Comments on: InlandPolitics Commentary: A battle of Good vs. Evil

By: Bob Conaway

Bob Conaway — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:45:44 +0000

Whew…the more I read, the more I really wish someone would look at all this and sort it out. I thought and still believe that someone with a new and unconnected perspective should look at all this and start the disclosure process, so we can put behind us all the venom, hate, anger and focus our energies on making the County not just a better place to work, but a better community. Bob Conaway

By: AntiCorruptionUnit

AntiCorruptionUnit — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 02:02:41 +0000

Thanks Sarge for finding that article, that puts even more things in perspective.

Hackleman and Ramos, you guys are really a couple of class acts, about as smart as the tattoo police in the Ristow case.

Stevie what do you want to know about Ray Pryke and the Counseling Team issue, I am a witness in that case that has been going on for 8 years now?

One of the other reasons I was fired, for my deposition in that matter.
Something I said about Penrod and the mafia.

But I have the great Mrs. Nancy Bohls Penrod depositions in this case if you want to really understand that education and positions in life DO NOT make you smart.

What did Forrest Gump say, “stupid is as stupid does”??

By: Little Stevie Wonder

Little Stevie Wonder — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 19:56:49 +0000

Thanks Sarge, that really sheds light on the situation for me…no wonder Mark at the Sentinel is the target, besides his articles exposing Mikey’s womanizing ways, he was in the middle of the Merritt “leak” accusations and associated retaliation that were the subject of the settlement made in Merritt’s favor. What is Ray Pryke’s deal hanging his publisher out to dry and obviously setting him up for the SLAP suit filed by a County contractor that also doubles as the ex-sheriff’s domestic partner? Lets hear the story again about why ex-sheriff Penrod recently (2009) got a warning letter from the FPPC regarding his numerous problems with his Form 700 and campaign filings (or should I say non-filings) and the on-going conflict with his wife Nancy Bohl’s company The Counseling Team, International. Hey doesn’t DA Mikey Ramos “The Enabler” have the real jurisdiction over these violations of GC Sect 1090 et. seq. and he’s just playing the “selective prostitution” game again, this time involving one of the County’s paid consultants/ contractors? Shame on you Mikey, shame, shame, shame.

By: truthseekerSBC

truthseekerSBC — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:47:50 +0000

This kind of corruption…the decades its gone on,….cannot thrive without judges/cronies….the local media (mr pine you getting this)..playing their parts…it is the very evil(ramos) vs the lame,politicaly crimmnal,elite welfare kings the BOS(when you get paid the monies these fools get paid…for working half a year,that welfare for the rich)…evil…from my view thats Evil vs Evil

By: Hello

Hello — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 14:51:49 +0000

And Here

http://blog.getliberty.org/default.asp?Display=1935

By: Hello

Hello — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 14:47:01 +0000

If Moonbeam really wanted a story, he would look into Ed Roski’s purchase of the State legislature to subvert the CEQA process for his new stadium.

He spent $500,000 in campaign contributions to sacramento legislators.

http://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=8182498

I really don’t see any difference between these two cases….

By: AntiCorruptionUnit

AntiCorruptionUnit — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 14:25:30 +0000

Excellent points Logic. The high bail on Erwin and Postmus the first time and now the second round go way beyond malice.

I wonder if ANY of our Judges see the same thing as we do. It would be nice to see one of them step up to the plate and admonish Ramos about the obvious.

The Sun newspaper, they sleep with the enemy.

By: Logic_Anyone?

Logic_Anyone? — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:07:22 +0000

What is surprising me is how no one here seems to be questioning how high that bail was set… murderers have gotten lower bails! And high bails are usually set when people are determined to be a “flight risk” or could potentially commit crimes again… um, Postmus and Erwin paid their previous bails, did not flee, and have NO OPPORTUNITY for anything like this… seems pretty shady to me. Why is Ramos pursuing them so aggressively and with such malice? I thought law was supposed to be reason free from emotion? Looks like Ramos is getting pretty worked up. Seems like he’s either afraid of them, or wants them to be so intimidated that they will cop to anything he says (like a LOT of other people around him, it seems).

By: Logic_Anyone?

Logic_Anyone? — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:32:46 +0000

What I want to know is, while the papers are so readily gobbling up any information they can dig up on Erwin and Postmus, meanwhile, they are ignoring all of the things that don’t add up? Why am I reading this on a blog instead of a newspaper website? Why do the papers NEVER mention Ramos’ dirty deeds? Like how he failed to file extra income that he gave to his wife, then claiming he “didn’t know” he had to claim it since she is a teacher… hello? You’re the DA! Don’t plead ignorance of the law. What about Ramos spending government money to take trips with his many girlfriends? What about the fact that ALL the evidence in this case is loose (at best) and trumped up or even made up at worst? For crying out loud, they couldn’t even link specific dates to these “events” in question… yet I can’t find anything about this in the papers. You know, journalism in this country used to report THE NEWS- THE FACTS. Now all you get is a one-sided opinion. Convenient that so much is left out that would make Erwin and Postmus look like scapegoats here, and also so much is left out that would damage the credibility of the DA on his witchhunt… wonder if the papers are in HIS pockets by any chance?

By: Steve Brow

Steve Brow — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:56:30 +0000

Well, Publius, a change of venue would mean that Jim Erwin could not get a fair trial in San Bernardino County, so we would send the same prosecutor and the same defense lawyer to, say, Amador County where the members of the jury would have never heard of Jim Erwin before and would have only have heard of the entire County of San Bernardino in a bad light.

The involvement of the California Attorney General’s office is not a change of venue. It is an appeal to an overarching authority that is at arm’s length from San Bernardino County to protect against any conflict of interest.

If the FBI’s Public Intergrity Unit desired to step in and take over the case against jim Erwin et al, most likely the Attorney General would recognize the supremacy of the federal government and step out of the case.

I suspect that if I called the Atrtorney General’s office tommorrow and asked them what they were doing about Jim Erwin, that they would tell me that they were confident that they had the matter at hand and that I not need to worry.

I suspect that if I called the FBI Public Ingerity Unit tommorrow and asked them what they were doing about Jim Erwin, they would ask me “Who is Jim Erwin?” That would not mean that they were not already well aware of who Jim Erwin was. It would also not mean that they were not already well aware of who I was.

I spent three years following the last San Bernardino County scandal. When I called the US Attorney to ask if I had been told the truth about how they had worked the case, I was told, “I’m not answering that!”

J Edgar Hoover did some things right.

By: publius

publius — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:27:05 +0000

Steve Brow, how does the Supremancy clause apply. How have the Feds preempted the field?????

By: publius

publius — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:16:47 +0000

DA Insider, “Erwin is not the issue” really, how can you be taken seriously after making that comment. Your last posts had Erwin in everyone of the conflicts with the DA’s office. If you are thinking about the office and not the personalities, than your cooment does not add up. This is what is known as circular logic?

By: Steve Brow

Steve Brow — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:13:41 +0000

Publius, the question is not a change of venue. The question is the Supremacy Clause.

By: DA Insider

DA Insider — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 04:25:31 +0000

Erwin is not the issue. The issue is the perception of the public. How can the public feel that the decisions of the DA are dispasionate when all of the parties are part of the same small circle of friends or former friends. I am thinking about the office not the personalities.

By: publius

publius — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:54:38 +0000

DA Insider, I respectfully disagree. Boyd’s involvement has nothing to do with his job at the DA’s office. To think the DA would have to conflict out because of the unclean hands of Erwin does not make sense. If that is the case Erwin would benefit from his ill deeds, I believe that would be against public policy. Just my opinion.

By: DA Insider

DA Insider — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:51:36 +0000

DAinsider whoever you are, recusals involving deputies happen more often than ones involving the DA themselves. Normally in a big enough office the case is transferred to a different region of the county. Where the DA themselves are a witness or are a friend or enemy of the defendant or as in this case former friend now enemy it is impossible to transfer the case. If you really were a DA “insider” you would know that. Ramos should step down just like he did the last time there was a case involving Erwin.

By: DAinsider

DAinsider — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:21:26 +0000

Publius,
Do you not see that the attorney union would benefit in its litigation against Erwin from a conviction of Erwin on bribery charges? Aren’t Cope and Goritz members of the union? Also, since DDA Clyde Boyd is now potentially a witness for Erwin or the DA, I’d say that is another conflict that can’t be avoided. His comments in the Sun sure sounded like back peddaling, and he’s got a ton of credabilitiy issues and has been a liability for the DA’s office for years, and everyone knows it. I’m certain it is against DA policy to prosecute cases where there own deputies are even potentially witnesses.

By: publius

publius — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 02:23:59 +0000

DA Insider, the common thred is Erwin. I do not believe you get a change of venue under these circumstances.

By: DAinsider

DAinsider — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 01:19:46 +0000

The conflicts of interest for the local DA’s office are now way too blatant to ignore:
1) The SBSun’s recent mention of DDA Clyde Boyde’s involvement as VP of one of the supposed phony PACs, set up by Erwin, which allegedly funnelled $100,000 from the Colonies as payoff for a vote on the settlement…
2) DDA Clyde Boyd also was key in setting up the attorney union PAC, which subsequently hired Erwin to negotiate a contract, at the insistence of Boyd…
3) The attorney union, of which all non supervising DDA’s are members of, including those working on Eriwn and Postmus’s case, is currently engaged in civil ligitation against Erwin for shady dealings in the contract he negotiated….
4) The attorney union PAC then supported Derry w/ $100,000, who then hired Erwin as chief of staff, until his arrest…

Now Erwin is singing the praises of the attorney union President, Merritt, whose members are simultaneously sueing and prosecuting him? I’m confused.

Mike knows full well that these conflict couldn’t be ignored by the bench, so I’m guessing not for now, but your attorney certainly should raise these obvious conflicts if you want the case removed from the DA’s office.
as well as his involvement with creating the attorney union’s PAC, which then hired Mr. Erwin to negotiate a contract, which is now the subject of civil litigation b/w the them

By: Fed-Up

Fed-Up — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:31:14 +0000

What evil did Jeff Burum remove from a community before? Does anyone know?

By: Sgt Milstar

Sgt Milstar — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:17:56 +0000

LSW Here is a link to a news article on Grover Merritt.

Link: http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_setup22.2714b98.html

By: Q

Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:31:51 +0000

Ramos falsely accused Merritt of leaking information from a Grand Jury panel to the newspapers.

By: Little Stevie Wonder

Little Stevie Wonder — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:03:34 +0000

Didn’t the Grover Merritt issue come out of a case involving Ontario? Just wondering if there is even a bigger connection between Mikey and The Devil than meets the public eye?

By: Sgt Milstar

Sgt Milstar — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:52:24 +0000

Under your position, and I would do the same, if it was me in the spotlight.

Thanks for your reply.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:39:21 +0000

More than likely Federal. Obviously dependent upon decision by counsel.

Federal for civil rights as well.

I thank you for your concern. The rest of you as well.

By: Sgt Milstar

Sgt Milstar — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:33:15 +0000

Please see my post # 16 at your website.
Link: http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/2010/02/14/sbsun-county-supervisors-see-no-conflicts-of-interest-amid-corruption-case/comment-page-1/#comment-779

My question is this, Would you like your case to be tried at the state level, or the federal level? There are a lot of people here in the inland empire who want you to get a fair trial. I am one of them.