Friday, April 20, 2007

 

Faulder fired

Mendo D.A. elect Meredith Lintott fired her election opponent Keith Faulder a few days after taking office. She insists that there won't be many more firings, but as we know in Humboldt County, when there is a significant change in the philosophy of the office you tend to lose the old guard. From the Press Democrat:
As a result of the immediate dismissal, a murder case scheduled for Monday may be rescheduled, Lintott said.

Caleb Flitcroft was set to go on trial for allegedly shooting and killing his girlfriend, Brittney Syfert, in a fit of jealousy during her birthday party in Potter Valley in 2005.

Faulder has prosecuted the lion's share of the office's more serious homicide cases during his eight-year tenure with the office.

"I'm sorry to see him go," Ukiah Police Sgt. John McCutcheon said. "He's the most skilled attorney in that office."
Reverse the politics and it's deja vu all over again.

I'm also sorry to see Faulder go, but as with Gallegos, Ms. Lintott has the right to reshape the office to her vision, even if it means some short term difficulties. There are distinct philosophies about the office. It's not merely a bureaucratic position. Probably Gallegos' mistake was to wait too long to clean house. Lintott seems to have learned from his mistakes.

Comments:
"Ms. Lintott has the right to reshape the office to her vision, even if it means some short term difficulties."

But USAG Alberto Gonzales does not?
 
You can fire somebody for no reason, but you can't fire somebody for the wrong reason. It's one thing to fire somebody who doesn't share your political vision. It's quite another to fire somebody for refusing to bend to pressure from Republican senators desperate for an election issue. That's not what we're talking about here.
 
I guess that sounds reasonable in Ericworld, but you've failed to convince me counselor.
 
But what will Lintott do with all the machineguns and silencers Norm V. purchased for the DA's office?

The real question???????? What will she do with Tim Stoen? I don't know a thing about Faulder but Stoen is another matter.

Bye bye Tim. Do you think Paul Gallegos will give him a job?
 
"gallegos mistake was to wait too long to clean house".

Waiting too long.... maybe he just needs.... moore time.

Hilarious. You really think the current staff is superior to the one he inherited? On what basis?
Tell me what you saw, not what you heard, that gives
any credence to your judgement about the relative capacities.

And in terms of cleaning house, he only fired Albin,
Jackson and Dikeman of the felony deputies he inherited. Most of the "house cleaning" was firing (always concealed as something else) of underperformers he hired. The good lawyers mostly left on their own.
 
Well, first and foremost you have to have staff who won't undermine you, leak e-mails or telephone messages to the press, or take public stands against your cases.
 
Oh Eric Stop it ! Just stop it. When you continue to defend Gallegos your credibility just gets tarnished.

Everyone, with any insight (and this possibly includes you), knows that Tim leaked those e-mails! Come on! Why break into Timmies office, hack into the computer, overcome the password security, and then leak something that makes Stoen look good? Are you stupid or what? That's like the old party line that right wing PL/Dikeman supporters broke into Gallegos' house to "TURN UP THE HEAT". Come on! The whole thing would be comical if it weren't for the end result of a disfunctional ineffective DA's office.

And as I recall the telephone message was a voice mail he (PVG) left to one of the DDA's prior to his taking office! Correct me if I'm wrong.

Public stands against his cases ??? How about an example? Are you talking about Ken Miller and Tim Stoen's poochscrew case against PL? That one went far, and I don't want to hear about the whistle blower lawsuit case .. it's just too transparent.

Rose's blog has a list of all the attorneys that have left, many of them PVG's hires. Most of PVG's hires left because they were incompetent losers or loon's (at least one loon, the guy that got arrested for impersonating a military officer).
 
DA Lintott certainly has the right to have people sharing her views in her administration, especially as second in command, which Faulder was. Well and good. But what differences exist between her approach and that of Keith Faulder? I don't mean there may not be any, I mean that we don't know what they are and what this firing portends for the future conduct of the Mendocino County DA's office.

I don't think the parallels between this firing and the Dikeman firing in Humboldt necessary exist. Dikeman ran a negative campaign during the recall election in which he denigrated Gallegos' ability to run the DA's office. I don't recall any similar statements in the Mendocino campaign (which I did not follow in its entireity, so if Faulder made negative statements about Linott lets hear them.).

Putting off a murder prosecution as a side effect of firing Faulder may not be the mark of a good DA. If Faulder prepared the case and was ready to go it would have made more sense to allow him to do it, and leave at the end. Mendocino does full-day trials so its not like Faulder would be doing other work during the trial, and the trial was to start Monday. Perhaps Lintott didn't like Faulder's approach to the trial - right to relieve him of the duty. Perhaps another deputy DA is ready to step in to the gap and do the trial - not a mistep.

I hope more information comes to light because I do cases in Mendocino county quite often and would like to get a solid idea of what to expect in the months to come.

One more question: Lintott was in the DA's office as a deputy at one time. Was Faulder there also? Do they have some personal history from that time that would make working as boss-subordinate now not a great idea - like friction or arguments when they were both deputies?
 
DA Lintott certainly has the right to have people sharing her views in her administration, especially as second in command, which Faulder was. Well and good. But what differences exist between her approach and that of Keith Faulder? I don't mean there may not be any, I mean that we don't know what they are and what this firing portends for the future conduct of the Mendocino County DA's office.

I don't think the parallels between this firing and the Dikeman firing in Humboldt necessary exist. Dikeman ran a negative campaign during the recall election in which he denigrated Gallegos' ability to run the DA's office. I don't recall any similar statements in the Mendocino campaign (which I did not follow in its entireity, so if Faulder made negative statements about Linott lets hear them.).

Putting off a murder prosecution as a side effect of firing Faulder may not be the mark of a good DA. If Faulder prepared the case and was ready to go it would have made more sense to allow him to do it, and leave at the end. Mendocino does full-day trials so its not like Faulder would be doing other work during the trial, and the trial was to start Monday. Perhaps Lintott didn't like Faulder's approach to the trial - right to relieve him of the duty. Perhaps another deputy DA is ready to step in to the gap and do the trial - not a mistep.

I hope more information comes to light because I do cases in Mendocino county quite often and would like to get a solid idea of what to expect in the months to come.

One more question: Lintott was in the DA's office as a deputy at one time. Was Faulder there also? Do they have some personal history from that time that would make working as boss-subordinate now not a great idea - like friction or arguments when they were both deputies?
 
I would assume they had a conversation about it. But in the old days, the first thing a deposing king did was to kill off all the nobles who had supported the prior king.
 
I don't understand? When PVG fired AJ you guys thought that was AOK right? They are at will positions, you guys thought it was just fine to fire someone with no record of disiplinary, a good work ethic, who was extremely competent, respected by her co-workers, just becasue he could right? It was his right. So if Ms. Lintott wants to fire the guy so what. She can fire more, like PVG did. They can get pissed and leave. You can't have it both ways.
 
So Eric, in the day of the first amendment, the Hatch act, etc, your rationale for firing people who had the temerity to tell voters what was what is to cite the practices of persian emperors?

I love liberal, progressive hypocracy. I really do. You people must sit on revolving stools so you can turn away from inconvenient facts as fast as possible.

Again, you tell me how you knew who leaked emails.
Who got fired for that? Who "undermined" what policies? Who got fired for that? Not even Dikeman did? Who took public stands "against" his cases? You, sir, have no clothes. You work on innuendo and progressive sign language, but EVERY time there is a call for facts, you duck.
The fact is, the current staff has less experience, less respect from defense and bar, less competence, and fewer wins.
 
You failed to mention that the DA's Office has no respect from law enforcment.
 
But in the old days, the first thing a deposing king did was to kill off all the nobles who had supported the prior king.

Good times! Let's bring 'em back! Firing off civil servants who've looked at you crosseyed is pleasant enough, but it lacks visceral oomph.

Public hangings would be an inexpensive source of public entertainment and edification.
 
Again, you tell me how you knew who leaked emails.
Who got fired for that? Who "undermined" what policies? Who got fired for that? Not even Dikeman did? Who took public stands "against" his cases? You, sir, have no clothes. You work on innuendo and progressive sign language, but EVERY time there is a call for facts, you duck.
The fact is, the current staff has less experience, less respect from defense and bar, less competence, and fewer wins.


We'll probably never know who leaked the e-mails. Dikeman gave the telephone message to the press. And at the time he came in, about half the staff, bitter from Farmer's then recent loss, undermined him - which is what Gallegos was talking about in the message that Dikeman thought would help his campaign.
 
You tell me specifically how the staff "undermined" him. The lawyers and the support staff continued to work incredible hours, won cases, helped him win cases, he ran on their record. The undermining crap is pure Salzman. You tell me one thing that one lawyer did to "undermine", and you can leave out
Dikeman running for office, that's called democracy.

And again, you have apparently conceded that compared to the staff he had, the staff he has
is pathetic. Loyal though, to the Ayapallah. Better be, or you get strangled. Isn't that the way the old kings you now admire so much liked to do it?

Have you read "Team of Rivals"? Guess there's no worries of PVG being labelled Lincolnesque. More
like Hooveresque.
 
I'd say you're undermining your boss when you declare against him for being incompetant, hire a crusading loon he previously fired for your campaign manager, play a private phone message from him at your coming out party (that you think makes him look bad because he's begging for cooperation from the likes of you), and bad mouth your boss to every law enforcement officer in the county. That's my idea of undermining. What's yours?
 
You tell me one thing that one lawyer did to "undermine", and you can leave out
Dikeman running for office, that's called democracy.


Dikeman running was fine, but making comments on cases which hadn't been resolved was extremely inappropriate.

As to the undermining, Gallegos can't comment on it publicly because they involve personnel issues, and I'm not going to repeat the courthouse banter. He's in a catch 22 in that he can't defend himself against the attacks. However, I will refer you to the telephone message he left for Dikeman which Dikeman saw fit to save and release when he kicked off his campaign.

As for his current staff, they seem to be doing well, though some of them have been forced onto a steep learning curve. I've perused Rose's blog on occasion for evidence to the contrary, but there isn't much there. She's onto global warming and the Baykeepers right now.

I've read references by anonymous posters that cases are being defensed at a higher than normal rate, but nobody is posting anything to back up the claim. Certainly no specifics.
 
No specifics should be your motto.
Gallegos can't comment? Really? He told you this? Or you're finding excuses.

Personnel issues? The Albin case has resolved. He didn't mention undermining there. Jackson, the statute for filing has run. Dikeman? Done deal.

You're not going to repeat courthouse banter? Just parrot the PVG/Salzman party line instead. Nothing like a picky gossip.

The specifics are there. Compare the convictions and sentences achieved by Wade, Jackson, Gimle, Dikeman, Isaac, etc with what we have now. Look where those DDA's went, and what they are doing, cmpared to what we've got, and where they came from.

Gag order, anyone? How about that Eric? How would you react if one of your client's potential plea deals was outed in the newspaper, in the middle of the case, before there was a resolution. You'd have a fit. Steep learing curve? A topped out 4 is supposed to be teaching, not learning.
Pathetic, really, the whole shabby structure of PVG and his grovelling apologists.
 
Little Eric is pretty quiet now!
 
I am a friend of the Syfert family. I am angry beyond belief. Britney was shot in front of her family and died in her father’s arms. There was an extreme amount of witnesses. Generally a plea bargain is considered when there is a possibility that the prosecution might not succeed in their conviction. With as many witnesses as there was, I have a hard time believing that a plea bargain is even being considered. Lintott’s political maneuvering is denying Britney’s family’s need for justice. Shame on you Meredith.

Tangi Tunoa
Santa Rosa
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Free Website Counter
Free Web Site Counter

Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.
Click for www.electoral-vote.com