By Gustavo Arellano
By R. Scott Moxley
By Alfonso Delgado
By Courtney Hamilton
By Joel Beers
By Peter Maguire
By Charles Lam
By Charles Lam
* * *
SHERIFF IS ACCUSED OF PUNISHING MIKE CARONA ALLY
During Mike Carona's control of OCSD, Christine Murray served as a favored deputy because of her unswerving loyalty to the corrupt regime. When Carona faced sentencing for his post-FBI arrest conviction in 2009, Captain Murray wrote a public letter of support for her old boss' character. Within weeks, Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, Carona's comparatively squeaky-clean replacement, transferred Murray from a powerful position to a meaningless department job, and then dismissed her entirely seven months later in an alleged layoff due to budget constraints.
Murray is suing Hutchens, claiming she was illegally punished for expressing her First Amendment sentiments for Carona, who now fittingly resides in a Colorado federal prison. According to the lawsuit, Hutchens met with Murray in August 2008 and "shared her desire that the department move forward under her tenure without embarrassing scandals and maintaining public trust." Those words apparently didn't sink in because six months later, Murray served as Carona's character witness. In depositions, Hutchens claims her decision to dismiss Murray was not based on the captain's actions or character, but rather on eliminating unnecessary positions.
The assertion leaves Murray's Upland-based lawyer, Michael A. McGill, incredulous. In a brief filed this month, McGill accuses the sheriff of committing perjury because, in his view, she obviously covered up her desire to rid the department's management of perceived "fools" and "idiots." According to McGill, Hutchens relies on the 2001 book Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap & Others Don't as her guiding management strategy, which requires putting the right people in the right jobs.
"Incredibly, Sheriff Hutchens would now have us believe that she never took into consideration which captains and assistant sheriffs she was laying off," wrote McGill. "The evidence in this case completely contradicts [Hutchens'] assertion that [Murray's] dismissal had nothing to do with her individually."
The dispute is scheduled to go to trial in U.S. District Court Judge James V. Selna's Santa Ana courtroom next month.
"80 percent of all cops are criminals, they violate the laws while on duty and they are being paid to do so and be so". They are a criminal organization and are armed and dangerous. Jackbooted thugs.
Also, did you notice how in January of last year the Supreme court quietly mandated that law enforcement required a warrant before they could attach a GPS tracking device to a vehicle?
Sometimes my Twitter questions are just rhetorical lol
Crooked law enforcement has existed forever. The technology to violate your privacy has been around for decades. Therefore crooked cops don't need no stinking warrant lol.
guilt ridden former engineer of the surveillance state. Big Brother's little brother if you will.
Why am I reading this at 6:58 pm on 2/13 and it says the article was published at 12:00 am on 2/14? Is the reporter in Rio?
Love how the press is regurgitating law enforcement's claim that they did not 'intentionally' set fire to the cabin. Yet as they play the audio of police radio transmissions, they clearly say they're moving ahead with the 'plan' to 'burn'.
in today's vocabulary, serial killer is synonymous with psychopath. while christopher dorner is a "suspected" murderer on multiple accounts, he is by no means a psychopath. he may be sociopathic, and has obviously been driven to extremes by corrupt authority, but by no means is he psychopathic. he gave clear reasoning as to why he is doing what he is doing, and even told people "if you dont want to die, gtfo my way". so although people are dying at his hand, it's not his will (they are just an unfortunate obstacles as far as he is concerned).
@Cottonwood You, sir, are ahead of your time. Or, I am actually in Rio and it looks identical to Costa Mesa...