the same jail for civil rights violations. Do you see the magnitude of the importance that the investigation go on without obstruction? Do you see what it is at stake? If the roles were reversed how would you feel about our civil rights? The six officers were defendants in their criminal trial just like the defendants at the jail where the supposed civil rights violations took place. What if there were credible allegations that those six officers’ civil rights were violated while in a jail facility awaiting trial? Would you believe it to be wrong to conduct an investigation? How would you feel about someone obstructing that investigation? It is a really important investigation that needs to happen.

    FINALLY, TODAY BEFORE WORK I STOPPED BY A MARKET AND BOUGHT A FLAG ABOUT ONE FOOT AND ONE HALF IN HEIGHT. I FLEW IT AT HALF STAFF IN MY OFFICE IN HONOR OF ALL THE VICTIMS OF THE 9/11 ATTACKS. EVERY HOUR ON THE HOUR I PRAYED FOR THE VICTIMS, THE FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS AND EVERYONE WHO HELPED THAT DAY AND ANY DAY AFTER THAT. IT IS DIFFICULT ENOUGH DOING THAT AND I CANNOT BEGIN TO IMGAINE HOW DIFFICULT IT MUST BE FOR THOSE WHO WERE PERSONALLY INVOLVED. MY HEART JUST FEELS LIKE ITS GOING TO DROP ON THIS DAY EVERY YEAR. I DO WHAT I CAN IN TERMS OF MONETARY DONATIONS TO THE SURVIVORS. WE LIVE WITH IT A MAYBE A FEW DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR SOME OF US ONLY ONCE A YEAR. YOUNG CHILDREN, SINGLE MOMS, SINGLE DADS, BROTHERS, SISTERS, COUSINS WHOEVER THE SURVIVORS ARE THEY ARE ONE THOSE TITLES AND MORE AND THEY TO THIS DAY LIVE WITH IT EVERYDAY. FIND IT IN YOUR HEARTS TO HELP WHEN YOU CAN. GOD BLESS.

  • Correction (see previous comments): what is more valuable no promotions off of this case but the possibility of other promotions throughout your career or no promotions for the rest of your career?

Leave a Comment