PDA

View Full Version : Weak District Attorney



Loren Swelk
07-17-2007, 12:35 AM
It certainly appears to me that unless the District Attorney can get some type of plea agreement, no matter how minor, he stands very little chance of winning a conviction at any level. Murderers have gone free when jailhouse snitches recant, baby sellers are guilty of nothing but a bad notary and so on. I am of the opinion that the DA's office has fallen apart and are scrambling to appear competent when indeed they are not. Maybe with all of those years as a politician Bill has forgot how to be a lawyer. The prosecution of serious crimes is a quantum leap from sponsoring legislation and glad handing political donors.

large
07-17-2007, 07:02 AM
I made comment about Mr. Thiebault's abilities over two years ago, and again during and after the last election . . I said then and I'll say it again, Thiebault's a Politician, not a lawyer . . and were he much of a politician he'd have aspired to move up, not down, in the pecking order . .

The "Baby Sale" Case is just the tip of the iceberg . . but a damned good indicator of how the office is currently 'Working" . . It's not, apparently, and while I considered Karl Taemler as "mediochre" as a prosecutor, he, apparently, was the star. And his leaving, apparently also, was about this very case . . He didn't feel it should have been prosecuted, nor publicized . . and apparently Thiebault did . . for political gain obviously, because there really wasn't much substance to it in the first place, as far as I could see, based upon the news media's reports.

However . . There's still another set of laws that were broken, and it's being discussed . . The fact that both Uribe-Lopez (The Mother) and Irene Lerma are Illegal Aliens, and haven't yet been deported . . why not? Had I been the D.A. that's where I would have gone, immediately . . send 'em back to where they came from! And while it's sad that Mrs. Lerma has a family here, as it is with a lot of Illegals, she's still here illegally and is fully aware of both that fact and the repercussions . .

The idea that if one can enter this country illegally, and then get knocked up, freeing you of deportation or any legal recourse is pure Bull$hit . . Starting a family after commiting a crime does not spare you in any court in the country for any infraction . . so why should it in the case of illegal entry into this country?

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 01:08 PM
Not being familiar with Mr. Thiebault, I can't comment on him, but I would like to say that State District Attorney's represent the people of the State of Colorado in State District Courts which have no standing or authority to try violations of Federal laws. Since entering the country illegally is a violation of Federal Code, a State District Attorney cannot prosecute anyone for being an illegal alien nor can they deport anyone.

large
07-17-2007, 03:23 PM
IF . . You are wanted for any other federal misdeameanor (or felony) on the books, and if the local police or sheriff runs your ID (or lack of one) through NCIC and you come up with a warrant or violation, betcha they hold you until the feds (whichever agency) comes and gets you . .

The fact that ignoring ONE particular federal violation happens, and that particular specialized training is required to arrest and hold those breaking that particular law is, again, Bull$hit . .

Not to mention, holding a hearing to ascertain whether an illegal alien should be deported . . There shouldn't be any discussion . . Nor consideration of ties, particular job or time illegally in this country . . Just a green bus South . . and jail the guy that employed that illegal . .

After all, if I don't have a valid driver's license either on a Military Post or the State Highway, the hearing is about what to do with me, not whether I broke a law some how . .

Loren Swelk
07-17-2007, 04:29 PM
This thread is taking a turn away from the incompetence of the DA. That is OK because it is symptomatic of another concern. Wouldn't it be the responsibility of the DA to inform the Feds of a possible violation of federal law? I, as a citizen, would certainly hope so. It is indeed interesting that the public defenders office who is underfunded and overworked and without the vast resources and investigative powers of the District Attorney routinely kicks the DA's a$$ in the courtroom. Maybe that is why the majority of cases that can't be plea bargained are dropped. It is better to never have gone to court than to go to court and lose. I believe I shall call that the Thiebault Principle. The corollary of course would be the Nifong Addendum. Never admit you are wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Blunder along until it costs you your job, reputation, law license and future.
To spend all of that money and resources for a bad notary conviction is a serious lapse in fiducuary responsibility of the taxpayers money!

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 07:24 PM
Large - Yes, law enforcement at all levels, Federal, State, County, and City will apprehend and hold anyone identified and wanted for a crime at any other level or any other jurisdiction.

I was specifically addressing the authority and standing of a State District Attorney who does not apprehend or hold anyone, nor can they prosecute cases other than those against State Statutes.

Loren Swelk - According to the Chieftain article, both of these people face Federal Immigration Hearings, so how do you know the District Attorney didn't relay information to the Feds? In any case, why would he have to report information to them they already possess?

Both - As to the rest of your comments, you cannot assume I disagree or agree with you or want to discuss them.

Zen Curmudgeon
07-17-2007, 07:24 PM
It is indeed interesting that the public defenders office who is underfunded and overworked and without the vast resources and investigative powers of the District Attorney routinely kicks the DA's a$$ in the courtroom. Is there some sort of scorecard for this that identifies the attorneys as DA and PD?

ZC

Loren Swelk
07-17-2007, 07:43 PM
Is there some sort of scorecard for this that identifies the attorneys as DA and PD?

ZC



Only as defendants (DA) and plaintiffs (PD or private attorney)

LS

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 07:50 PM
Is there some sort of scorecard for this that identifies the attorneys as DA and PD?

ZC

I don't know about a scorecard, but surely the attorneys can be specifically identified in each criminal court case as either for the prosecution (the DA's side) or for the defendent. And if the attorney is either employed by the Public Defender's office or court appointed because the defendent cannot afford one to represent him, then that attorney would be a public defender. I would think that an attorney who is not directly employed by the DA's or PD's office, might well be hired by either side over the course of time to be on either side for different cases. I don't know how often they have to hire the independents, if ever, though.

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 08:19 PM
Is there some sort of scorecard for this that identifies the attorneys as DA and PD?

ZC



Only as defendants (DA) and plaintiffs (PD or private attorney)

LS

I think you're a bit confused here, Loren Swelk. The term "plaintiff" is used in civil actions for the person bringing on a legal complaint for which there will necessarily be a "respondent" who is the alleged cause for the legal complaint. In criminal cases the adversaries are the prosecution and the defendant. Also, the DA is the prosecution, representing the people, not the representative of the defendant. There may well be cases where DA's might bring on civil cases and would be plaintiffs or they might become the respondents in civil cases for their district's, but their primary job is to prosecute criminal cases. Certainly, the many city and county attorneys, state attorney generals, and the U. S. Attorney General's office perform those functions in civil cases.

large
07-17-2007, 08:31 PM
Hmmm, there are "Court appointed Attorneys" . . and Public Defenders. But they aren't the same . . Public defenders are paid by the state to defend those who cannot afford legal representation, and are part and parcel of the system.

Court Appointed Attorneys generally aren't that lucky . . often, they receive little or no reimbursement, and they may be appointed for a myriad of reasons . . not necessarily a criminal defense in every case . .

We also saw what can happen when a D.A. tries to hire an experienced local lawyer who has been a leading criminal defense Lawyer . . Conflict of Interest rears it's ugly head and the D.A. cannot try any of his upcoming cases. They have to go to other venues.

Scores are indeed kept, both by the D.A. in office and the opposing political party, as well as the media, local and sometimes national, depending on how many times you fumble a high profile case, such as the one Mr. Thiebault just dropped in the mud . . and the "Scoreboards" are brought out everytime the office is contested!

Loren Swelk
07-17-2007, 08:48 PM
So, Born in Pueblo, you knew the answer to the question you asked, you just wanted to pontificate. Swell.

Thanks for your cogent replies Large, I enjoy your insight.

Loren

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 10:20 PM
Hmmm, there are "Court appointed Attorneys" . . and Public Defenders. But they aren't the same . . Public defenders are paid by the state to defend those who cannot afford legal representation, and are part and parcel of the system.

Court Appointed Attorneys generally aren't that lucky . . often, they receive little or no reimbursement, and they may be appointed for a myriad of reasons . . not necessarily a criminal defense in every case . .

We also saw what can happen when a D.A. tries to hire an experienced local lawyer who has been a leading criminal defense Lawyer . . Conflict of Interest rears it's ugly head and the D.A. cannot try any of his upcoming cases. They have to go to other venues.

Scores are indeed kept, both by the D.A. in office and the opposing political party, as well as the media, local and sometimes national, depending on how many times you fumble a high profile case, such as the one Mr. Thiebault just dropped in the mud . . and the "Scoreboards" are brought out everytime the office is contested!

You are totally wrong. Court appointed attorneys are paid in criminal cases. That is the only reason I lumped them with the Public Defender's office, in that, they are not paid for by their client, but by taxpayer's (public) money. Some attorneys are voluntarily willing to take on clients without being paid, but that is a separate category. The state has no right to demand services from any of it's citizen's without adequate compensation for that service. That would be a manifestation of involuntary servitude and illegal.

As to scores, I never entered into that part of the debate and don't intend to do so.

BornInPueblo
07-17-2007, 10:25 PM
So, Born in Pueblo, you knew the answer to the question you asked, you just wanted to pontificate. Swell.

Thanks for your cogent replies Large, I enjoy your insight.

Loren

Funny, I wonder what question I asked that you thought I knew the answer to?

You need not take comfort from Large's reply, because my comments to your post are valid and still apply.

large
07-18-2007, 07:51 AM
Hmmm, feisty, but opinionated . . which you can be unless fact is called for . .


You are totally wrong. Court appointed attorneys are paid in criminal cases.

"Court appointed" attorneys aren't always paid . . frequently they are "Stiffed' by the same courts who either sought them out or appointed them on the spot, based only on the fact that they just happened to be in the courtroom at the time . .I have seen this occur, personally, only two times . . but based upon the fact that I have spent very little time in a courtroom, that tends to indicate this isn't an analomy . . as far as payment . . it sucks . . ask any lawyer. Often the paperwork required to be paid, costs more to assemble than the attorney will receive in payment . .

As far as an attorney taking a case "Pro Bono" or not charging for his services, that is done, often in High profile cases where the publicity will benefit the attorney (or his firm) in the long run. But seldom, if ever done in run of the mill cases where the defendant (or plaintiff) cannot afford an attorney . .

And . . The "State" does not demand a Lawyer's Services, THE COURT does . . Ask a Judge, (perhaps Adele Anderson) and they will tell you there is a Difference . . even if there's not supposed to be . . and no matter how it's put, when a Judge "asks" an attorney present in his/her Courtroom to represent a defendant on the spot, if you know what's good for you in that court the next time you come in, Y'better do what the Judge has implied that he/she desires . . as a witness of the two events, I never heard payment for services rendered mentioned.

And later, in a social setting, I met one of the Attorney's . . and we discussed that particular situation. He had never been paid for the five times he appeared nor for the filings he was required to do for the defendant, in that particular case, A second offense DUI, no Driver's License, several traffic offenses, and a drug paraphenalia charge . . which ended up as a plea bargain . . as he said, "It's all part of the Game". . and his firm declared it a "Pro Bono" after the second attempt to collect only the filing fees . .

So you see, I'm not "Totally Wrong" or even close to being so . . and you're just a little short on facts . . Things aren't always the way they're supposed to be . .

Zen Curmudgeon
07-18-2007, 02:19 PM
As far as an attorney taking a case "Pro Bono" or not charging for his services, that is done, often in High profile cases where the publicity will benefit the attorney (or his firm) in the long run. But seldom, if ever done in run of the mill cases where the defendant (or plaintiff) cannot afford an attorney . .Probono.net (http://www.probono.net/) lists 35,000 members, 21,000 of whom are pro bono attorneys; the American Bar Association (http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/probono/home.html) manages a pretty big pro bono directory, including its Death Penalty Representation Project, which has matched over 100 unrepresented death row inmates with free legal representation in the past 10 years; the Department of Justice has a big pro bono project in its immigration review section (http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/probono/probono.htm); even the Salvation Army (http://www.probono.ca/) sponsors a pro bono referral service.

Google lists over 1.9 million hits for "pro bono lawyer".

ZC

BornInPueblo
07-18-2007, 03:02 PM
"Court appointed" attorneys aren't always paid . . frequently they are "Stiffed' by the same courts who either sought them out or appointed them on the spot, based only on the fact that they just happened to be in the courtroom at the time . .I have seen this occur, personally, only two times . . but based upon the fact that I have spent very little time in a courtroom, that tends to indicate this isn't an analomy . . as far as payment . . it sucks . . ask any lawyer. Often the paperwork required to be paid, costs more to assemble than the attorney will receive in payment . .

As far as an attorney taking a case "Pro Bono" or not charging for his services, that is done, often in High profile cases where the publicity will benefit the attorney (or his firm) in the long run. But seldom, if ever done in run of the mill cases where the defendant (or plaintiff) cannot afford an attorney . .

And . . The "State" does not demand a Lawyer's Services, THE COURT does . . Ask a Judge, (perhaps Adele Anderson) and they will tell you there is a Difference . . even if there's not supposed to be . . and no matter how it's put, when a Judge "asks" an attorney present in his/her Courtroom to represent a defendant on the spot, if you know what's good for you in that court the next time you come in, Y'better do what the Judge has implied that he/she desires . . as a witness of the two events, I never heard payment for services rendered mentioned.


Source: Colorado Statutes : TITLE 21 STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER : ARTICLE 2 ALTERNATE DEFENSE COUNSEL : 21-2-105. Contracts with attorneys and investigators.

21-2-105. Contracts with attorneys and investigators.

(1) On and after January 1, 1997, the alternate defense counsel shall contract, where feasible, without prior approval of the court, for the provision of attorney services for cases described in section 21-2-103 (1). To provide for adequate legal representation of indigent persons, the office of alternate defense counsel may contract, where feasible, without prior approval of the court, for the provision of investigative services for cases described in section 21-1-103 (1). The office of alternate defense counsel shall establish, where feasible, a list of approved contract attorneys to serve as counsel and a list of approved investigators to provide investigative services in such cases. As a condition of placement on the approved list, the contracting attorney or investigator shall agree to provide services based on the terms to be established in a contract, at either a fixed fee or the hourly rate for reimbursement set by the supreme court. Terms of the contract shall be negotiated between the alternate defense counsel and the contract attorney or investigator. Contracts made with an attorney shall specify that the services shall be provided subject to the Colorado rules of professional conduct.

(2) Contracts made pursuant to this section shall provide for reasonable compensation and reimbursement for expenses necessarily incurred, to be fixed and paid from state funds appropriated therefor. The office of alternate defense counsel shall review the bills submitted for reimbursement by any contract attorney or investigator and may approve or deny the payment of such bills in whole or in part based on the terms set forth in the contract negotiated between the alternate defense counsel and the contract attorney or investigator.

large
07-18-2007, 03:03 PM
I was speaking of those "Court appointed" attorneys that a judge appoints either by assigning the case and notifying him or his firm or appointment on the spot in the courtroom . .

Organized "Pro Bono" agreements with certain organizations and the ABA wasn't mentioned because it's a moot point . . a Judge isn't going to grab a phone book and search for a "Pro Bono" Attorney during a court session, that isn't what Judges do . . But again, the ABA, the ACLU and many other organizations usually take "Pro Bono" cases where there's high case profile and lots of media . . after all, in most cases again, "Pro Bono" is no more than Lawyerly Promotion of their profession by those who can afford it . . it long ago ceased to be lawyers looking out for the dispossesed and poor who cannot afford legal representation . .

If that were the case, there would be far fewer poor people on death rows in this country. A good share of them are there because they had "Court Appointed Attorneys" who were paid so well they totally neglected their client's defense . .

IF the ABA or other "Pro Bono" organizations were really doing their jobs, most of those guys on death row wouldn't have been sent there in the first place and there'd be nobody to "Save" . . And 1.9 million lawyers sitting around waiting for somebody to call them so they can work for nothing is a misleading statistic, because, I'd bet, they turn down 50 to 75% of the cases they're called about . . probably more. I know of a Firm who represents employees who have been discriminated against, and they only take on 5 per year . . and you'd have better have good documentation when you present your case to them!

Of course, you may cite as many exceptions as you wish . . because there are . . nothing's carved in stone . . But statistically, I'm right . .

Loren Swelk
07-18-2007, 03:10 PM
Large,
You have forgotten one of the most important idioms in trying to be reasonable and use common sense in this forum. "Never get into a wrestling match with a pig, you both get dirty, but the pig likes it".
Loren Swelk

large
07-18-2007, 03:41 PM
Now, I wouldn't call anyone a pig . . but "Dense" . . Yeah . . Born in is arguing about the duties of a State Attorney General or such . . and as the State's top lawman, one would think he'd be concerned about those who break all laws . . apparently Born in doesn't feel that to be part of his job . . I suppose next, the locals will be ignoring Bank Robbers . . after all, that's a Federal Offense also!

Zen Curmudgeon
07-18-2007, 08:41 PM
Of course, you may cite as many exceptions as you wish . . because there are . . nothing's carved in stone . . But statistically, I'm right . .

Hmmm, feisty, but opinionated . . which you can be unless fact is called for . . Is calling for a statistic the same as as calling for a fact? Three significant digits, if you please.

ZC

BornInPueblo
07-18-2007, 09:28 PM
I was speaking of those "Court appointed" attorneys that a judge appoints either by assigning the case and notifying him or his firm or appointment on the spot in the courtroom . .

...


Of course, you may cite as many exceptions as you wish . . because there are . . nothing's carved in stone . . But statistically, I'm right . .

I regret ever using the term "Court appointed," because in reality they are not. In criminal cases the defendant must submit a form answering questions about his assets and income and financial ability to hire an attorney to defend him. In fact, the court merely reviews the information on that form and assigns the case to the Public Defender's office if it decides the defendant is, indeed, indigent. It is then the Public Defender who must represent the defendant, and only in cases of a "conflict of interest" within the Public Defender's office that an alternative contracted defense attorney is assigned to the case.

The few cases of anecdotal information you have represented here are no doubt about relatively minor infractions involving misdemeanors and relative short times of representation from attorneys present. They are merely hearsay and may be an abuse of power by the judge, if true. They certainly aren't supported by Colorado Statutes and are therefore irrelevant from a legal standpoint.

Murder's on death row and felons convicted of other crimes in Colorado were never represented by an attorney they did not hire themselves or by their family or some other interested party, were probono, or a statutorily authorized and paid Public Defender or alternative contracted defense attorney by the Public Defender's office.

BornInPueblo
07-18-2007, 09:42 PM
Hmmm, feisty, but opinionated . . which you can be unless fact is called for . . .

The opinionated side is indeed yours to have and to hold. That's why I posted the facts from the actual Colorado State Statutes. Hearsay and anecdotal statements from conversations with unknown persons and observations made by you in infrequent court observations do not represent fact.

BornInPueblo
07-18-2007, 10:16 PM
Now, I wouldn't call anyone a pig . . but "Dense" . . Yeah . . Born in is arguing about the duties of a State Attorney General or such . . and as the State's top lawman, one would think he'd be concerned about those who break all laws . . apparently Born in doesn't feel that to be part of his job . . I suppose next, the locals will be ignoring Bank Robbers . . after all, that's a Federal Offense also!

When I originally replied to you about the subject, this had to do with your statement of what you would do if you were the "District Attorney" and how you would see that the illegal immigrants were prosecuted and deported. My response to you was that no Colorado State District Attorney has the legal authority or standing to do so. I stand by that response, and if you think I am wrong, then you should come up with facts to refute it. I only made one small reference to the "State Attorney General" in one of my replies. It matters not whether any of these state officials are concerned about the breaking of any law or not, but about what their job is and what they are authorized and have standing in a court of law to perform. Neither I nor you can assume that because they may not make a public statement and have no authority to pursue a course of action, that they are not concerned about it.

Robbery is indeed an offense that a District Attorney can prosecute in Colorado. It is also a Federal offense that a U.S. Attorney can prosecute if it involves a federally charted bank. Whether or not the state or the feds do the prosecuting is often worked out between the two who have the stronger case and, sometimes, the resulting punishment for it.

You seem to have a real problem with recognizing the court system from the executive system. Thus, you want to equate that a District Attorney must be the same as a law enforcement officer. They are not the same thing. A District Attorney is an official that represents the people in a court of law, while a law enforcement officer is a protector of the people in the executive function. It is not the authorized duty of a District Attorney to arrest people, to detain people, to deport people, or to enforce the law in any way. Those are functions of law enforcement agencies.

You can unfairly represent me in anyway you choose to do so, but you cannot state facts that refute what I state.

BornInPueblo
07-18-2007, 10:32 PM
Large,
You have forgotten one of the most important idioms in trying to be reasonable and use common sense in this forum. "Never get into a wrestling match with a pig, you both get dirty, but the pig likes it".
Loren Swelk

You have forgotten what facts, reasonable, and common sense even means. It is obvious that all you want to do is hold onto Large's tail in order to make yourself seem more important and more intelligent than you are. You only recognize me as a pig because I successfully refuted your previous statements and like the minor, irrelevant, and idiotic statements you have made, you think you are being pulled up from the ashes to some sort of grace. You are clearly not.

large
07-19-2007, 08:11 AM
You seem to have a real problem with recognizing the court system from the executive system. Thus, you want to equate that a District Attorney must be the same as a law enforcement officer. They are not the same thing. A District Attorney is an official that represents the people in a court of law, while a law enforcement officer is a protector of the people in the executive function. It is not the authorized duty of a District Attorney to arrest people, to detain people, to deport people, or to enforce the law in any way. Those are functions of law enforcement agencies.

I have no problem with separation of powers at all . . either between law enforcement, prosecution or the legislative branch. But I do have a problem with how those powers are deferred at will . . a prosecutor has, apparently, choices about who he prosecutes and why, which is the root of this thread . .

And apparently, either the judicial side has been far too efficient in allowing criminal's rights in evidence gathering, or the prosecutors are demanding little in evidence from law enforcement to pursue a case . . and in several instances, the prosecutors (not just in Pueblo County) have sought "short cuts" in their evidence gathering such as "Jail House Snitches" (which, often as not, burns the prosecution, either in direct testimony or in appeal) or use of the Media (which again, has burned more prosecutors than suspects).

That being said, I will again refer back to statements I have made in the past in this forum and the Letters to the Editors of the host newspaper. Bill Thiebault is a Hack Politician first, and anything else second . . as a prosecutor he has continually shot himself in the foot, costing Pueblo County money that could easily have been spent for nearly anything else worthwhile . . Venue changes due to conflicts of interest, continuing intrigue with his first prosecutor Carl Taemler, inability to even convict a murderer of jaywalking, due to his reliance upon, again, Jailhouse Snitches. Failure to convict a bar owner of attempted murder, again, due to his Jailhouse Snitches . . and now the current flap about the Lermas . . six months of investigation, Continual conviction in the newspapers by press releases from the Pueblo County D.A.s Office, an internal flap, disagreement as to whether prosecution was possible, but ole Bill weathered on, at the taxpayer's expense . . It would've been far more reasonable to hand the two illegals over to ICE, insist they be deported and fine Mr. Lerma for illegal paperwork (or whatever) . . Six months ago . .

Y'see, it isn't Separation of Powers I don't understand, it's separation of politics and stupidity from the job . . I didn't define levels, but apparently you choose to . . Stupidity and ineptitude seem to follow politics far more than the job title.

BornInPueblo
07-20-2007, 12:04 AM
I have no problem with separation of powers at all . . either between law enforcement, prosecution or the legislative branch. But I do have a problem with how those powers are deferred at will . . a prosecutor has, apparently, choices about who he prosecutes and why, which is the root of this thread . .

And apparently, either the judicial side has been far too efficient in allowing criminal's rights in evidence gathering, or the prosecutors are demanding little in evidence from law enforcement to pursue a case . . and in several instances, the prosecutors (not just in Pueblo County) have sought "short cuts" in their evidence gathering such as "Jail House Snitches" (which, often as not, burns the prosecution, either in direct testimony or in appeal) or use of the Media (which again, has burned more prosecutors than suspects).

That being said, I will again refer back to statements I have made in the past in this forum and the Letters to the Editors of the host newspaper. Bill Thiebault is a Hack Politician first, and anything else second . . as a prosecutor he has continually shot himself in the foot, costing Pueblo County money that could easily have been spent for nearly anything else worthwhile . . Venue changes due to conflicts of interest, continuing intrigue with his first prosecutor Carl Taemler, inability to even convict a murderer of jaywalking, due to his reliance upon, again, Jailhouse Snitches. Failure to convict a bar owner of attempted murder, again, due to his Jailhouse Snitches . . and now the current flap about the Lermas . . six months of investigation, Continual conviction in the newspapers by press releases from the Pueblo County D.A.s Office, an internal flap, disagreement as to whether prosecution was possible, but ole Bill weathered on, at the taxpayer's expense . . It would've been far more reasonable to hand the two illegals over to ICE, insist they be deported and fine Mr. Lerma for illegal paperwork (or whatever) . . Six months ago . .

Y'see, it isn't Separation of Powers I don't understand, it's separation of politics and stupidity from the job . . I didn't define levels, but apparently you choose to . . Stupidity and ineptitude seem to follow politics far more than the job title.

From the very beginning of my posts here, I said I didn't know very much about Mr. Thiebault, and would not directly comment about him specifically and have not done so. I have simply tried to correct some of the things I saw as clearly being either misunderstood, wrongly assumed, or incorrectly defined.

large
07-20-2007, 07:57 AM
ANYBODY can look in a book or at Wikipedia for definitions and corrections of grammar . . And . . in the way it was inferred, you must be a retired English Teacher with little understanding of the facts but want to interject what little knowledge you have of the subject at hand . .

And separation of powers or not, as a lowly citizen, one has the obligation of reporting laws being broken . . without that and a total dependance of the law enforcement agencies to find and arrest any lawbreaker, we'd be pretty much in the same situation those Sunni's and Shiite's are in today in Iraq . . nobody reports the bomb being built, they just whine when it goes off! Thus, a District Attorney, or any other minion of the State should be concerned and working within the powers assigned him, to stop lawbreaking where ever it happens . . and then sort out who gets to do what to the offender . . turf wars notwithstanding . .

Isn't that the basis of any law abiding country?

It's certainly odd that we can convict, and sentence a man to jail, fine him $200,000 for not being able to remember what was said to certain people 2-3 years back, but we can choose to ignore the breaking of the law by 12 million people . . selectively . .

large
08-17-2007, 07:22 AM
Another asterisk on Mr. Thiebault's impressive record (as well as the city's) is the recent arrest and "Perp Walk" initiated by the Pueblo County D. A. on "Unspecified" charges.

Whyizzit that the law can arrest a person who has been suspected of a crime, even murder in a lot of instances, be arrested upon agreement of turning himself in at a specific time and place. Saving the law enforcement agency and the municipality or county it works within X amount of dollars.

But in the case of Mike Zaremba, a long time Golf Pro who has run all three local golf courses, and is a relatively high profile citizen of the area, and unlikely flight risk, the local D. A. Thiebault decided to make a high profile arrest in DENVER, on a golf course, where Zaremba was doing what he's supposed to be doing, playing GOLF. Quite like he was guilty of bank Robbery, murder or being a high profile member of organized crime . .

Thiebault can't get a conviction of jaywalking against any of the high profile Murder Suspects, or drug dealers he's had to prosecute, but he can make a grand jury case of theft of city funds of between $1000 to $20,000 and have the guy arrested in public and perp walked off a Professional Golf Tournament.

Perhaps I missed something here, or are we looking at ONE CHEAP, UNTALENTED POLITICIAN?

Bottom line here, I'd bet when the smoke clears, based upon past dealings with the City Finance Department, chances are, they made the mistake (s) or this is "Backwash" and book keeping carryover from the deal last year where Zaremba's accountant embezzled over $300k from Zaremba's golf course operations. At the time Dave Galli assured the public that no public money or facilities had been compromised . . and y'gotta just ask yourself, "$300k and none of it affected the city . . Godd*mn! How much money do those golf courses make? and why do we have to subsidize them?"

I believe, one, the city is trying to cover their collective a$$es and Thiebault found a way to make some political hay . .

One more comment, this morning's paper quoted him as saying he was surprised at the scuttlebutt that had been generated by the nature of Zaremba's arrest.

"How can someone be outraged at that and not outraged at the theft itself?" He said.

So, Bill, we have to ask; "How much actually was stolen?" If it was only a thousand dollars, perhaps not, $20,000, on the other hand, we'd tend to believe Mike Zaremba is a tad stupid. Either being the case, we're not as outraged as just disappointed . . Outrage might begin when the public finds out how much you have spent discovering this . . . ! And that you're still cashing a mnthly paycheck from Pueblo County!

large
08-21-2007, 08:58 AM
To continue this thread. . poor ole Bill, th' D.A. seems to be puzzled about the public opinions that keep stacking up against his "public arrest" of Mike Zaremba . .

And yet, no precise figure or specific method of theft has been detailed, either by The D.A. or the City, just that he stole somewhere between $7,000 and $18,000, and that he attempted to create a conspiracy with others, most notably another Golf Pro . . who, for whatever reason went to the city last year to report the crime(s).

Of course, one motive might have been the $800k+ per year that Zaremba's operation paid from the city . . Better than a salary, Hmmm?

Perhaps the city wants a sweeter deal than they can get from Zaremba, or did the city's semi functioning book keepers find an error they missed when Zaremba's book keeper was discovered skimming profits?

Is this more than a simple embezzlement scheme by someone who really wouldn't need to do something like this . . ? Why does the City Manager and the Pueblo County D.A. seem to want Zaremba to appear more guilty than he might be?

Loren Swelk
08-21-2007, 09:50 AM
It is easy to figure out why Poor ole' Bill opted for the Swat team to arrest Zaremba infront of his friends and colleagues, thus assuring front page headlines for a few days. If you can't win in the courtroom maybe he can win in the media. And on a similar note. Didn't Sheriff Taylor used to work for Poor ole' Bill? He may have learned from him, but time will tell if he learned anything useful. I believe they both will be eating crow sandwichs before these two stories fully play out.

Zen Curmudgeon
08-23-2007, 08:24 PM
Somebody indict somebody quick!


Wil Wheaton Indicted for Role in Robot Fighting Ring (http://www.bbspot.com/News/2007/08/wil-wheaton-indicted-for-role-in-robot-fighting-ring.html)
By Brian Briggs

Los Angeles, CA Ė Actor and Internet personality, Wil Wheaton, has been indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of promoting and hosting a robot fighting ring.
http://www.bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2007/08/wheaton.jpg
Prosecutors allege Wheaton kicked and electrocuted robots that weren't performing well, as many as fifteen robots. "He just blew their circuits," said US Attorney Bob Schrumpkin.ZC

Zen Curmudgeon
08-24-2007, 08:10 PM
To continue this thread. . poor ole Bill, th' D.A. seems to be puzzled about the public opinions that keep stacking up against his "public arrest" of Mike Zaremba . . Do we need to point out that arrests are, by design, "public"? Sort of on purpose, you know, the secret arrest being one of the drivers of the American Revolution.


And yet, no precise figure or specific method of theft has been detailed, either by The D.A. or the City, Umm. . . is this where we mention that Mr. Thiebaut is a District Attorney, not a City attorney? Uh, you're right, everyone here knows the difference. Should we then move on to the obvious question of "precise figure or specific method" criticism? Let's see, aren't you the guy bemoaning trials in the press instead of the courts? Perhaps, large, you should exercise patience and wait for the details to be unveiled in the appropriate forum, id est, a court of law, not the Chieftain forum.

ZC

large
08-25-2007, 09:46 AM
Well, y'see m'boy . . We're dealing with a city administration who doesn't even understand the decimal point well . . I believe a couple years back, Mr. Galli (and his crew at finance) misplaced a decimal point to the tune of . . . Ten Million dollars . . Yep, same guy . . and the crow was very cold before it was consumed, before a very small crowd . . I think the city council was the only witnesses . .

Thus, I think, the need for something more specific . .

So, here's the deal. Were I Bill Thiebault (and I'm not) I think I'd have low profiled this one every chance I got . . And since both Zaremba and his attorney knew this little soap opera might be in the making, I, as the D. A., would have just placed a call to Mr. Zaremba's attorney and had him come in on Monday morning . . Arrests do not have to be "secret" but there's a lot of difference between a Perp Walk with brass band and the guy turning himself in . .

I also would have stated publicly that Mr. Zaremba was released on his own personal recognizance on undisclosed charges pertaining to his business with the city . . Bill didn't and he wasn't . . Zaremba was treated as a "Flight Risk" . .

As we have seen in the past, some of these "prosecutions" die a very quiet death . . this one won't, and because of the stance taken at the outset, both Thiebault and Galli will have to prosecute this one "to the death".

Because, there's a lot of crow ready for the microwave if they lose! And losing will be almost anything outside of the original indictment because of how they treated the suspect . .

Regarding trial by Media . . If you publicly arrest a guy for mass murder in front of the world, and treat him as a mass murderer, then you at least ought to relate to the press or Media who it was he Murdered . . it's kind of a 50/50 deal here . .

The whole deal smacks of partisan politics and Bill Thiebault's inability to convict, lessee, a couple of murderers, a rapist and a whole bunch of gang bangers . . So, instead, he'll "Protect" us from a suspected embezzler from a Golf Course and a guy who was growing dope with a state permit . . By getting them on the front page . .

D*mn, somehow I just don't feel too "Protected" . . .

Nicole Delzer
08-25-2007, 11:11 PM
I just have to chime in on this horrific, overzealous use of power... I hope the person responsible for Mike Zaremba's arrest in Broomfield reads this.

I am not from Pueblo; not even from Colorado. However, I would venture to say that many of the residents of Pueblo are ashamed by your actions. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but your actions DO reflect on your community.

I am appalled at your lack of decency, not to mention practicality of arresting Mike Zaremba while at a golf tournament in Broomfield. You obviously have an axe to grind and used your power to design a scheme to blatantly embarrass Mr. Zaremba. Many of his peers in the golf industry are disgusted by these actions as well. You arenít gaining any fans out there, only proving your ego and judgment are out of control.

I am certain Mike's home and work address (which he must frequent) are available to you, or was that too easy? I think you should detail what transpired to come to the decision that a radical and public arrest was necessary. I would assume you wouldn't come out to defend yourself and your actions because you donít have any good reasons. I think we would find out they are frivolous and personal vendettas. I think itís all about you and your ego needed a little boost.

Your actions already tell me what kind of person you are; a narcissistic, egotistical, hothead who lacks any decency or common sense. Congratulations on becoming ďA$$hole of the YearĒ in my book.

You possess very poor judgment and I think you should be fired.

large
09-06-2007, 08:01 AM
OK, NOW the City manager has decided to "Audit" the golf course contracts with Zaremba . .

I thought ole Bill Thiebault had all this information when he indicted Zaremba and declared him a High Criminal and a flight risk . . . How else could one find out that money was being embezzled or stolen? Apparently Zaremba was "Convicted" in a Grand jury by heresay presented by an Employee of Zaremba's who, himself, might desire to enjoy the contracts that Zaremba held with the city, and sought to remove his bidding competitor . . Suppose?

I dunno what Mike Zaremba's Financial Situation might be, but I'm pretty sure that any businessman in Pueblo, who would have a continuous contract with the City for a business that grossed over $800k per year plus profits from the Pro Shops and restaurants, could, if he needed to, acquire the $20K he's supposed to have stolen, with a signature loan from any one of several of the banks in this community . . Maybe he couldn't, but logically . . .

And then the City Manager announces an audit . . After the fact . . Hmmmm?