Efren Carrillo not prepared to resign at this time

I attended today's Board of Supervisors meeting. Following is an excerpt from this evening's online PD article, which I suggest you read in the printed version tomorrow. It is an accurate article.

A dozen citizens asked that he resign. Nobody defended Mr. Carrillo. Those asking that he resign were calm, articulate, and persuasive. Among them were various victims of sexual abuse and a National Guard member, some of whom pointed out that many women would feel uncomfortable around him, especially those who have bad memories of men hurting women. Carrillo has clearly lost the respect of many in the 5th District. "Alcohol is the symptom, not the cause," contended one witness." "One's home should be a sanctuary," commented another.

Carrillo himself appeared quite serious as he listened to the many reasons why he should resign, in marked contrast to his usual more affable demeanor. I may try to give a fuller report tomorrow, but I have to leave at 6 a.m. to teach.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Press Democrat:

Critics of embattled Sonoma County Supervisor Efren Carrillo forcefully renewed their call for his resignation at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting, saying his continued service in elected office tarnished the county’s reputation and left his constituents without an effective representative.

The 5th District deserves but doesn’t have a fully functioning representative now,” said Alice Chan, a Sebastopol-based Democratic Party activist. “His continued presence on this board is an embarrassment to us and to Sonoma County.”
The comments, echoed by about a dozen speakers, many of them either outright Carrillo opponents or newly emerged critics, came in Carrillo’s second Board of Supervisors meeting since his July 13 arrest on suspicion of prowling and burglary.

Carrillo responded in a brief interview late Tuesday evening, saying he had no current plans to give up his county job.

“That's a decision I'm not prepared to make at this time,” he said. “I'm focusing on the work before me, and my intention is not focused on the distractions but rather the performance of my job while still tending to the early stages of my recovery.”
...

---

Full PD article is here.

These are my comments, I felt Efren really listened. The video of everyone's comments are in the video below.

If you resonate please share and maybe we can create a compassionate solution.

"Efren, I have thought a lot about your role as a representative of West county and your actions both in San Diego and recently here.
In San Diego there were no legal consequences, the political machine that backs you, was able to take care of that fairly easily.
But with the second offense, you have now experienced the painful reality that you have been used, and those that supported you are now weighing whether or not you are damaged goods or if you might be salvageable and then even more indebted to them.
You might think that the people who support you staying in office are concerned with your best interests.
I would disagree.
If you were my brother or son I would plead with you to realize that you are dealing with deeply rooted issues around respect for women, and that alcohol bingeing is the symptom not the cause.

Those that say you should stay want something from you, not for you.

You have already endangered a life, threatened and scared a woman in the sanctuary of her home, and what you do next without help could be irreparable.
There is something that happens in all our lives that leads us to make the horrible mistakes we do; that has wounded you and is now causing you to unconsciously wound others.
I do not wish for you to be punished, punishment does not heal and help those you have hurt. I ask you to own your responsibility and to rehabilitate yourself.

In service to the people of West County, step down and take time to learn from some of the women who have devoted their lives to this community without pay or reward.

You have intelligence, charisma and an abundant amount energy. But these are hollow without a soul purpose. Do the work and become the great man you are meant to be.

I would humbly request that others of our community who speak today do so respectfully without a motive to humiliate. This will only create defensiveness that is not conducive to change."

Here is a video with all comments from yesterday. Mine starts at 16:06... https://youtu.be/iXwrpTFWr-ohttps://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/sa...re%3Dog&jq=100

Supervisor Carrillo Faces the Public
Concerned Sonoma County citizens take the opportunity to address Supervisor Efre...See More

Efren Carrillo is probably going to try to hold out until January when he can resign and be vested in his six figure pension from the county. I don't want my tax dollars to go to that entitlement. What can we do to ensure that he is ousted before then?

When the recall effort begins, volunteer your time. There was supposedly a recall effort planned to begin on or after September 15.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sambacat:

Efren Carrillo is probably going to try to hold out until January when he can resign and be vested in his six figure pension from the county. I don't want my tax dollars to go to that entitlement. What can we do to ensure that he is ousted before then?

---

Magick's presentation was excellent and the other dozen speakers asking Efren to resign were also persuasive. I was also surprised that Efren's supporters, including PR people, were not there. No one spoke on his behalf. Perhaps his PR people did not plan to come, as someone suggested. Another possibility is that they realized that people were planning to come to ask him to resign, so they decided not to come. They definitely have a strategy of some sort. Following is a letter from today's PD, "Orchestrated Campaign?" about that. Yesterday's PD had an excellent letter by Yannick Philips from Sonoma Valley about the Carrillo Controversy.

Orchestrated campaign?
EDITOR: Don't you think it odd that there appears to be a constant flow of letters congratulating Supervisor Efren Carrillo on how he's working so hard to fix his demons and how good everything will be once he's recovered and back on the job?
The guy manages to get himself arrested twice, the latter in particularly concerning circumstances (not my fault, must have been the booze), and his heroic recovery is lauded while the potential crime is played down.
Are we seeing a PR handling campaign in action? The one where you delay until the public forgets, apologize without admitting guilt, blame the problem on a disease, then orchestrate your supporters to send letters saying just how brave, talented and a role model you are?
MARK TOMLINSON
Petaluma

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Magick:

These are my comments, I felt Efren really listened....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sambacat:

... hold out until January when he can resign and be vested in his six figure pension from the county....

---

I'm not judging or criticizing this other public servant, the Sonoma County Fire Chief, just sayin' -

https:// https://www.pressdemocrat.c...cles/130909817

Sonoma County Fire Chief Mark Aston has stepped down from his post while on medical leave and plans to remain off-duty until he retires at the end of this year. Aston, 56, has led the county department since 2008....Aston has been out on medical leave since mid-July for an injured foot and said he does not expect to return before his retirement, now planned for mid-November to mid-December....He announced last November that he intended to retire at the end of this year, a date that extends his Sonoma County service to five years and makes him eligible for a county pension....A hiring process to permanently fill the department’s chief/director post could wrap up by November. The county received 70 applications for the position with a salary range of $137,437 to $167,053. Aston’s 2012 pay, including cash and car allowance, was $181,312. If cleared by a doctor to return to work before his retirement, he said plans to use accrued vacation and administrative leave to remain off-duty. In his three-decade career, Aston served as fire chief for the City of Clovis; battalion chief for the Apple Valley Fire Protection District in San Bernadino County and as a firefighter for both the City of Corona and Riverside County.

this appears to be accurate and there is nothing to do about it. a recall could not be successful till june 2014. efren is smart, who would not do the same in his shoes? this would also be in character with his actions as supervisor. i predict he will resign early in the new year, with a proper replacement arranged, who will probably win reelection with a three year incumbent advantage:.(

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sambacat:

Efren Carrillo is probably going to try to hold out until January when he can resign and be vested in his six figure pension from the county. I don't want my tax dollars to go to that entitlement. What can we do to ensure that he is ousted before then?

---

My letter to the editor from the Press Democrat is below and I will help with any recall effort, if (sadly) needed:

Quote:

---

EDITOR: A Bay Area politician was caught having an affair with his best friend's wife while in office. His erstwhile friend was also his campaign manager. Many of the politician's constituents were appalled by his behavior, and some called for his resignation.

The politician acknowledged the gravity of what he had done and sought treatment for a drinking problem. Meanwhile, he remained in office. At the end of his term, many acknowledged that he had done a pretty good job despite significant controversy around a very bold and humane move he made during his term.

He ran for higher office and was elected. Now he is being touted by some as the next governor of California. Who is he? Gavin Newsom, the handsome, articulate, wealthy and white scion of a prominent San Francisco family.

If Supervisor Efren Carrillo enjoyed some of Newsom's advantages, I wonder if the calls for his resignation would be fewer and his constituents would be more inclined to forgive his indefensible actions and give him a second chance.
RICHARD CLEVERLY
Santa Rosa

---

Carrillo and Newsom
EDITOR: Let’s take a closer look at the comparison between Efren Carrillo and Gavin Newsom (“Second chances,” Letters, Aug. 30 [above]). Was it a poor choice for Newsom to have a consensual affair with his campaign manager’s (and best friend’s) wife? You bet. Now compare that to being arrested at 3:40 a.m. outside a woman’s window (a mere acquaintance) wearing only underwear and socks. Surely, you see the difference.

As for Carrillo being deserving of a second chance, let’s remember the San Diego incident, less than a year ago. He’s had his second chance.

I understand trying to make light of this latest incident by comparing it to a much lesser offense. However, I don’t believe the woman in the Newsom story ever had to call 911. Had Newsom been caught outside an unwilling woman’s window, in the middle of the night, half-naked, I believe the outcome of his story would have been different.

Please stop trying to portray what Carrillo did as a simple mistake and think how you would feel if the frightened woman calling 911 in the middle of the night had been your daughter, your sister, your wife or your friend. Not likely you’d be making light of that.

YANNICK A. PHILLIPS
Sonoma

funny & interesting comparison.

Another difference is Newsom is a liberal Democrat, married gay couples while in office in SF, while Carrillo is more centrist, supported by the business community, defeated Rue, an environmentalist, voted for Dutro. Carrillo collected more enemies than Newson, obviously. Carrillo is Latino, Newsom is anglo, I think due to subtle racism there is a higher bar for Carrillo. Carrillo's offense was like a teenage prank. I can only think alot of the animosity towards him is political.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by yann123:

My letter to the editor from the Press Democrat is below and I will help with any recall effort, if (sadly) needed:

Carrillo and Newsom
EDITOR: Let’s take a closer look at the comparison between Efren Carrillo and Gavin Newsom (“Second chances,” Letters, Aug. 30 [above]). Was it a poor choice for Newsom to have a consensual affair with his campaign manager’s (and best friend’s) wife? You bet. Now compare that to being arrested at 3:40 a.m. outside a woman’s window (a mere acquaintance) wearing only underwear and socks. Surely, you see the difference.

As for Carrillo being deserving of a second chance, let’s remember the San Diego incident, less than a year ago. He’s had his second chance.

I understand trying to make light of this latest incident by comparing it to a much lesser offense. However, I don’t believe the woman in the Newsom story ever had to call 911. Had Newsom been caught outside an unwilling woman’s window, in the middle of the night, half-naked, I believe the outcome of his story would have been different.

Please stop trying to portray what Carrillo did as a simple mistake and think how you would feel if the frightened woman calling 911 in the middle of the night had been your daughter, your sister, your wife or your friend. Not likely you’d be making light of that.

YANNICK A. PHILLIPS
Sonoma

---

TOMMY, someone entering your home is NOT a teenage prank, it's unfortunate and would be outrageous if people see it as only that... This is not about being liberal vs. centrist/ or other arguments...this is about -not allowing Efren's actions to set an example for our young girls and women and our young boys and men in Sonoma Co. to think this kind of activity from anyone (politician or other individual) is ok.......IT IS NOT OK.
I hope Sonoma Co. can count on every man in the county to take Efren's actions very seriously and stand strong in support of the recall if he doesn't step down on his own.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

funny & interesting comparison.

Another difference is ...

---

As a woman, I think that a lot of the "animosity" toward Carrillo stems from the feelings a woman has when she imagines him coming to her window and door in his underwear......

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

funny & interesting comparison.

Another difference is Newsom is a

---

As a woman who was subject to sexual abuse as an adolescent, I can sympathize with the people also traumatized in the past.

However, I caution against "branding" someone an abuser without knowing all the facts. Mr. Carillo has not been charged and it is too easy to blame that fact on some amorphous "political machine" working in Mr. Carrillo's favor. As an attorney, I have litigated cases in Southern Calif. and currently practice and live in Sonoma Co. Believe me, the San Diego DA's office is not soft on crime and could care less what position a potential defendant holds. The DA has to answer to his constituents. If there was enough evidence, charges would have been filed.

Efren is a devoted, hard-working supervisor. For example, his support for civic and business projects in challenged areas like Roseland have given that area new life and energy. He has been a visionary, offering support and encouragement to Latino businesses and entrepreneurs, as well as overseen countless community projects. He has gone out of his way to bring us all together with fundraisers for those who couldn't afford medical care, beautification projects, and has fought for more funding for our schools.

A rush to judgment does a great disservice to a demonstrably fine civil servant.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by mskslr:

As a woman who was subject to sexual abuse as an adolescent,...

---

Reply to: MSKSLR-

Nothing says Efren can not be appreciated for his passed projects and nothing says he can't continue to do good deeds. Some have an issue with the County paying anyone a plump salary (plus a plump retirement to go with it) with that recipient not being a respectable member of the community. Some of us -my main issue-have a problem with our county demonstrating to our young women and men of our county that Efren's actions are ok. THEY ARE NOT OK.

We need to show our young men and women in our County (and beyond) that if ANYONE finds fit to roust a women out of bed at 3am/call 911 (embarrassingly in their socks and undies) they will be severely reprimanded and no...not considered 'just a prank'. Our children and young adults need to feel safe from the public AND from ELECTEDS ALIKE. Again, I would hope every gentleman and lady out there would defend the safety of our private home and assure our young children and young adults that this behavior from grown men will not be tolerated and will not go unpunished.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by yann123:

Reply to: MSKSLR-

Nothing says Efren can not be appreciated ....

---

Yann123:
You don't have a CLUE what happened that night (or early morning) yet you're willing to discard this man's achievements for what....your Conjecture of what might have happened?

You don't Remotely have enough information to judge him...let alone condemn him.

One scenario: At risk of being trivialized, I'm recalling the scene in the movie High Fidelity where the main character stands outside his love interest's window with a boom box. He's charming...we adore him. What if Mr. Carrillo thought he was (misguidedly) serenading? Of course he needs to examine his use of alcohol - ! But to vilify him? Sorry people but I'm not seeing any abuse
(sexual or otherwise) here. Bad judgment, but not abuse.

And are you seriously suggesting that he should be tarred and feathered (let alone his losing his pension) for waking someone up from their lawn at 3 AM? Yes- she called 911. (Not sure exactly why...)

Bad judgment on his part in retrospect but his behavior has nothing to do "Failing to set an example to our youth!" My 23-year-old daughter isn't going to behave any differently because our supervisor acted childishly while on vacation in So Cal.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by mskslr:

And are you seriously suggesting that he should be tarred and feathered (let alone his losing his pension) for waking someone up from their lawn at 3 AM? Yes- she called 911. (Not sure exactly why...)
Bad judgment on his part in retrospect but his behavior has nothing to do "Failing to set an example to our youth!" My 23-year-old daughter isn't going to behave any differently because our supervisor acted childishly while on vacation in So Cal.

---

I'm just responding to the youth comment -Do we want to say to our children, "Yes, people can act badly in this way and it's ok." I am a mom as well...it's not to deter my children from acting like Efren it's for my children to feel safe in their community knowing that these sort of 'activities' would be reprimanded and not deemed acceptable as a community as a whole.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by yann123:

I'm just responding to the youth comment -Do we want to say to our children, "Yes, people can act badly in this way and it's ok." I am a mom as well...it's not to deter my children from acting like Efren it's for my children to feel safe in their community knowing that these sort of 'activities' would be reprimanded and not deemed acceptable as a community as a whole.

---

None of this has Anything to do with children. No child was involved at all. How did the conversation cross over from an inebriated adult acting stupidly early in the morning to "our children being at risk?" What does his man's behavior on one occasion in Southern California have to do with our children's safety "in their community?" Nothing.

Quite to the contrary, I watched hundreds of people gather in an auditorium to donate money to help a poor, seriously injured Sonoma County girl who was stuck in Mexico after her mother died there in a crash; she didn't have money for the health care she needed. Efren stood up for her. I brought my son that day to witness the kind of heroism I hope he will be strong enough to display. How do we so easily wipe away the record of a man like this?

you brought up children by citing your daughter and now your son. you also seem confused about efrens latest incident. it was his next door neighbor in santa rosa. san diego was over a year ago. what i find most interesting about you is how you headlined carrillo on your business website before the last supervisor election. carpenter had the way friendlier quote for marijuana decriminalization, perhaps you support efren because of his hands off approach to the current medical marijuana absurdity? i find that only people who financially benefit from the unsustainable black industry of indoor grows like how things are now. carrillo looks the other way on this one, even when questioned directly.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by mskslr:

None of this has Anything to do with children. No child was involved at all. How did the conversation cross over from an inebriated adult acting stupidly early in the morning to "our children being at risk?" What does his man's behavior on one occasion in Southern California have to do with our children's safety "in their community?" Nothing.

Quite to the contrary, I watched hundreds of people gather in an auditorium to donate money to help a poor, seriously injured Sonoma County girl who was stuck in Mexico after her mother died there in a crash; she didn't have money for the health care she needed. Efren stood up for her. I brought my son that day to witness the kind of heroism I hope he will be strong enough to display. How do we so easily wipe away the record of a man like this?

---

No, rossmen: My reference to my daughter and son was meant to express that as a devoted parent, I would not compromise my children’s safety and moral education for Anything. If I thought that our supervisor compromised those principals, I would oppose him.

I have no idea what you mean by, “the current medical marijuana absurdity” or your odd reference to, “unsustainable black industry of indoor grows like how things are now …” These comments are off topic, irrelevant, and, even if we were discussing medical marijuana, absurd. Please don't trivialize this discussion by introducing knee-jerk political topics such as use of marijuana.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by mskslr:

I have no idea what you mean by, “the current medical marijuana absurdity” or your odd reference to, “unsustainable black industry of indoor grows like how things are now …” These comments are off topic, irrelevant, and, even if we were discussing medical marijuana, absurd.

---

Rossmen's comments were off topic in general but do relate in the sense of why you may be supporting Efren. Please see this thread and the excellent movie about medical marijuana at the link supplied there, which still seems to be available for free.

Please direct any further comments regarding medical marijuana on that thread. Let's keep this one about Efren.

i was just trying to figure out why you support e-tard(his rumored nickname among women regulars of the santa rosa club scene). as a parent, i can't imagine any parent holding up a binge drinking, bar fighting, prowler as a moral example for their children. your bias is clear from your work website and it is just as environmentally clueless as efren's answers to my question about the increased electrical use for sonoma county. i think he will retire when his pension is vested early next year. the interesting thing about this educated guess is that there are wacco readers, current and retired county staff, who know how supervisor pensions are structured, and no one has corrected the understanding my guess is biased on.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by mskslr:

No, rossmen: My reference to my daughter and son was meant to express that as a devoted parent, I would not compromise my children’s safety and moral education for Anything. If I thought that our supervisor compromised those principals, I would oppose him.

I have no idea what you mean by, “the current medical marijuana absurdity” or your odd reference to, “unsustainable black industry of indoor grows like how things are now …” These comments are off topic, irrelevant, and, even if we were discussing medical marijuana, absurd. Please don't trivialize this discussion by introducing knee-jerk political topics such as use of marijuana.

---

Though people know that I think the best thing for Mr. Carrillo and his constituents is for him to resign, I am doing my best to follow the advice of his supporters that we wait until the Oct. 11 court day to discuss this matter further. I am concerned by the growing name-calling, personal attacks, and worsening level of this discussion, by members of both sides. Most of us love Sonoma County, and no matter what happens on this particular matter, we will continue to be living here together.

On the vestment and pension issue, I did speak with a former member of the Retirement Board. He corrected what has been posted here. He said that pensions do not start until someone is 50 years old. They are something like 2% per year of the highest salary. So this is a much lower figure than was implied. I think the Retirement Board number is 565-8100. I am currently overwhelmed and want to stay out of this as much as possible, so I hope that a more objective person can call and verify or correct this.

Thanks Shepherd. I agree about waiting and share your concerns.

In the public retirement systems I am familiar with there is an employee and an employer contribution per paycheck. For safety usually 9% and others 8%. The employer contribution is larger. Sonoma County has it's own retirement system. Safety employees (police & fire) receive 3%@50. (2.7@57 if hired after Dec 2012) They have lots of exposure to stress, smoke , injuries and toxins. Many work beyond 50. A friend of mine works for the county and her minimum retirement age is 60,(for new hires 2.5%@67) . If a person had the 3%@60 formula and worked 5 years (the minimum time to be able to collect a retirement), they could apply for retirement at 60 and receive 15% of their highest year's salary each year. (as long as the system is solvent)

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Though people know that I think the best thing for Mr. Carrillo and his constituents is for him to resign, I am doing my best to follow the advice of his supporters that we wait until the Oct. 11 court day to discuss this matter further. I am concerned by the growing name-calling, personal attacks, and worsening level of this discussion, by members of both sides. Most of us love Sonoma County, and no matter what happens on this particular matter, we will continue to be living here together.

On the vestment and pension issue, I did speak with a former member of the Retirement Board. He corrected what has been posted here. He said that pensions do not start until someone is 50 years old. They are something like 2% per year of the highest salary. So this is a much lower figure than was implied. I think the Retirement Board number is 565-8100. I am currently overwhelmed and want to stay out of this as much as possible, so I hope that a more objective person can call and verify or correct this.

---

having looked at the county's website as well as the pd data base for county workers pay and retirement, my understanding is that if efren is supervisor for five years, he can step down with a lifetime pension of about $20k\yr with cola. the county will have contributed about $250k for his pension by that time. age does not apply to elected officials. as a hardworking, talented, smart young man, sitting with the shards of his career and ambitions, i think he will take it.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Though people know that I think the best thing for Mr. Carrillo and his constituents is for him to resign, I am doing my best to follow the advice of his supporters that we wait until the Oct. 11 court day to discuss this matter further. I am concerned by the growing name-calling, personal attacks, and worsening level of this discussion, by members of both sides. Most of us love Sonoma County, and no matter what happens on this particular matter, we will continue to be living here together.

On the vestment and pension issue, I did speak with a former member of the Retirement Board. He corrected what has been posted here. He said that pensions do not start until someone is 50 years old. They are something like 2% per year of the highest salary. So this is a much lower figure than was implied. I think the Retirement Board number is 565-8100. I am currently overwhelmed and want to stay out of this as much as possible, so I hope that a more objective person can call and verify or correct this.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Though people know that I think the best thing for Mr. Carrillo and his constituents is for him to resign, I am doing my best to follow the advice of his supporters that we wait until the Oct. 11 court day to discuss this matter further.

---

From a quick check of your posts it seems you have posted 19 times in the last month on this subject, which leads me to the conclusion that your "doing your best" to "wait until the Oct. 11 court date to discuss the matter further" has been singularly ineffective. I would beg you to redouble your efforts to refrain from discussing the matter.

Also I was amused by the Feudian slip in your last sentence:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

and no one has corrected the understanding my guess is biased on.

---

(Someone did later go ahead and correct your understanding.)

Patrick Brinton

And Sebastacat would ask YOU to find something better to do than to count the number of times that someone has posted on a particular subject.

The debate will continue, Patrick - with or without your approval or blessing.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

From a quick check of your posts...

---

Mr. B: Did you check to see how many posts Shepherd made AFTER he decided to limit them?

And I was amused by YOUR slip:

"Also I was amused by the Feudian slip in your last sentence:"

What's "Feudian" mean, since you don't seem to admit the possibility of a typo?

(Sorry, I've had a trying day....)

Sara S

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

Also I was amused by the Feudian slip in your last sentence:

---

Thanks for pointing this out, Sara!

Moral of the story? That Karma stuff can bite you - sometimes when you least expect it.......

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sara S:

What's "Feudian" mean, since you don't seem to admit the possibility of a typo?

---

It is good to get some humor into this too-acrimonious discussion. :) Mr. B, who is a talented photographer with a show currently at the Risk Press Gallery in Sebastopol, and I have indeed been having on ongoing FEUD about oral communication, which has nothing to do with Efren Carrillo. So there are often back stories to how we respond in the moment.

I re-pledge to do my best to lay low on this matter until the Oct. 11 court date. I must admit that I have already failed, with this email and with the quote from the PD article about the victim's lawyer finally being quoted. Previously, it was only the defendant's lawyer being quoted. I felt that was news-worthy, and tried my best not to add any of my personal opinions.

My apologies for my typos. I am, however, glad to hear that there are still some Freudians out there. I am more inclined toward Jung, though I admit that Freud was important.

Always happy to provide amusement. And yes, of course I realized it was a typo, but it seemed like a remarkably apposite one. Really, folks, lets keep our sense of humor.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sara S:

And I was amused by YOUR slip:

"Also I was amused by the Feudian slip in your last sentence:"

What's "Feudian" mean, since you don't seem to admit the possibility of a typo?

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

I re-pledge to do my best to lay low on this matter until the Oct. 11 court date. I must admit that I have already failed, with this email and with the quote from the PD article about the victim's lawyer finally being quoted.

---

Just curious if anyone on here who read that article, and read what the prosecution-side said, now feels an impulse to even just briefly apologize for their extreme open-endedness...? It's a question, not a request. The deliberate, strident accumulation on here of strong, unyielding assertions regarding the alleged "limitless possibilities" concerning the nature of what happened? (And anyone professing anything else is a politically-motivated, full-on lynch mob.) Despite overwhelming "circumstantial evidence" that certain things could be ruled out completely. No, she didn't call 911 to get help for Efren, as one of many examples. I'm not going to argue and will end it there except to point out that some people don't have a problem eating their hat, however tiny of a nibble was required.

Strident open-endedness? Unyielding about limitless possibilities? Do I really need to point out the absurdity here?

If I am to be counted among those you are complaining about, you are seriously misrepresenting my views, and those of others who have posted in a similar vein. The examples you seem to be referring to of people offering alternative (and less criminal) explanations for the events in question were responding to the unyielding assertions put forward by the accusers as to what "obviously" happened, with references to "unrefuted" evidence, some of which, as I have pointed out before, are probably libelous.

In answer to these allegations, it was pointed out that first, there are a number of other, less criminal explanations, second that all the accounts we have so far are from law enforcement and prosecution sources (thus very unlikely to be cast in a manner sympathetic to the accused); we have, for obvious and normal legal reasons, not yet heard from the defense, and third that under the customary presumption of innocence principle we should withhold out judgment until the proper time. I realize that the presumption of innocence is a legal concept intended for application in the courtroom, and that you are quite entitled to your own opinion as to the guilt of the accused, but a fair minded person at least bears in mind the possibility, however remote, that they may be wrong. All three of these cautions are still in force.

What the accusers here have been doing is to keep up a constant barrage of ever-escalating accusations falsely represented as clear and obvious facts, reposts of every letter to the editor that agrees with them (though not the ones that don't) and repetitive demands for political action. This is where all the stridency and unyielding assertions have been coming from. I have seen no stridency on the other side, just suggestions about what might have happened in response to absolute assertions about what did (allegedly) happen. None of us knows what happened, it's just that some of us admit we don't, while others claim they do know. On this topic I would turn to the great Bertrand Russell, who said, "The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."

So my message to the accusers is: if you want to pursue a recall, get out there start collecting signatures. In the meantime please present your opinion as simply your opinion, and not as established fact.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by dzerach:

Just curious if anyone on here who read that article, and read what the prosecution-side said, now feels an impulse to even just briefly apologize for their extreme open-endedness...? It's a question, not a request. The deliberate, strident accumulation on here of strong, unyielding assertions regarding the alleged "limitless possibilities" concerning the nature of what happened? (And anyone professing anything else is a politically-motivated, full-on lynch mob.) Despite overwhelming "circumstantial evidence" that certain things could be ruled out completely. No, she didn't call 911 to get help for Efren, as one of many examples. I'm not going to argue and will end it there except to point out that some people don't have a problem eating their hat, however tiny of a nibble was required.

---

For those who do not read the PD daily regularly, following is today's letter on Supervisory Efren Carrillo. No comment from me.

Aghast at Carrillo
EDITOR: I read with shock, again, about Supervisor Efren Carrillo's poor decision to even think that he would be a welcome committee member at the county's Family Justice Center in Santa Rosa. Hello, we are talking about battered, sexually and emotionally abused women here (“Carrillo told to avoid crisis center,” Thursday).

Then, he has the audacity to say that he “didn't need to be told” that he was not welcome and that “he decided on his own” not to return. This is a man whose ego is still so inflated, who displays sociopathic, addictive behavior in that he places blame on others and credits himself for decisions that others need to make for him to keep others out of harm's way.

This supervisor needs to be fired since he cannot make the right decision to do the right and just thing to step down and to get out of everyone else's way.
ANNIE DELGADO, Penngrove

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

I realize that the presumption of innocence is a legal concept intended for application in the courtroom, and that you are quite entitled to your own opinion as to the guilt of the accused, but a fair minded person at least bears in mind the possibility, however remote, that they may be wrong. All three of these cautions are still in force.

---

I agree and am glad to hear it. You make many fine points throughout. However, we DO now know something, we know how the victim feels in this "the wide range of human possibility" regarding what actually happened. This is the phrase or theme that I was alluding to earlier with my expression "limitless possibilities." Neither are absurd reflections of what has been asserted prior. Both unfairly and equally strip the actual incident as reported of any meaningful context, as if we knew nothing at all -- and can believe nothing at all. I am not accusing you, but do you not see in your response to this new development an unintended, yet direct implication that the victim is not only full-out lying, but doing so to the manipulative extreme of having certain very strong feelings that I guess she doesn't in truth have -- were I to accept your full explanation. If so, this is making the victim guilty in advance.

I truly appreciate and did learn from your logical, articulate explanation here. In accord with your explanation, I wonder if this alleged lack of fair-mindedness that you refer to here wouldn't better be paraded out in public by offering a direct demonstration of its living contrast: moderation and reason. Instead of many hands slamming down an equally opposing counterweight --- as I understand you to have partially explained, done mostly out of necessity for balance.

I think this counterweight as constructed on here over time unintentionally yields a lack of fair-mindedness and compassion for not only the other party in the incident, but the entire county that is on the receiving end of this.

In the request to not judge in advance, people are also implicitly being directed to make no distinctions, to exercise no sense of discernment whatsoever, not even in a situation that will soon become a county crisis in governance with one-fifth of the decision-making hamstrung. A (fair?) price paid for the well-intentioned feelings of wanting to take away one person's pain --and prove a point--- possibly at the expense of hundreds of thousands of other people.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

Strident open-endedness? Unyielding about limitless possibilities? Do I really need to point out the absurdity here?

If I am to be counted among those you are complaining about, you are seriously misrepresenting my views, and those of others who have posted in a similar vein. The examples you seem to be referring to of people offering alternative (and less criminal) explanations for the events in question were responding to the unyielding assertions put forward by the accusers as to what "obviously" happened, with references to "unrefuted" evidence, some of which, as I have pointed out before, are probably libelous.

In answer to these allegations, it was pointed out that first, there are a number of other, less criminal explanations, second that all the accounts we have so far are from law enforcement and prosecution sources (thus very unlikely to be cast in a manner sympathetic to the accused); we have, for obvious and normal legal reasons, not yet heard from the defense, and third that under the customary presumption of innocence principle we should withhold out judgment until the proper time.

What the accusers here have been doing is to keep up a constant barrage of ever-escalating accusations falsely represented as clear and obvious facts, reposts of every letter to the editor that agrees with them (though not the ones that don't) and repetitive demands for political action. This is where all the stridency and unyielding assertions have been coming from. I have seen no stridency on the other side, just suggestions about what might have happened in response to absolute assertions about what did (allegedly) happen. None of us knows what happened, it's just that some of us admit we don't, while others claim they do know. On this topic I would turn to the great Bertrand Russell, who said, "The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."

So my message to the accusers is: if you want to pursue a recall, get out there start collecting signatures. In the meantime please present your opinion as simply your opinion, and not as established fact.

Patrick Brinton

---

I prefer the term "accuser" to "victim" to describe the person making the accusation. Calling her a victim presupposes that she is honest and accurately perceived what happened, and that the conduct described was criminal. None of these conditions is known for certain. Saying that Carillo's conduct could have non-criminal explanations does not automatically imply that the accuser is a liar (though that possibility cannot be ruled out); it could simply be that she misread the circumstances. (There was a recent incident in which a person trying to get help after an accident frightened a householder so much she called the police in panic, and when the police arrived they shot and killed the accident victim.) Neither does it say that Carillo is definitely innocent of criminal conduct or intent. It simply says that we do not have enough information on which to make a judgment.

As far as I know we have not in fact heard directly from the accuser; we have had a statement from her lawyer. This gives rise to the further question: why does she feel she needs a lawyer? Her interests in the criminal proceedings against Carillo are properly and adequately served by the prosecution. I think it is worth bearing in mind that when the case, if there is one, comes to court, it will not be called (name of accuser) vs. Carillo, but rather People vs Carillo. One possible explanation of her need for a lawyer may be that she is considering some kind of civil suit against Carillo. Again I do not say that this is so, but it is certainly a possibility. In this case the lawyer would have a strong interest in portraying his client as having been severely wronged whether or not that was actually the case.

So unless you are willing to contend that women never make false or mistaken accusations against men, a contention that I believe you would have a very hard time proving in the face of multiple credible and even proven examples of both having occurred in the past, you are not entitled to state as a fact that we have enough evidence to form an opinion on Carillo's culpability.

As to the state of affairs concerning the Board of Supervisors, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. The County of Sonoma will no doubt manage to carry on just as functionally (or disfunctionally) as usual in the face of these circumstances. Districts have suffered in the past and will suffer in the future from representatives that through sickness, family difficulties, laziness or plain incompetence have not been able to be all we might wish, and somehow we have survived, and we will survive this. I think there are often more dangers (not to mention expense) in intemperate and unconsidered action than in waiting for things to take their normal course. Let us all take a deep breath, calm down and realize that things are seldom as important or urgent as they might be portrayed by people who just may have other agendas (finding a good excuse to get rid of a politician that they already opposed) than simply concern for the accuser (not yet proven to be a victim.)

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by dzerach:

I agree and am glad to hear it. You make many fine points throughout. However, we DO now know something, we know how the victim feels in this "the wide range of human possibility" regarding what actually happened. ...

---

I am not sure why it is any concern of yours how I spend my time, but you may rest assured that I have many better things to do than count peoples' posts, which is why I am pleased that it is so easy and takes so little of my valuable time to do so. I expressed no desire to limit the debate; I wrote to support and encourage Shepherd in his declared intention, which he seemed to be having some difficulty fulfilling.

No doubt the debate will continue, and I will choose to continue make my views known or refrain from doing so with or without your approval or blessing.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

And Sebastacat would ask YOU to find something better to do than to count the number of times that someone has posted on a particular subject.

The debate will continue, Patrick - with or without your approval or blessing.

---

Maybe you believe that she should be referred to as a mere "accuser," but I and many others with whom I have spoken do not.

I will continue to refer to the woman who called 9-1-1 twice on the morning of July 13, 2013 at 3:40 a.m. as the victim.

I think we should all make an effort to familiarize ourselves with Proposition 9, which was the Victim's Bill of Rights -- which is also known as Marsy's Law -- which was passed in 2008 by the People of the State of California, which gives victims of crimes certain important rights.

And these rights are considered to be so important by the people of California that this landmark law amended some portions of the California Constitution so that victims of crimes would be guaranteed certain rights.

The law also has provisions which ensure that the victims of crimes will not be left out of the judicial process.

The reason given in the latest Press Democrat article as to why the victim retained a lawyer was so that her Marsy's Law rights would be protected and enforced. And I applaud the victim for doing so. If I were a victim of a similar crime, I would do the same thing.

And since I have been a victim of a different type of crime in the past at the hands of another, I share in the victim's outrage and hope that she will avail herself of every avenue which may be available to her in her personal pursuit of peace and justice.

And I will continue to speak out and pray for her now and in the future - just as I have in the past - with or without anybody's approval, criticism or blessing.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

I prefer the term "accuser" to "victim" to describe the person making the accusation. Calling her a victim presupposes that she is honest and accurately perceived what happened, and that the conduct described was criminal. None of these conditions is known for certain....

---

It is not a matter of belief that makes me refer to her as the accuser, it is the only description we know to be true. She may indeed establish the fact that she is a victim, but she may not. If she does, I will willingly acknowledge her as such. Until she does, I will not.

You do not even address what seems to me to be the defining question: do you assert that accusers never lie and are never mistaken? If you do not, and it is hard to see how anyone could make such an assertion, then you must admit to at least the possibility that one or other is the case here, in which case she is not a victim in the sense that you are using the term. Therefore calling her that now is at the very least, premature.

It may not have occurred to you that those of you putting forward this point of view may actually be helping Carillo. If his attorney can show that it is likely to be difficult to find an unbiased jury, he can ask for a change of venue, almost always beneficial to the defense.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

Maybe you believe that she should be referred to as a mere "accuser," but I and many others with whom I have spoken do not.....

---

Since I saw absolutely no mention of any effort which may have been expended by you researching Marsy's Law, I am going to conclude that you did not bother to read it and familiarize yourself with its many applicable provisions.

Regarding your assertion that the victim could be lying, I will remind you and others that the laws for lying and for filing false police reports about matters of a serious nature such as this are quite stiff. I recently heard on the news that one woman was sentenced to a year in jail for doing just that.

But if you wish to dwell in a castle built of such possibilities and euphemisms (i.e., that the woman in question should be referred to as the "accuser" and not the "victim") I certainly can't prevent you from doing that -- and I won't.

However, I find it quite sad that you have cast such a dim light upon so many people who simply do not deserve it -- the victim, the police, those who have spoken out in favor of the victim -- but not the one person whose reprehensible conduct has gotten us to this wretched discussion in which we now find ourselves engaged: Efren himself.

And Sebastacat finds THAT to be the most disturbing thing of all.

No, I have much better things to do with my very limited time than to engage in an eternal, hair-pulling game of literary Ping-Pong with you, Patrick, so this will be my last post in reponse to your many posts on this subject.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

It is not a matter of belief that makes me refer to her as the accuser, it is the only description we know to be true.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

Saying that Carillo's conduct could have non-criminal explanations does not automatically imply that the accuser is a liar (though that possibility cannot be ruled out); it could simply be that she misread the circumstances....simply... we do not have enough information on which to make a judgment....I prefer the term "accuser" to "victim" to describe the person making the accusation.

---

Yes, I'm glad you pointed out the grey space. However, wouldn't it make more sense in your line of reasoning to call this alleged accuser, "the other party." ? If her temporary role at this juncture is not that of victim --- as would indeed normally be the case in a truly civilized society (regardless of biological sex) ---how does the Default Designation then become "accuser" ? Maybe this is a neutral word in the legal sphere, but not in the shared language/dictionary. She has been made guilty of some pretty severe stuff in your attempt to remain objective.

So, that's fine to leave all of this for the courtroom to figure out --or to dismiss the case altogether. A private citizen's guilt or innocence. I guess he's now -- slowly -- well on his way to a full recovery, personally -- eliminating the probability for more suspicious or obstructive events for the county.

On an ironic note, if the other party turns out to be this ambitious and spectacular liar that you are leaving the door open for her to be....And it comes to pass the supervisor had been engaged in an ongoing attempt to personally associate with this type of person.... Again, "out of the courtroom stuff " does bear upon the public's ability to trust sound decision-making in the public sphere.

While I found your reply to be exemplary clear-thinking throughout, if not slightly too narrow in scope, it does leave me behind with two loose pebbles (in my shoe, that is).

As fellow inheritors of the tradition of Western civilization --and the court system -- I believe it was podfish who left a concise post ( half a Russian novel ago) that beautifully cut to the chase: Caesar's wife. In other words, it doesn't matter if Caesar's wife (Efren) did or didn't. Likewise the placing in brackets of the other party as victim or accuser:

Efren "ought not even to be under (THIS DEGREE OF) suspicion." You and your cohorts cannot blame it solely on politics, although you likely will.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

As to the state of affairs concerning the Board of Supervisors, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. The County of Sonoma will no doubt manage to carry on just as functionally (or disfunctionally) as usual in the face of these circumstances. Districts have suffered in the past and will suffer in the future from representatives that through sickness, family difficulties, laziness or plain incompetence have not been able to be all we might wish, and somehow we have survived, and we will survive this. I think there are often more dangers (not to mention expense) in intemperate and unconsidered action than in waiting for things to take their normal course.

---

Keep in mind that when these types of distractions transpire at the national or state level, they are no less damaging but better absorbed by the populace. When they happen in smaller confines, at the town, city, or county level, they have a greater, genuine impact, as they well should. There is nowhere else for the buck to stop.

There's a good reason why certain proverbs have not disappeared over time. I don't think this Caesar one, with its untenable extremes, remains solely because people love a good misogynistic tale. Pompeia: her mere "energy," if you will, and maybe a short-sighted decision-making, apparently opened the door wide enough to allow for doubt of her character. Which not only reflected on Casesar personally, but Caesar understood that good governance itself cannot thrive with these types of distractions and ongoing impressions.

Some might argue the instruction is outdated. Even while we slog through the age of " internet footprint" redaction, and a pragmatic concern for how others might interpret us...I guess there are two different standards, one for the elite -- voila, its' opposite for the serfs! This schism is: corruption in government.

Footnote recklessly culled from Wikipedia wherein the Supervisor of the Fifth is compared to Pompeia (and not to Clodius), and Casear to the electorate -

A young patrician named Publius Clodius Pulcher managed to gain admittance disguised as a woman, apparently for the purpose of seducing Pompeia, Caesar's wife. He was caught and prosecuted for sacrilege. Caesar gave no evidence against Clodius at his trial, and Clodius was acquitted. Nevertheless, Caesar divorced Pompeia, saying that "my wife ought not even to be under suspicion."

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

I have much better things to do with my very limited time than to engage in an eternal, hair-pulling game of literary Ping-Pong with you

---

I can sympathize with your difficulty. Were I arguing your side of the debate I would have given up some time ago.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

this will be my last post

---

Works for me.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by dzerach:

Yes, I'm glad you pointed out the grey space. However, wouldn't it make more sense in your line of reasoning to call this alleged accuser, "the other party." ?

---

I call her the accuser because that is what she is. I do not see that this is any kind of slur, even in common parlance, and certainly does not imply any guilt on her part. If you prefer "the other party" I suppose that is acceptable, though it is a little non-specific (there are a number of "other parties" to this controversy).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by dzerach:

if the other party turns out to be this ambitious and spectacular liar that you are leaving the door open for her to be....

---

Who said she had to be "ambitious and spectacular" if she is making a false accusation? She may have said things in the heat of the moment that she then felt she could not back away from. And as I pointed out there is an equal chance she may have misread the situation entirely, and honestly described what she mistakenly thought was happening. I repeat that simply keeping an open mind about whether or not a criminal act took place does not imply any malice on anyone's part, and these repeated attempts to use escalatory language to portray my views as being in some way insulting to the "other party" are inappropriate appeals to emotional response at the expense of reason, and misrepresent what I am saying.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by dzerach:

Caesar's wife. In other words, it doesn't matter if Caesar's wife (Efren) did or didn't. Likewise the placing in brackets of the other party as victim or accuser:

Efren "ought not even to be under (THIS DEGREE OF) suspicion." You and your cohorts cannot blame it solely on politics, although you likely will.

---

It is unwise to base any part of your case on these kinds of sayings. If we are to seriously take the point of view that anyone in public office accused of anything is automatically to be condemned because he should not even be suspected of anything, then all you have to do to get rid of someone would be to make a sufficiently serious allegation against them. And I do not blame the fact that he is under criminal suspicion on politics, I blame the tendency to proclaim him undoubtedly guilty without even the benefit of a trial on politics.

Patrick Brinton

"Difficulty"? No.

Frustration? Yes.

When someone with whom I am trying to have an intelligent conversation simply ignores relevant, pertinent information which I am politely bringing to their attention -- as was the case with my penultimate post -- Sebastacat becomes frustrated.

And, unfortunately I find that severing communication with such people who refuse to even acknowledge such pertinent information is the only viable alternative.

If you wish to take another swipe at me, you are free to do so.

Have it your way, Patrick.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

I can sympathize with your difficulty. Were I arguing your side of the debate I would have given up some time ago.

---

I did not find the information you provided either relevant or pertinent to the present discussion, except perhaps for providing a possible answer as to why she hired a lawyer, which was not really the central point at issue. We could, if you like, have a debate about victims' rights, and I do have opinions about that, but that is not the discussion we have been engaged in, and I would prefer not to muddy the waters.

The present discussion concerns what I see as your and others' habit of presenting what are at present allegations as established fact, and publicly declaring Carillo as "obviously" guilty of criminal conduct; in some cases of conduct and motives that even the prosecution has not publicly accused him of. In the course of this discussion the question arose of whether it is proper to refer to the person making the allegations as a victim before this fact has been properly established. My view is that this designation is prejudicial. What rights she has as a victim depend on her being able to show that she is indeed a victim (i.e. that actual criminal conduct took place) so I fail to see what their relevance is to this discussion.

I apologize if you perceive me as "swiping" at you; compared with some of the "discussion" that takes place on this forum I consider my occasional light-hearted pokes pretty mild, but if they are wounding to you I will try to refrain.

Patrick Brinton

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

"Difficulty"? No.

Frustration? Yes.

When someone with whom I am trying to have an intelligent conversation simply ignores relevant, pertinent information which I am politely bringing to their attention -- as was the case with my penultimate post -- Sebastacat becomes frustrated.

And, unfortunately I find that severing communication with such people who refuse to even acknowledge such pertinent information is the only viable alternative.

If you wish to take another swipe at me, you are free to do so.

Have it your way, Patrick.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sebastacat:

...
No, I have much better things to do with my very limited time than to engage in an eternal, hair-pulling game of literary Ping-Pong with you, Patrick, so this will be my last post in response to your many posts on this subject.

---

Sebastacat clearly lacks the courage of his/her convictions. And there is nothing literary in this silly game Sebastacat plays. When Sebastacat says, "this will be my last response", we should hear no more from Sebastacat on the subject.

Please stop the insults, Photolite.

And please be advised that I do not take direction from you.

I will post as many times as I want - with or without your blessing or permission.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by photolite:

""No, I have much better things to do with my very limited time than to engage in an eternal, hair-pulling game of literary Ping-Pong with you, Patrick, so this will be my last post in reponse to your many posts on this subject".

Sebastacat clearly lacks the courage of his/her convictions. And there is nothing literary in this silly game Sebastacat plays. When Sebastacat says, "this will be my last response", we should hear no more from Sebastacat on the subject.

---

the woman carrillo frightened into calling 911 twice has a lawyer because the court system provided her with one. the courts have gotten lots of public feedback about how these kind of cases are prosecuted and a law was passed named for a woman murdered by someone she had accused of harassment. this lawyer is probably responsible for the napa da still considering charges and will also be involved in any plea deal, the most likely outcome. carrillo has admitted much culpability, probably against the advise of his lawyer, but hey he is a politician trying to keep his job and used to taking public opinion risks. the facts of the night are not in dispute. we all get to speculate why? it is extremely common for friends and admirers of someone caught with their pants down to think,"thats not who i know, there must be an excusing explanation." even when that someone admits their pants were down and sometime drinking is a problem.

it is not intemperate action to discuss the suitability of a elected official, it is a citizens responsibility. take your blinders off, take another look at your man, and quit chastising those who are interested and care about how we are governed.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

...I think there are often more dangers (not to mention expense) in intemperate and unconsidered action than in waiting for things to take their normal course. Let us all take a deep breath, calm down and realize that things are seldom as important or urgent as they might be portrayed by people who just may have other agendas (finding a good excuse to get rid of a politician that they already opposed) than simply concern for the accuser (not yet proven to be a victim.)

---

We know very few "facts of the night". Why does it upset you so that many people want to know all the facts before a judgement is made?
What's your big hurry?
Could it be that you just don't like Efren's political decisions and you would want him out quickly no matter what?
Well, go ahead and blast away. You're probably not changing anyone's mind, but if it makes you feel better...

Tom

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

... the facts of the night are not in dispute. we all get to speculate why? it is extremely common for friends and admirers of someone caught with their pants down to think,"thats not who i know, there must be an excusing explanation." even when that someone admits their pants were down and sometime drinking is a problem.

it is not intemperate action to discuss the suitability of a elected official, it is a citizens responsibility. take your blinders off, take another look at your man, and quit chastising those who are interested and care about how we are governed.

---

as far as i know the only thing disputed by efren or his lawyer that was reported in the pd was the intention of efren. the rest he apologized for. and we probably will never know more without a trial, which is highly unlikely. so the facts are in. efren's action were not serious enough to win a felony trial against adraian, probably the best criminal defense lawyer in sonoma county. carrillo will either plead to a misdemeanor or the case will be dropped.

what upsets me is ostriches like you who think this doesn't seriously impact 5th district residents and the county in general and just kick sand at people trying to figure out what to do. i voted for efren the first time, in the runoff, not for his second term. the biggest factor in my voting choice was who else was running. i agreed with some of his vote decisions and admired his hard work and appreciated preventing preservation r.i.p. my biggest disappointment was when i asked for help with the prmd. while i might have voted for efren again, depending on his opponent, now i think he is a lame duck creeper, ineffective and in the way. and from his current actions and public statements, it seems like he agrees!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tomcat:

We know very few "facts of the night". Why does it upset you so that many people want to know all the facts before a judgement is made?
What's your big hurry?
Could it be that you just don't like Efren's political decisions and you would want him out quickly no matter what?
Well, go ahead and blast away. You're probably not changing anyone's mind, but if it makes you feel better...

Tom

---

I do not believe that "the facts are in". You can spin it any way you want, but I just don't see that as true. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

Since you think I'm an "ostrich", Please enlighten me on exactly how you think that the 5th district in which I live, and the county in general, is so seriously impacted that we can't wait for all the facts to make our decision.

If I have "kicked sand at people who are trying to figure out what to do", I sincerely apologize to them! I had no idea I was doing that. This sandbox can get a little rough at times, but I always try to be reasonable and polite.

If you want to have a politician in office who does everything YOU think they should do, you have two choices that I can see.
1. contribute mega bucks to a candidate and hope you own them so they will do exactly as you say.
2. get elected yourself and do whatever you think is best, despite what your constituents and contributors might think.

As for Efren being a "lame duck" or "ineffective"... we shall see about that after this case is concluded... and I'll bet he wouldn't agree with you at all.

Tom
(again, sorry about any unintentionally misdirected sand)

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

as far as i know ...

---

yes your head is in the sand and your feet are flinging it every which way. i could share more reasons why i think we will learn nothing more about the night in question but you don't address the ones already written. and where do you think efren's head is at, given his quotes in the pd concerning the family justice center gaff? i'm concerned about forestville, and roseland, and my kids school up the street. the bos decides things like roads, water, and now power. we need a supervisor who can solve problems and bring people together, not awol.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tomcat:

I do not believe that "the facts are in". You can spin it any way you want, but I just don't see that as true. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

Since you think I'm an "ostrich", Please enlighten me on exactly how you think that the 5th district in which I live, and the county in general, is so seriously impacted that we can't wait for all the facts to make our decision.

If I have "kicked sand at people who are trying to figure out what to do", I sincerely apologize to them! I had no idea I was doing that. This sandbox can get a little rough at times, but I always try to be reasonable and polite.

If you want to have a politician in office who does everything YOU think they should do, you have two choices that I can see.
1. contribute mega bucks to a candidate and hope you own them so they will do exactly as you say.
2. get elected yourself and do whatever you think is best, despite what your constituents and contributors might think.

As for Efren being a "lame duck" or "ineffective"... we shall see about that after this case is concluded... and I'll bet he wouldn't agree with you at all.

Tom
(again, sorry about any unintentionally misdirected sand)

---

I would like to underline an astute observation that Ross has made regarding the unlikely possibility that anything else will come up in some future "trial" or court date. Although I think it is still possible that some new information or evidence could still surface in this mess, I believe it to be minimal or nearly impossible. Or at least that anything "new" will come up that will suddenly turn things around one way or the other. Folks who are obsessed with using legal due process as an argument to defend Efren are making the colossal mistake of overlooking the probability that it won't even go that far. They are overlooking the myriad of different scenarios that can result from all of this.

Sure, everyone has a Constitutional right to due process, but focusing exclusively on that scenario alone is a "single story" or a kind of stereotype because it does not take into consideration all of the other possible events that can take place. For example, the scenario that there won't be a trial is just one among many other possible outcomes. Insisting, like the "Efrener's" do, that this is strictly a trial case that needs to unfold is an extremely limited view of reality. There are many different ways that this whole blunder can play out. It is not exclusively about a trial that might never take place, etc.

I understand that apologists for Efren are insisting on his Constitutional rights but that is focusing faaar too much attention on just one aspect of a legal process resulting as a consequence of Efren's actions (actions to which Efren has already admitted to). Remember what they say when the police read you your Miranda rights, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law..." And the fact that Efren has repeatedly and publicly admitted guilt is just an aside to the whole fanfare.

Again, it is unlikely (but not impossible) that this will go to trial. Efren has THE BEST criminal defense attorney available in Sonoma County. He is not going to screw things up. If there is going to be a trial, and if there is going to be new evidence, fine then, let it unfold as it should. But that is ONLY ONE possible scenario. And insisting on only one possible outcome is trite, to say the least, and it is excruciatingly narrow minded, to be more accurate. The attitude of Efren's apologists clearly denotes a head-in-the-sand mentality with blinders to either side, just like the ones put on horses, so that they can't see anything else going on around them.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

yes your head is in the sand and your feet are flinging it every which way....

---

I've yet to see any Efren "apologists" on this thread. I've only seen those that acknowledge the possibility that there might be information that is yet to be revealed and those who believe otherwise.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:

...I understand that apologists for Efren are insisting on his Constitutional rights but that is focusing faaar too much attention on just one aspect of a legal process resulting as a consequence of Efren's actions (actions to which Efren has already admitted to)....

---

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I'm sure you are not perfect.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shepherd:

Magick's presentation was excellent and the other dozen speakers asking Efren to resign were also persuasive. I was also surprised that Efren's supporters, including PR people, were not there. No one spoke on his behalf. Perhaps his PR people did not plan to come, as someone suggested. Another possibility is that they realized that people were planning to come to ask him to resign, so they decided not to come. They definitely have a strategy of some sort. Following is a letter from today's PD, "Orchestrated Campaign?" about that. Yesterday's PD had an excellent letter by Yannick Philips from Sonoma Valley about the Carrillo Controversy.

Orchestrated campaign?
EDITOR: Don't you think it odd that there appears to be a constant flow of letters congratulating Supervisor Efren Carrillo on how he's working so hard to fix his demons and how good everything will be once he's recovered and back on the job?
The guy manages to get himself arrested twice, the latter in particularly concerning circumstances (not my fault, must have been the booze), and his heroic recovery is lauded while the potential crime is played down.
Are we seeing a PR handling campaign in action? The one where you delay until the public forgets, apologize without admitting guilt, blame the problem on a disease, then orchestrate your supporters to send letters saying just how brave, talented and a role model you are?
MARK TOMLINSON
Petaluma

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I'm sure you are not perfect.

---

Every time I see someone judging someone for judging, criticizing someone for criticizing, shaming someone for shaming, or throwing stones at someone for throwing stones (and I see these things a lot), I just have to laugh. :lol2:

Yes, I am well aware that you are perfect Dixon as are your opinions and that gives me a good laugh.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

Every time I see someone judging someone for judging, criticizing someone for criticizing, shaming someone for shaming, or throwing stones at someone for throwing stones (and I see these things a lot), I just have to laugh. :lol2:

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

Yes, I am well aware that you are perfect Dixon as are your opinions and that gives me a good laugh.

---

:nearmiss:Sheeesh! Of course that's not my opinion of myself.
I make a point about the irony of people's criticizing others for criticizing, and you respond with a snotty ad hominem attack. You can do better than this, Marilyn. Or maybe you can't.

Oh, by the way Dixon, I think the "elephant fart" station you were looking for originated in the 'recall Effren campaign'.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

:nearmiss:Sheeesh! Of course that's not my opinion of myself.
I make a point about the irony of people's criticizing others for criticizing, and you respond with a snotty ad hominem attack. You can do better than this, Marilyn. Or maybe you can't.

---

Efren was charged with the misdemeanor of "peeking" today. I have started a new thread called "Efren charged with "misdemeanor peeking" in General Community to discuss this. I am closing this thread.