OCDA Says You Have the Right to Self-Incrimination

[Moxley Confidential] Defense attorneys claim OC prosecutors unfairly interrogate suspects

"This is a motion [by Sanders] that cries out for a hearing," Goethals stated. He scheduled a Feb. 28 evidentiary session and promises to explore the corruption allegations with sworn testimony possibly for "a week or two." That plan seemed to please Sanders. On the other side of the courtroom, Wagner didn't look so thrilled.

*     *     *

HERE COMES THE JUDGE
Earlier this month, the Irvine City Council hired retired Superior Court Judge Nancy Wieben Stock to oversee the issuance of subpoenas for city contractors that took millions of dollars in no-bid contracts at the Orange County Great Park but have refused unconditional cooperation with an audit that has already uncovered massive irregularities.

The public-accountability move, approved unanimously by the council's present Republican majority, was—not surprisingly—objected to by Larry Agran and Beth Krom, the council's Democrats who for 12 years helped to sabotage the park project by funneling as much as $174,000 per month in funds to their own campaign operatives.

A scathing, preliminary audit report issued in January by the well-respected financial forensics team at Hagen, Streiff, Newton & Oshiro Accountants recommended the government contractors should be forced to cooperate so that investigators can follow the eyebrow-raising money trail.

Wieben Stock enjoyed a 24-year career as a high-ranking superior court judge and now works as a private mediator at JAMS Orange Resolution Center. During her court tenure, she handled complex litigation cases and served as presiding judge. Perhaps most worrisome to Agran and Krom is that she's also a former federal prosecutor known to not appreciate unsavory conduct.

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
All
 
My Voice Nation Help
24 comments
capmotion
capmotion

"'This is a motion [by Sanders] that cries out for a hearing,' Goethals stated."

Many matters in criminal courts cry out for a hearing, but what is too often lacking are judges with insight and hormones to side with liberty over power, which was intended by the Framers but which rarely occurs.  Judges are way, way too interested in earning "endorsed by law enforcement" on their election campaign materials, so the requisite neutrality falls by the wayside in the majority of these fracases.

tongue_twister_for_t
tongue_twister_for_t topcommenter

"I have absolutely no influence over the proceedings and procedures over the trials that go on in these courtrooms". - Judge Derek Johnson.

Overheard him say this in public area to court clerk.

tongue_twister_for_t
tongue_twister_for_t topcommenter

"80 percent of ALL cops are criminals and violate the laws while they are ON DUTY".

tongue_twister_for_t
tongue_twister_for_t topcommenter

"The citizens have a right to defend themselves from the police":. - OCDA T. Rackaukas.

NoBullshit
NoBullshit

The only thing to learn from this is to not trust anybody once you are in the cell.  And be very wary of any public defender you have because they are very friendly with the DA's office.  They have to be;  they work next to each other day in and day out.

949girl
949girl topcommenter

I'm kind of on the fence about this issue because if you invoke your right to an attorney and then you are dumb enough to confess or give incriminating details to a jailhouse informant and the snitch testifies that is one thing.  I do feel it is entrapment but I also feel that you should have the common sense to keep your mouth shut.   But to be putting audio in to a cell is totally different.  Don't you have to give consent to be recorded? I think recording someone after they specifically said they wanted an attorney is wrong.  

 

18usc241
18usc241 topcommenter

"Matt Murphy, Wagner's DA colleague who is handling the Wozniak case, also took issue with Sanders' complaints that the OCDA used the informant known as "Inmate F"—a despicable Mexican Mafia, career criminal—to trick that defendant into talking."


When I read this Mr. Moxley, I wonder whether the white crack addict trash sent to harass me were current or former members of neo-Nazi gang groups in Orange County, CA.  I wonder if the latino trash sent to harass me were current or former gang members (maybe even Mexican mafia trash). And finally, I wonder if some in Orange County, CA law enforcement are moonlighting as cocaine traffickers since the criminal harassment by this police community began around the time that I was working for STSS Inc on law enforcement related engineering projects in Bogota, Colombia (with the cooperation of Colombian law enforcement). 


This US born latino man is left to ponder this because the FBI, Tony Rackauckas, Loretta Sanchez and the cities of Garden Grove and Anaheim are too criminal or too cowardly or both to help. 

18usc241
18usc241 topcommenter

Any American prosecutor or District attorney who fosters "a culture that confuses winning with justice" is an American traitor and criminal sociopath. This sort of person belongs in federal prison along side Mike Carona - permanently. Quite literally, a danger to the fabric of American society.  


I have personally seen what a society looks like when it's collapsed as a result of the criminal filth of it's politicians / police / military. It's nasty stuff. 

18usc241
18usc241 topcommenter

"prosecutors strenuously fought to keep secret but ultimately surrendered after a judge ordered their release"


So much obstruction from this sea of integrity called the Orange County, CA District Attorney's office. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about correct? Isn't that the bullshit you tell the American people? 

18usc241
18usc241 topcommenter

Since a collection of criminal sociopaths (cops / FBI / prosecutors? who knows ... you name it) in the Orange County, CA criminal justice system use criminal civilian confidential informants to harass. intimidate. damage property. invade home privacy. and attempt murder I assume that any testimony from an "in-custody informant" is backed up by audio / video tape evidence. If not, the prosecution/conviction has a high probability of being complete mierda.  

fc2479
fc2479

Hope Manny gets his job back with the Fullerton police....we are pulling for you buddy...good job in court....just saying scott....

Jeff Brusius Mahaffey
Jeff Brusius Mahaffey

Whether concerning civil or criminal matters, a strict adherence to the Constitution, the rules of evidence, legal ethical standards, as well as transparency & accountability in public funding, is crucial to maintaining a viable government & judicial system. This holds true regardless of one's political leanings.

Useyourbrain
Useyourbrain

@NoBullshit  

Or, here's a novel idea:  Stay out of trouble and chances are you won't get arrested; and this matter becomes a non-issue.

capmotion
capmotion

@949girl People need to learn to shut up, whether in jail, on the street, or being addressed by government.  You are never safe to talk about the facts of your matter, whether to cops, friends, cellmates, loved ones, or anyone except your attorney.  95% of the cases that are conviction bound are such because the suspect could not shut the hell up, or could not say "no" when asked for consent to search.  Government is not your friend - it is only its own friend, with its own agenda, and justice toward individuals or their families and friends is not part of that agenda.

rscottmoxley
rscottmoxley topcommenter

@949girl Good question. Given that even pretrial inmates have no right to privacy, the audio or visual cell bugging isn't controversial. Law enforcement does it all the time. But there is--or should be--a distinction between that conduct and the government using its powers over in-custody defendants to trick them into answering prosecutor questions after they've invoked their constitutional right not to talk. Either that right has meaning or it doesn't, no?

rscottmoxley
rscottmoxley topcommenter

@fc2479  Isn't he already working as Jimmy Kimmel's sidekick?

FishWithoutBicycle
FishWithoutBicycle

@Useyourbrain  

I suppose you are one of those individuals who believes that if someone is in jail they "deserve" to be there because they "must have done SOMETHING wrong" or else they wouldn't be incarcerated...even if they didn't commit the particular crime they were being locked up for! If you seriously believe everyone in jail is guilty and deserves to be there you are woefully delusional.

949girl
949girl topcommenter

@rscottmoxley @949girl I guess that is where I get a little confused.  I'm not sure what law it is or if it is even a law but I was always under the impression that video/audio recordings were not admissible in court if the person being recorded didn't give consent.  I guess that isn't the case from what you are saying?  So anyone who is arrested in jail can be recorded at anytime and it is allowable to be heard in court as evidence?

It seems like there is some loophole that was made around the 6th amendment to work in favor of the state when an inmate decides to invoke their right to a defense attorney.  I know informants/snitches aren't very credible.  They seem to testify in a lot of cases so I'm sure a lot of people on the jury know they have something to gain by testifying and that their testimony isn't always considered very truthful.  There is kind of a golden rule in jail that you aren't to be a rat.  So does that mean when an informant goes in with a specific intent of getting information for the DA it's ok?  It's almost as if the inmate is employed by the DA, he may not be getting paid but he definitely has a clear motive.  I don't think that is alright.  If the state has a solid case then they should be able to prove it without trickery.

Now I can understand if "John Smith" has a big mouth or is dumb and gives up info to a regular inmate and that regular inmate sees that admission as bargaining power for their own sentencing or conviction for testifying against the inmate awaiting trial.  The regular inmate who uses this inmate to work in their advantage seems more legitimate but even still I would know he had a motive.  But at least it's not the DA being shady.


I know someone who was in a high profile case in OC a couple of years back and that person knew that they were purposefully being put in the same cell or holding area with their codefendant because the DA had had informants going after them from the very beginning.  He was there for a long time and said the jail was full of informants and that it is wise to not speak about your case at all.



 


fc2479
fc2479

No buddy, that's Guillermo Rodriguez.  Think that's kinda racist that you would bring that up with that tone.  You might want to get with Gustavo before you start making racist comments.....you know he wrote the whole guacamole article.  Peace...glad Manny beat the case....ha ahha ha

FishWithoutBicycle
FishWithoutBicycle

@Useyourbrain  

You are right, an innocent person would probably maintain their innocence throughout, even if an informant tries to coax a confession out of them...as opposed to admitting guilt when being aggressively interrogated. The latter is why I get annoyed when folks say things like "just keep your nose clean and you won't go to jail". The fact is there are SO many people in jail who shouldn't be there that there is a national foundation called The Innocence Project to help those wrongly incarcerated.

Useyourbrain
Useyourbrain

@FishWithoutBicycle @Useyourbrain  


My statement was qualified by the phrase "...chances are..."  There are always exceptions; I don't think they are the norm, however.  If you can demonstrate anywhere in my statements that I implied that innocent people are "never, ever" arrested, please show me.


I thank you both, however, for the Straw Man.


And by the way, another thought:   Someone innocent behind bars would not, *in all likelihood*,  be copping to a crime they didn't commit to--- an informant---- or anyone else.

 
Anaheim Concert Tickets
Loading...