March 25, 2011
The San Bernardino County legal community finds itself embroiled in contretemps, with a report spreading that district attorney Mike Ramos, or agents of his office acting on his behalf, threatened a Superior Court judge.
Though the account has not been confirmed by any of the principals said to be involved, an individual of considerable standing and substance at the courthouse has told the Sentinel that just prior to Judge Frank Gafkowski’s ruling on a matter believed to be of major import to Ramos’ professional standing and political future, the district attorney dispatched a senior member of his office to confront Gafkowski and present him with an ultimatum regarding that pending ruling. That ultimatum contained a warning that if Gafkowski made a finding contrary to Ramos’ interests, efforts would be undertaken to ensure that Gafkowski would lose his current judicial assignment.
Gafkowski, a retired jurist, sits as a judge on the San Bernardino Court by assignment. While he was neither elected to the post he holds nor appointed to it by the governor as is the case with most judges, he was selected by the chief justice of the California Supreme Court to assist the San Bernardino Superior Court in handling its civil case overload. Gafkowski hears civil cases almost exclusively in that assignment.
Among the cases he is hearing is one brought by Cheryl Ristow, a former evidence technician in the district attorney’s office. In August 2010, Ristow, through her attorney Jim Reiss, filed a lawsuit alleging she had an 18-month affair with Ramos that included sexual relations that took place in Lake Arrowhead during a city-county conference they attended on behalf of the district attorney’s office, in Ramos’ office at the district attorney’s headquarters, as well as in Ramos’ county-issued car. Ristow’s suit further claims that after she ended the affair, Ramos sexually assaulted her at her workplace when he “grabbed and fondled” her against her will. When news of the affair came out, she alleged that Ramos and some of his employees retaliated against her.
Ramos and his attorney, Richard Marca, have denied the allegations contained in the suit. The district attorney’s office and the county have maintained that Ristow was properly reprimanded for office dress code and attendance violations. Ramos has personally denied having had an affair or improper relations with Ristow.
In the months both before and after the filing of the suit, Reiss was gathering information and evidence to support the assertions in the suit. Earlier this year he drafted an amended complaint in answer to the legal arguments and motions filed by Marca that there is insufficient grounds upon which to proceed with the suit.
As late as March 2 Gafkowski had given indication he would allow the case to proceed toward trial, issuing a tentative ruling giving Reiss 20 days to file a second amended complaint and proceed with discovery for the case. That discovery would have included taking the depositions of, i.e. questioning under oath, those involved, including Ristow and Ramos, as well as witnesses, such as other office employees, some of whom Ramos is alleged to have also been sexually involved with.
On March 3, however, Gafkowski abruptly changed course, and dismissed Ristow’s suit.
Gafkowski’s ruling that the sexual harassment lawsuit against the district attorney lacked sufficient evidence to back Ristow’s claims stunned knowledgeable legal authorities, in that there were factual issues that yet needed to be explored to ascertain whether Ristow’s case was in fact viable, and the judge’s ruling precluded the fact-finding necessary to make that determination.
According to a current member of the district attorney’s office, however, Gafkowski’s paradoxical legal ruling can be explicated by an event that took place just prior to his dismissal of the suit.
Speaking with a strict understanding of anonymity, the prosecutor said a high ranking member of the office, by inference assistant district attorney Jim Hackleman, buttonholed Gafkowski. Ramos’ emissary informed the judge that unless the case pending against Ramos was disposed of expeditiously, the district attorney’s office would approach San Bernardino County Superior Court Presiding Judge Douglas Elwell to tell him Gafkowski’s continued assignment was unacceptable to the prosecutor’s office.
A member of the court staff, also speaking with a guarantee of anonymity, told the Sentinel that Gafkowski had a discussion regarding the case without Ristow’s legal team being present.
Court records also show Gafkowski holding discussions regarding Ristow’s case with Ramos’ lawyer without Ristow or her legal team being present in the courtroom.
Gafkowski’s courtroom is located in the San Bernardino Superior Court’s Civil Division at 303 W. Third Street in San Bernardino. Ramos has his office two floors above Gafkowski’s courtroom in the same building.
A phone call to Gafkowski was intercepted by his courtroom clerk. She said all inquiries to the judge had to be routed through the court’s executive office. The Sentinel posted an email to Gafkowski, seeking his version of events, through a secretary with the court’s executive office, Michelle Stallone. At press time, Gafkowski had not responded to that email.
A request for comment from Ramos and Hackleman was relayed to them through their secretary, Kathy Dolan. Neither responded.
Susan Mickey, the district attorney’s office’s public information officer, told the Sentinel, “I’m sorry, but I don’t have any response to that. I don’t know what this is about. You might want to contact Mr. Ramos’ attorney, Richard Marca.”
Marca told the Sentinel, “This is an absolutely ridiculous accusation – that a judge of Judge Gafkowski’s integrity who has an absolutely sterling reputation would even entertain such a conversation or that someone from the district attorney’s office would engage in it.”
Any change of attitude Gafkowski evinced toward the case, Marca said, was based on the inherent weaknesses of the plaintiff’s position. “He ruled one way and after oral arguments he ruled in a different way because her [Ristow’s] attorney had an obligation to show facts supporting why this case should go to trial. There were no facts at the beginning, in the middle or on the last day we were there to flat warrant this case to continue on, unless they made them up. They were supposed to present to the court a viable case that warrants further litigation. Theirs did not warrant further litigation.”
Marca said the report of Gafkowski being threatened by someone working on behalf of his client was “an absurd fabrication, which is just a continuation of the fabrications which have been involved in this case.” He said, “As the lead lawyer in this case, I had every confidence the case would have no other outcome than the result that occurred no matter how long this case lasted. Who would resort to attacking the integrity of the judiciary? It is unfortunate that someone would make these kinds of accusations about a sitting judge, a man of solid integrity like Judge Gafkowski, and not care about their accusations and what they do to someone’s reputation.”
Marca said he was “not monitoring the activity of everyone in the district attorney’s office.” He said “I am not aware of any such information” regarding a meeting between Hackelman or anyone else from the district attorney’s office and Gafkowski. He reiterated his belief that such a meeting “just didn’t happen. It doesn’t make sense.”
Reiss told the Sentinel he considered Gafkowski’s ruling to dismiss the case “highly unusual. Just the day before, he had issued a tentative ruling to let us submit a second amended complaint. He just flipped over on us. He had no basis to dismiss the case under the law. The whole process exists so that plaintiffs and defendants get their day in court.”
Reiss said unresolved issues yet exist.
“He [Ramos] says there was no relationship, consensual or otherwise, and there was no retaliation when the relationship went sour,” he said. “We say there was. It’s a he said, she said kind of thing. That’s why there needs to be evidence considered and witnesses heard.”
Reiss said the report going around that Ramos had sent someone over to threaten Gafkowski was “pretty shocking. That’s basically extortion.”
Reiss said, though, that since Gafkowski’s cases are primarily or exclusively civil ones and the district attorney’s office engages in criminal filings, any complaint the district attorney’s office might make about Gafkowski’s acceptability would not, or at least should not, carry much weight with Elwell.
“The district attorney’s office doesn’t have much leverage over him as a judge hearing civil cases, I would think,” Reiss said.
Ramos, however, has cultivated his relationship with the county’s judges and the succession of presiding judges who have served in that capacity while he has been district attorney. In 2009, for example, Ramos supported the continuation of San Bernardino County’s practice of augmenting the county judges’ state paid incomes with an additional $20,000 stipend. Critics of the stipend, including county supervisor Neil Derry, said the payment was adverse to the state constitution and a represented a conflict of interest for judges, who often hear cases in which the county is either a plaintiff or a defendant. Ramos asserted that it was neither unconstitutional nor a conflict, and the county has continued the practice.
Uh, can we say overreaching?
Unwilling’s only purpose is to police the blogs for DA Ramos and make sure “The Don” is not being “disrespected” After years of this, his nonsensical comments are getting old, tiresome, and a waste of time to read- there is never any credibility to them.
As always, the Sentinel never disappoints. Cheers!
Maybe Mikey should have offered him another $20K/yr. out of his campaign contributions instead of threatening a judge? The smart thing might have been a bribe, or at least use the leverage from the County’s $10 MILLION in seed money for the NEW SB JUSTICE (sic) CENTER that you got VIP Josie to dangle in front of the judges noses. And Josie, we thought you were serious about all that “Justice For All” stuff at the ground-breaking, when all you really cared about was in covering-up for the corrupt DA (he’s latin right, maybe he just can’t control himself?)
Note to feds: If Hoops and Ramos had not covered-up the POST scandal, they both probably would have lost their prospective jobs in the last election.
If Bell is Corruption on Steroids, San Bernardino County is Bell on Steroids.
Unwilling please tell us in more detail how this accusation is over reaching?
Before answering please keep in mind all the other issues going on that have Mr.Ramos FINGERPRINTS ALL over them.
It appears again someone from the DA’s office stepped knee deep into the crap at the behest of Ramos!!! And someone knows what happened and leaked it to the paper. Seems like an awful lot of leaks these days, all over the County. Of course all those issues are over reaching too!!!
Good to see Mr.Marca speaking on behalf of the District Attorneys office and ALL that work there.
Everyone should make a note to themselves how Marca told us early on Ramos didn’t have any affairs. BUT the Judge made a factual finding that Ramos did have an affair. I’d say that pretty much makes Ramos a liar OFFICIALLY speaking. What is that now STRIKE 3,4,5 or 6 on lies?
Of course no one from the DA’s office would ever challenge a witness on the stand who appeared to have told that many lies during the course of any criminal case right?
The next phase of this very SERIOUS scandal and act of misconduct will be too see what the Judges do about one of their own being threatened in ANY WAY SHAPE or form and tolerate it. Will their ethics take over, or will they consider the $20k they get above and beyond their normal salary more important to them at the end of the day?
Unwilling everyone knows you work at the DA’s office, so I at least know you know what circumstanial evidence is. The circumstantial evidence has become overwhelming that your boss has become the “DON” of SB County!!!
I am really beginning to wonder when the DDA’s will speak up like the Public Defenders did and rid themselves of Mr.Ramos and the stench that is attached to everything he does.
With the obvious antics that go on internally, one REALLY has to ask themselves HOW MANY citizens have been wrongly accussed and convicted on any given number of issues.
Maybe you read my little commentary on the Mathew Linderman case and how both the DDA and defense attorney did not want to talk about Cindy Shaum’s picture appearing on Linderman’s computer? The only concern was that MIGHT embarass Ramos!!!!SHIT we cannot have that now can we?
So to think Mr.Ramos WOULD never suggest to or threaten a member of the judiciary to keep dirt under the carpet when looking at ALL the incidents in the last couple years is laughable!!!!
Have you forgotten Mr.Ramos refused to be deposed in Grover Merritt’s case?
Instead of saying this issue is again over reaching, LET’s just say whoever leaked this issue is just a “disgruntled” or “bitter” employee!
ACU, how do you refuse to be deposed? If you get a subpoena, you have to go to the deposition, don’t you? That’s what I’ve always heard. I know he thinks he’s above the law and all, but can’t the other side do something when the deposed doesn’t show up?
Well,well,well. We come full circle again and end up with nothing. The fix is in on every front. Even during other trials not related to this one, there were convictions because certain information was not allowed to be brought into the court room through testimony and not just memos and hearsay. And now we have this situation that no one will be able to comfirm, document, arrest and convict. If this is true it is big and really big. But who is the person that officially asks for an investigation, and who will investigate? A few years ago I was told off the record and from someone of great importance, “you do have somewhere to go and that’s the AG”s office”. Wrong. So then there was the FEDS in Riverside, wrong. Someone needs to do a little checking on the last names assigned to the Riverside office and in Mikeys camp. You may start connecting some dots that may make all of you feel that there is no end to the 12 lives this guy has. Just a heads up, go to LA and not locally if you really have the goods. And then you had better check your rear view mirror. This guy deals with those he can control. I would hate to see what he would do to those that he can’t. The fix is in and he and his henchman are a few steps ahead of all of you. LSW and ACU, do some diggin. You have plenty of hints and are up to the taske.
Fed UP, Ramos settled the case before having to sit down and be deposed. His decision, with support from the BOS to settle with Merritt.
Standard MO for those in power within the County to offer a deal or settlement before all out war takes place and the “TRUTH” of the matter comes out.
Maybe I should change the wording to “would not” be deposed versus “refused” to be deposed. Maybe Ramos said I am not going to be deposed because this case is going to be settled. Bottom line Ramos was not deposed and settled the case just before that was suppose to happen.
In this case, a different approach was taken.Ramos had to do something because he has Ristow and those other 5 or 6 ladies who came forward to back up Ristow’s claim.
I see the same type of desperation in Ramos as we do in other crooks about to be caught. They sometimes do something stupid in the final seconds.
You have to decide what it appears to be in this case when comparing EVERYTHING else that has happened with him.
It’s not rocket science as to what is going on with him.
ACU, kind of hard to accredit Mikey with that much clout. All his aspirations of higher office have been squelched by his libidinous activities getting so much attention. And to think he wields power enough to influence the bench as much as this would take is giving him way too much credit.
Anon, your an idiot, but I digress. Again, if you actually have evidence that Mikey wields the power you suggest, please illustrate those points on the blog. Not hypothetical, sentinel based conspiracies; actual cases of influence peddling we can all agree with. And can we all please just take an unbiased look at the claims of Ms. Ristow?
Black Helicopters, no need for me or any other average person to dig around, an implosion is on the horizon. Ramos will self destruct it’s just a matter of time.
He is arrogant, he continues to step on his manhood on a fairly regular basis. Ramos like anyone else will screw with the wrong person or group of people, he will suffer the rath as anyone does.
One day Ramos will mess with the wrong woman who is married and don’t wish to play, when Ramos retaliates against her as he has done others, some husband will clean his clock once and for all. LET history be your guide on that one. NEVER play with a man’s emotions on such topics.
I would be the first one to put money on that husbands books while sitting in jail, so he could at least buy some cookies, awaiting trial for doing a public service. I might contribute money towards the mans bail too!!!
I only wish I was still working when Ramos pulled that little stunt in Yucaipa when he was drunk at the party and dismissed those two Deputy Sheriff’s like they were garbage in the street.
YEP I would have lost that battle too, BUT not before I fought the good fight and whooped his ass, took a few pictures, made a few copies of the audio tape and distributed them to every news station in Southern California, just before being put on administrative leave of course.
What did blogger Wise Up tell me awhile back, “patience is sweet”. Let’s hope that is the case here. If your a person who prays often, pray that this guy is ousted from office before too many more employees or citizens have to deal with his corrupt actions.
Just my thoughts!!
Unwilling, local clout is all I will give credit for. You can tell us why Ristow’s claims are without merit if you like??
If your basis is because she is heavyset, had the wrong work ethic in the office, YOU WILL lose the argument. Unless those in power have disciplined others like they did Ristow, then again one can and should argue the discipline was a “pretext” to retaliation!!
In the business world private or public, the powers to be must show that their disciplinary actions are well established, well enforced, fairly enforced in like circumstances and administered to ALL employees. Meet that burden then you MIGHT have a decent defense against retaliation.
NO SMOKING gun is needed to prove retaliation, just circumstantial evidence.
SINCE it has become quite obvious Mr.Ramos LIED about the matter is all the evidence one needs to proceed with the case and let a jury decide the merits.
What’s the question I have heard more than once in my day, come from the lips of lawyers, “were you lying then, or are you lying now”?
With all do respect your reply is very generac!!!!
Unwilling since you have made the challenge to some of us to show how Ramos has influenced the bench, since you work in that office, MAYBE you can tell us how he hasn’t?
Tell us the sudden reassignment of the Judge is just bad timing too? Is the judge suddenly wanting to be closer to home so he can spend time with his family?
Your comment how we should look outside the Sentinal conspiracy theory, why don’t you show us how the article is without merit?
Maybe you wold like to tell us Mr.Ramos in no way is covering for Hoops and the POST scandal, and selectively prosecuting some and letting others walk. Of course us common folks should remember there never was a cover up or scandal because Sheriff Hoops said so. KINDA like you are right now.
We can start with his best friend Gary Penrod and go from there.
Unwilling has a point.
Ramos customarily uses operatives to carry out his dirty work.
Whether it’s David Ellis, Mike Fermin, Jim Hackleman, Bob Schrieber, or Hollis Randles.
In this case it’s alleged Hackleman is the bag man.
The Feds had recently stopped looking at Ramos.
That’s now likely gonna change.
No point need be made on that, because it is a given in every equation around here. There are plenty of bag men for those in power.
That is how you get promoted or appointed, by being a bag man for someone at somepoint.
Bad thing about bag man is they are generally expected to take the hit when things go bad to protect the boss too.
Just not sure if that would be worth it so I can spend my time with Bubba!! Or face the angry husband or family member you played with.
Unwilling, I may be an idiot, but I’m MY OWN idiot. I answer to no one. You, on the other hand, are an idiot for DA Mike Ramos. Always the loyal robot, nothing ever changes, you follow his orders, orders, always orders.
You ask to “please illustrate those points on the blog. Not hypothetical, sentinel based conspiracies.” Sure, I’ll slash it on the blog for you, so you can later give Ramos a heads up – NOT. No info for you! All your boss needs to know is that county employees and citizens are fighting mad and working furiously behind the scenes documenting- before leaking. You can throw stones at the Sentinel all you want, but it’s all meaningless. The paper’s integrity and credibility are proven and cement strong. The Sentinel is on the side of the people, which explains why DA Ramos is sweating it out and has you policing the blogs to attack the paper-pathetic. Tell him there are more people policing any kind of attacks on the paper than he could imagine, and should any funny business happen, the wheels of justice (Agencies) are in place, and will burn Ramos and friends like iodine. Sweet!
My name is Edward Tirone. I have said this before. My experience with James V Reiss is that he is an integral part of the corruption in San Bernardino County. My disabled mother and I were forced from our home by corrupt Upland California Police Officers: including: Jeff Mendenhall, Steve Adams, and Martin Thouvenell. James Reiss misrepresented his services to me. Reiss made no effort to prove my innocence. Reiss with held evidence from the jury. I told him that I did not want Judge Joan Borba to hear my case and he ignored me. Two years after I fired Reiss during the sentenceing process; he and his firm continued to represent me on a civil matter, without my knowledge and any communication from Reiss and his firm, this was done against my will, and their intentions against my best interest. During this period I attempted to hire an attorney to sue Reiss and his firm. James V Reiss and his firm should not be allowed to practice law. Period.
Obviously DA Mikey is having Attorney Reiss take the fall for his own alleged infidelity/hostile work environment problem (it’s called “professional rationalization”).
Since the CA Bar is going along with it by debarring him, obviously Reiss is one of the conspirators used to perpetuate the County’s culture of corruption (along with many of the judges that receive the $20K/yr. County paid stipend/ bribe).
ET u should contact the LA office of the FBI if you haven’t already done so.
Interesting find on the internet.
Link: http://gs175.photobucket.com/groups/w156/N9R17LUCBS/?action=view¤t=dacorruptiontwo.jpg¤ttag=James+V.+Reiss#!oZZ9QQcurrentZZhttp%3A%2F%2Fgs175.photobucket.com%2Fgroups%2Fw156%2FN9R17LUCBS%2F%3Faction%3Dview%26current%3Dbadpaint4.jpg%26currenttag%3DJames%20V.%20Reiss
The first link is the last pic. Try this link for the beginning…
Edward Tirone, what is this all about? You made a post, but have documents already posted on the Internet.
Link: http://gs175.photobucket.com/groups/w156/N9R17LUCBS/?action=view¤t=dacorruptionone.jpg¤ttag=James V. Reiss
ET was probably phishing… hope he lands a big one.
Riess was interim suspended for alledgly misappropriating client funds.