PD Editorial: Don't Hide Details of Carrillo Case

[Sara S]

Supervisor Efren Carrillo in court alongside attorney Chris Andrian.
The Press Democrat

PD Editorial: Don't Hide Details of Carrillo Case

Published: Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 3:00 a.m.

Remember the handgun that California Assemblyman Tim Donnelly attempted to take through airport security at a Southern California airport two years ago? It turns out it wasn't even registered to him. It was registered to an 83-year-old San Bernardino County woman who said she sold it years earlier.

Donnelly, who was fined $2,125 and placed on three years' probation for carrying a loaded firearm in public without a permit, says he bought the gun five years earlier and never got around to having it registered. None of this was known publicly until this week.

So why is it relevant now, particularly to readers in Sonoma County? Two reasons. First, because Donnelly is running for governor as a Republican challenger to Jerry Brown. Second, it's an example of the importance of transparency and the value of some facts that may not be evidence in a criminal case but still matter in the court of public opinion.

In this case, these facts about Donnelly and the gun only became known because the Los Angeles Times was recently given access to the police report. Our hope is that the same will happen here in Sonoma County concerning another case of an elected official who ran afoul of the law..

Last week, the trial of Sonoma County Supervisor Efren Carrillo was pushed back from March 7 to April 18. But few believe the case against Carrillo, who faces one misdemeanor charge of peeking related to a alcohol-laced attempt to interact with a female neighbor last summer, will go to trial. In fact, Carrillo's lawyer and the prosecutor in the case were scheduled to meet today with a judge to discuss a pre-trial settlement.

Carrillo could face jail time, but we doubt it will come to that given that he has no prior convictions. And given that the charge has been reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor, there's little direct risk to his continued service on the Board of Supervisors.

Given that, as we've stated before, our concern is less about the consequences of any pre-trial settlement and more about what happens next — whether the public will ever get a full understanding of what transpired that morning of July 13.

Given his status as an elected official, we believe the public has a prevailing interest in having access to the 911 tapes, booking photos and the full police report.

Santa Rosa's interim police Chief Hank Schreeder declined this newspaper's latest request for the 911 tapes, citing the ongoing prosecution. But given that, there should be no obstacle to releasing these documents, including the police report, after the case is resolved — as happened with the Donnelly case.

Because the charges eventually were dropped, the public never got a full understanding of what happened in 2012 when Carrillo was arrested following a fight outside a San Diego nightclub, in which one person was seriously injured.

The worst outcome this time around is not that the case will be settled. The worst outcome is that the details of the conduct of Sonoma County's 5th District representative will once again be hidden from public view.

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...nion/140229643

[Alex]

To add to Chris Adrian's Feb. 27 PD editorial: Don't Hide Details of Carrillo Case


THE POWER TO LIE

There's a big difference between how the letter of the law applies to you and how it applies to the lawmakers/enforcers. They can hold you to the rules they made with a righteous nose in the air but have the power to let themselves off for breaking any of them. They have the power to blatantly lie, slam the gavel and walk away. You don't.

Big power and little accountability equals corruption. This also means that regardless of law, your rights are ultimately unreliable and unprotected any time the rights-protectors-in-charge want to bend them to their benefit.

In the case of Efren Carrillo, the exact corrupt handling process is unfolding - a quick, deliberate withholding and obfuscation of facts, a totally unusual and unnecessary delay of proceedings compared to an average citizen, no alcohol test given totally against 'policy', all adding up to a totally different train of events than would have long ago already been quickly imposed on any other drunk Jose's attempted breaking and entering with suspected intention of sexual assault.

The cops know exactly what happened. It took Ravich a while to scour the lawbooks for some obscure law to create an illusion that they were doing their job but whitewash the severity. There it was - PEEKING!

What a slap in the face to the sleeping woman after a nearly naked drunk tore her bedroom screen at 3am. Efren may not have completed his plans but this must feel like getting raped by the system anyway.

In the case of Andy Lopez, Ravitch has dutifully begun the law enforcement tradition of the auto-response-planting-the-seed-of-future-plausible-deniability-for-blatant-abuse-of-power by calling cold-bloodedly riddling a kid with 7 bullets in broad daylight within 10 seconds of one sudden, surprising and probably disorienting verbal order from some stranger from a distance... an officer acting according to policy.

This informs Sonoma County that a war veteran and 24-year career officer is not required or expected to know the difference between a real and toy gun, or the difference between an active deadly threat and a kid in broad daylight walking totally alone in an open field minding his own business.

If Ravitch really believes this was acting according to policy she is truly incompetent. If not, she is lying and incompetent.

Who else is going to lie? I predict:
1. The other officer in the patrol car will lie. He give in to the pressure to say that he perceived the danger similarly, or can't really say/wasn't paying attention it happened 'so fast' (who is he and where’s his statement already anyway?).
2. Officer Gelhaus will lie with words or silence. If anything, only that he didn't overreact, only as trained.
3. If there's no jury, the judge will lie. He will go against both his conscience and intelligence, give in to backroom pressure and rule to excuse the officer from murder with some statement he doesn't really believe and dutifully spew the same crafted 'inconclusive' blah blah that all the other officer-murderers in other courtrooms have been excused with.

The proverbial fox controls the henhouse. This is not news.

The recent cases of both Carrillo and Lopez are just the most recent glaring red smoke bombs in our faces of law enforcement's power to bold faced lie whenever they want and how the letter of the law applies only to you, not the foxes in charge except when utterly undeniable.

Both those cases are a big FU to the community and showing of cards - favoritism, selective obfuscation of facts, inequality of charges and consequences, backroom deals, suppression of evidence, self-interest at your expense - all forms of intentional (the word they like to use the most) criminal law-breaking lying.

For starters, we need to demand that 100% of public law enforcement words, actions and interactions be video-taped. Any good reason not to have absolute truth on the table when possible and eradicate at least one big means of the foxes to lie?

[eeeeeeow]

What if Efren gained access to that woman's apartment? This incident of "peeking" is nothing short of attempted sexual assault. And he's damn lucky there were no toxicology test performed. It's disgusting to me how this is being whitewashed. And to those who support this creep, shame on you. You have no morals. Your lack of compassion is a sad commentary on how society treats those in power. What if it was your daughter scared to death in the middle of the night? This guy has to be held accountable no matter what he has done as supervisor. Efren Carrillo's elected seat is not a free pass to sexually assault anyone.

[tomcat]

...and wild accusations without proof show me what kind of a person YOU are.

Tom

What if Efren gained access to that woman's apartment? This incident of "peeking" is nothing short of attempted sexual assault. And he's damn lucky there were no toxicology test performed. It's disgusting to me how this is being whitewashed. And to those who support this creep, shame on you. You have no morals. Your lack of compassion is a sad commentary on how society treats those in power. What if it was your daughter scared to death in the middle of the night? This guy has to be held accountable no matter what he has done as supervisor. Efren Carrillo's elected seat is not a free pass to sexually assault anyone.

[Eileen M.]

...and getting arrested outside of a terrified woman's apartment in his underpants at 3:30 a.m. shows me what kind of a person HE is.

[haloshames]

As a Sonoma County resident and women's health advocate, I am deeply concerned at the special handling in this case. A woman in our community was frightened by someone trying to break into her home, and it turns out to be our county supervisor - clad in only underwear.

This is very troublesome to me; I cannot understand why this keeps getting pushed back and minimized.
A woman could have been raped or worse, a man is caught outside dressed inappropriately - he blames it on an alcohol problem -- so he is not responsible?

This is a reprehensible miscarriage of justice. Please remove him from office so he can get the help he needs.
Let's stop ignoring the elephant in our living room - and address the problem.

Keep the women of Sonoma County safe!

[


PD Editorial: Don't Hide Details of Carrillo Case

Published: Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 3:00 a.m.
...

[Ted Pole]

[tomcat]

You got SOME of your facts straight.
A women was frightened. He was caught outside, He was dressed inappropriately. He seems to blame alcohol.
That is what he is responsible for.

There is no evidence of special handling in this case.
There is no charge against him of trying to break into her home.
There is no evidence of any intention to rape or worse.

We would ALL be in a lot of trouble if we were responsible for what COULD have happened while we were doing various stupid things in our lives, but we are only responsible for what DID happen.

...and what do you have against elephants?

Tom

As a Sonoma County resident and women's health advocate, I am deeply concerned at the special handling in this case. A woman in our community was frightened by someone trying to break into her home, and it turns out to be our county supervisor - clad in only underwear.

This is very troublesome to me; I cannot understand why this keeps getting pushed back and minimized.
A woman could have been raped or worse, a man is caught outside dressed inappropriately - he blames it on an alcohol problem -- so he is not responsible?

This is a reprehensible miscarriage of justice. Please remove him from office so he can get the help he needs.
Let's stop ignoring the elephant in our living room - and address the problem.

Keep the women of Sonoma County safe!

[Shandi]

If he had gained access to her apartment, who, can say, without a doubt, and with prior knowledge of intent, that he would have raped her? Looking (peeking) in a window, or even trying to get in a window does not constitute attempted sexual assault. One action does not necessarily lead to the other. No one but the parties involved know the facts, which of course, are always distorted by individual perception or attempts to put the blame elsewhere.

This is not to say that Carillo, like others in power, don't get preferential treatment. That is a fact. Have any of us gotten preferential treatment at any time in our lives, maybe because we knew someone who could make a difference in our getting a job or a raise, or other things we wanted. I, myself, have been able to rent houses on 2 different occasions, because I knew someone who had the power to put me at the head of the line. Once I actually tried to refuse that privilege because I saw it as an unfair advantage, but the person who owned the house talked me into it, even though she didn't know me. She may have been impressed by my unusual behavior.

What if Efren gained access to that woman's apartment? This incident of "peeking" is nothing short of attempted sexual assault. And he's damn lucky there were no toxicology test performed. It's disgusting to me how this is being whitewashed. And to those who support this creep, shame on you. You have no morals. Your lack of compassion is a sad commentary on how society treats those in power. What if it was your daughter scared to death in the middle of the night? This guy has to be held accountable no matter what he has done as supervisor. Efren Carrillo's elected seat is not a free pass to sexually assault anyone.

[Shandi]

Tomcat,

I appreciate your statement of the facts we know for sure, and those we don't know.

You got SOME of your facts straight.
A women was frightened. He was caught outside, He was dressed inappropriately. He seems to blame alcohol.
That is what he is responsible for.

There is no evidence of special handling in this case.
There is no charge against him of trying to break into her home.
There is no evidence of any intention to rape or worse.

We would ALL be in a lot of trouble if we were responsible for what COULD have happened while we were doing various stupid things in our lives, but we are only responsible for what DID happen.

...and what do you have against elephants?

Tom

[Shandi]

Unfortunately, no one can keep the women of Sonoma County or any women safe. Predators exist, and will prey on the weak. We are a vulnerable gender, but there are things that we can do to keep ourselves safe. One basic thing is to keep our doors and wndows locked. There are many other things we can do, like being aware of how we may give mixed messages to men. This is a dangerous game that many women play, especially once we're in a position where sex is the next expectation, and all of a sudden we change our minds. The time to change our mind is before we're in a vulnerable positon. Alcohol affects judgement, so that's another area to recognize as one that increases our vulnerability. AWARENESS is key. Knowing our surroundings, and not taking unecessary risks that may put our lives in danger. Taking self defense courses can help our confidence, so we don't appear weak and vulnerable. We need to take our time getting to know people before we invite them into our homes, and before we go to theirs.

I was telling a male friend about an experience I had with a man I had recently met, and had gone out with 3 times. Once was to a Buddhist temple, another was a movie, and the third was a birthday party. This man invited me over for dinner, and I accepted, and brought a salad. We had already shared that we didn't want to get involved in an intimate relationship. I brought a conversational deck of cards over, in case we ran out of things to say. We had dinner, and then sat on the couch talking for an hour or so. Then he made his move! I was suprised, and didn't really respond in the way he seemed to want. He didn't force it, fortunately. But when he called again, I made excuses until he stopped calling. My friend said that "when a woman accepts an invitation to go to a man's home, sex is expected." So, I won't be accepting anymore invitations to men's homes, unless I'm sure that I'm open to being sexual. It seems that there are a lot of us operating on assumptions, and that's not the better part of wisdom.

As a Sonoma County resident and women's health advocate, I am deeply concerned at the special handling in this case. A woman in our community was frightened by someone trying to break into her home, and it turns out to be our county supervisor - clad in only underwear.

This is very troublesome to me; I cannot understand why this keeps getting pushed back and minimized.
A woman could have been raped or worse, a man is caught outside dressed inappropriately - he blames it on an alcohol problem -- so he is not responsible?

This is a reprehensible miscarriage of justice. Please remove him from office so he can get the help he needs.
Let's stop ignoring the elephant in our living room - and address the problem.

Keep the women of Sonoma County safe!

[Victoria Street]

If Efren Carillo is innocent, then the continual delaying of his trial is not helping his image any...

As if "peeking" isn't already serious enough - yuck! Really? You want this person representing you? Than I am really, very sorry for you. This isn't a feminist issue, folks. Decency is genderless. Sure - we can argue about what "could" have happened" or what "didn't" happen all you want. Never mind about what "could" have happened - don't lose sight of what DID! It's as if "peeking" has now been minimized. What if you caught some perv "peeking" at your daughter? What's the big deal? He didn't really ASSAULT her! Or checkin' out your wife through the bedroom window? It's okay - he was (perhaps) under the influence - no biggie!

By the way - whatever happened to the FACT that the victim heard the blinds rustling? Were the blinds on the OUTSIDE of the window? Maybe I've got my prepositions all askew, but if not, then that means the blinds were on the inside, and if they're "rustling", then somebody has just crossed that line between the great outdoors and the interior of someone's bedroom. Hmmm - sounds something along the lines of breaking and entering to me...

[tomcat]

What ever happened to "Considered Innocent until Proven Guilty"? ...or don't you believe in that?

Heck, it seems that half the folks on this Board would Liked to have seen him tared and feathered and run out of town on a rail with no trial at all even before he was charged with anything!
How progressive.

Judges delay trials for various reasons and as far a I know it has nothing to do with anyone's image. Lawyers on the other hand are paid to win acquittal, at any cost. I believe that all the delays in this case were by judges, weren't they?

If the prosecutor thought they could convict him of anything more than he is charged with, they would have charged him with more. They LOVE to win a big case. Let's face facts, they just don't have much of a case, even though they wish they did.

Does Hot Breath on blinds really count as entering? ...or was it the warm summer breeze?

Tom

If Efren Carillo is innocent, then the continual delaying of his trial is not helping his image any...

[Victoria Street]

>

. Does Hot Breath on blinds really count as entering? ...or was it the warm summer breeze?

Tom

Yeah, you're probably right, Tom - it was just the warm summer breeze. At his back, I might add, since he was "peeking". Must have been one helluva breeze, though since I believe that another FACT is that the screen was torn...

[Beverly Schenck]

Carrillo is one sick individual, and is protected by big money, and a broken legal system.

Yeah, you're probably right, Tom - it was just the warm summer breeze. At his back, I might add, since he was "peeking". Must have been one helluva breeze, though since I believe that another FACT is that the screen was torn...

[Victoria Street]

Oh yeah - and the camera, er, I mean phone, er, uh, well, you know what I mean...

Voyeurism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyeurism

[Ronaldo]