Malicious Prosecution is a Common Practice by the Santa Barbara County's District Attorneys Office!

http://santabarbara.craigslist.org/rnr/1590778871.html
So many of you that are interacting with me at this time are new to my life and I value your interest, support and at times your harsh candor. I am a very strong willed person who requires only what is in my heart and mind for validity that my actions are the correct choice for me and the example I wish to set for my son’s. However there has always been one area of which I wish I had more of, my Dad and Brother’s people skills. I think my sister Robin says it best that sometimes “Larry does not play well with others in the sand box”. But you know what I am exactly what is needed today in these challenging times that we live in. I feel the same way about our President but let us stick to me for right now. In years past when the economy was prospering I would take an unpopular stance an challenge why certain acts were allowed and at what cost they would have down the road. Recently I have been trying to share the possibility that there could be other points or views hidden in current media stories. I do this in hopes of opening up your minds to the idea that things are rarely what they have been portrayed as in the media. I have used this next example in the past and as I think of it now Jose Canseco and his exposing of steroid use in Baseball is more relevant today than ever before. Seven years ago Jose Canseco said what everyone was thinking but afraid to ask. Baseball had taken there don’t ask don’t tell approach to there game and as to who was involved in steroid use. Now back than everyone hailed Jose and his accusations as ludicrous and untrue. So we fast forward to our current times and steroid use has not only been proven it is now being used to label an era in baseball history. So what of the media and there treatment of Jose Canseco in regards to back than? You see the media acts as if the steroid issue was something they gave birth to and have the nerve to act as if they never doubted its validity. All the while they still ridicule the only man who single handedly weathered the critics when he came forward. The media has a very short memory and the ability to rewrite the beginning, middle or end to any story or situation as need be. They create a story base, sprinkle it with meaningless statistics and serve it up as an important news worthy issue. Here is a two second example of a meaningless story that the media might try an portray as relevant. NEWS FLASH: wearing nylons in the 70’s has been found to be one possible cause for cancer in all women. Of all women who wore nylons in the 70’s as high as 30% were at some point later in there life diagnosed with some form of cancer, don’t worry a Class Action lawsuit is sure to follow! Oh what times we live in. Be very careful with whom you share that news flash with it just may be the next big internet rumor. Since we as a Nation seam to have so little time for our fellow humans that is until a given real situations pops up in our life that we take an interest.

Corruption in the Santa Barbara Superior Court has popped up in my life and I am telling you all there exist a wide use of steroids by the courts regardless of the backlash to me. They artificially strengthen there positions and falsify facts in criminal case’s and that not only happens on a daily basis, nobody seams to care that there breaking the law to enforce the law. Well I want you to know I care. Now I had written about a specific story and posted on the Craigslist not long ago and there was a reply that said I am providing false information in my postings in order to make myself look good. What a sad commentary for that person to say about the content of my work. The posting I wrote about dealt with the legality of some defendants pleading out to criminal charges after 2.5 years in the Santa Barbara court system, and to set the record straight nobody comes out looking good. The situations I write about have real victims, you, me and society we are all the silent victims to these abuses. All I am trying to do is expose the abuses that seam to go unnoticed that is until now. You see even though know one wants to acknowledge this we are on the cutting edge of exposing Corruption in the Santa Barbara criminal court system in a way that has never been seen before. Just the abuse to the calendaring and departmental system alone is a crime that can only be ten years old or since the Municipal court was incorporated into Superior Court here in California. I have repeatedly talked of Superior Court Trial Judges and the fact preliminary hearings should not leave the lower criminal division. The California Constitution calls the criminal division the limited jurisdiction court because it does not deal with any civil matters. The Trial court is called the unlimited jurisdiction court and does also deal with criminal matters that carry no less than a felony charge and than only after the accused has been bound over for Trial from the lower court. Yet one would think I was wrong simply because no one else has come to these findings. Well folks I Jose Canseco Mendoza am here to tell you that your denial of the facts and issues before us will no longer be accepted. It is my learning curve based on the last 4 years of my life that I am trying to share with you all. This learning curve is also why I have come to question so many actions by our court personnel and what appears to be an obvious bias towards minorities.

How is it that on one day Trial Judge Brian Hill is presiding over an arraignment in a Santa Barbara police Chief Sanchez’s high profile case such as operation Apehanger in department two in our historic courthouse, even though it was calendared on the day in question to the lower division and other department across the street? Why would one prefer an arraignment proceeding to a murder trail and protecting our society? Than after I question these acts in operation Apehanger the case is returned to the criminal division for future proceedings? How is it that the D’Sant Angelo case had Judge Ochoa presiding over the preliminary hearing in our historic courthouse and than later returned to department 12 of the criminal division? I only bring this up because in the Ricardo Juarez murder trial during his arraignment Judge Hill was assigned the case after 2 170.6 motions were used to steer the case his way for all matters. The term ‘for all matters” is widely used in Trial court and is further abuse from the lower division. So than tell me how it is possible for a person running for city council such as John Thyne can appear before Judge Brian Hill in department 2, Trial Court for a misdemeanor probation violation when that charge should never leave the jurisdiction of the criminal courts? All these and many more manipulations currently exist in the Santa Barbara Superior court system and we are just getting started.

I find it odd when a the newly appointed Superior Court Trial Judge such as Colleen Sterne fills the most recent vacancy to our courts rather that the 3 year old spot left by Judge Hall’s removal? Or how can she state that she will have her Judicial seat until the 2012 election even though the judges position replaced was scheduled to be on the general election for this current year of 2010. As we speak one would need a score card to keep up with the underhanded dealings of our Superior Court and its administrator Gary Blair. In a recent story appearing in the Santa Barbara Independent regarding Judge Lafferty’s passing there was a mention that with his death it brings the current judicial vacancies to three. Originally it was to be 2 commissioner spots that went unfilled do to budgetary reasons and those spots have since been upgraded to judicial positions. So let me get this straight because of the current Superior Court budget crunch we cannot fill the 100k commissioner spots used in the lower courts rather instead we will upgrade those positions to 176k judicial positions why that makes no sense. Now with a budget in excess of 22 million dollars for Santa Barbara Superior Court and the current back log of high priority crimes such as murder trials can we afford not to fill the commissioner vacancies? How can preliminary hearings be a priority over Trials anytime by court personnel that makes no sense? The design of our court system is proven one in the past; commissioners generally handled arraignments and traffic court in the basement of our criminal court building on Figueroa. As you ascended to the street level that would be the preliminary setting department and the second floor handled hearings and proceeding of various types. What has transpired to alter such a proven system and why has the Santa Barbara public not been made aware of such alterations? Some Preliminary hearings are taking in excess of 1 year by our Trial judges before the defendants are even bound over for trial? Are you insane that is like saying my Ferrari will have to sit because I did not budget for a flat tire. A 22million dollar enterprise and we can not figure out a better budget solution? How criminal is our current court system? Well a recent appointee from Santa Barbara by our California Governor to a Judgeship in Ventura has already resigned his appointment in less than 1 month! Lets talk about the Rodriquez hit and run case that was just postponed almost 2 weeks ago to accommodate the new assignments of Judge Eskin and the installation of retired Judge Rick Brown to department 12 for the term of one year, where does Judge Eskin go and how can I verify that? What happen to Judge Loberg in department 11 of the criminal division? How is the other Judge Brown and Judge Beebe both assigned to department 4 of Trial Court here in Santa Barbara? If I recall correctly and I usually do Judge Beebe was voted in to the north county bench of Santa Maria. It would be nice if our Superior Court web page could reflect all departments and there current personnel accurately and in a timely fashion. Even when selecting departments in the drop down window there are missing selections in regards to departments in Santa Barbara. I was just recently at the court house to attend a friends proceeding and while there I searched for the days calendaring, I did this because the Hollywood matter was to be heard in department 2, another trial of interest was scheduled for department 6 and I was curious to see who was really in department 4. Only Judge Ochoa’s calendar was posted, now why is that Gary Blair? It is a commonly known fact that department 14 is used to hide court proceedings from the general public since that is in a third building known as the Jury pool room and not a court house at all. How can one obtain a factual and most current genealogy of our Judges in all courts and department history?

Well I took the long way around the block to make my next point but getting back to my original concern and the posting in question on Craigslist last week. It seams that the Judicial Council and State Bar keep State wide case load trends and there is one area of special interest to me ; what percentage of felonies cases are concluded within 12 months. You can review the data I reference at the sites listed below if you feel the need of further confirmation.
1-www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/3 stats.htm
2-www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/documents/csr2009intro.pdf
3- www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/documents/csr2008.pdf
I have decided to make a chart for you all to follow and I have kept all the data in the original form as found except I have added one category.
We will be reviewing the data from the years listed below
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-o8
Now we need a control case to verify that the data is accurate and I will use case numbers 1188728, 1189598,121869 all from 2006-07.
The categories will run (A) through (G) and the criteria the represent is as follows.
A) Felonies Filed
B) Felony Dispositions
C) Felony Convictions
D) Reduced to misdemeanors from original felony charges
E) Acquittal’s and Dismissals
F) D+ E equals number of wrongfully charged felonies( my category)
G) Number of felonies closed in first twelve months, there is not a longer time frame keep by those supplying the data
A B C D E F G
2004-05) 3115 2778 2080* 303 379 683 DNS
2005-06) 3182 2865 2007** 265 588 813 100%
2006-07) 3160 2722 2101*** 0 621 621 92%
2007-08) 2308 2720 2083**** 0 486 637+ 88%
DNS Data Not Supplied
* Table 8B reflects 2080 felony convictions yet Table 8A reflects 2352 Pleads of guilty before Trial of felony or felony convictions and should these numbers not match for 2004-05 something is wrong there!
** Table 8B reflects 2007 felony convictions yet Table 8A reflects 2230 pleads of guilty before trial of a felony or felony conviction!
*** Table 8B reflects 2101 felony convictions yet Table 8A reflects 2063 pleads of guilty before trial of a felony or felony conviction, you see now someone has attempted to do the math before supplying numbers
**** Table 8b reflects 2083 felony convictions and the separation gap is closing for a second year Table 8a reflects 2040 pleads of guilty before trial.
+ in this particular year the data reflects 151 transfers , I added this number to acquittals and dismissals.

Now the main reason I began my research was so that I could once and for all show that the criminal courts has set 12 months as the target time frame in concluding felony cases start to finish. HAVING SHARED WITH YOU PRIOR THAT THE COURTS ARE SELF - REGULATING THUS THEY ARE ALSO SELF PROTECTING. They accomplish this in part by limiting there exposure with what they are wiling to share. A prime example of this is how they limit there exposure of non compliance to12 months since they request no further data beyond that time frame in dealing with felonies. Now here is the real tricky part of my analysis of this data, how and what to share with so much information? I have already pointed out that the data provided by our Santa Barbara Courts and District attorneys office is falsified and here is why. During the year of 2006-07 I was charged at one time with as many as 9 felonies in 3 separate cases. As it turned out all but one of these felonies was either dismissed or reduced to misdemeanors, yet based on the data supplied and reviewed by me that cannot be correct. During the time of 2004-06 568 felonies were reduced to misdemeanors based on the case load trends from the Santa Barbara Courts and this does not take into account dismissals. However during 2006-08 not a single case is reported reduced from a felony. Now having been in around the courts most of 2006-07 I would think greater than 25% are actually reduced from felonies to misdemeanors. So now if the Santa Barbara Districts office is willing to falsify evidence in murder trials and than convict the wrong people are we really that surprised that data numbers are false? Well if it has an effect on the economics of crime fighting and funding such as the term “possibly Gang related” seams to indicate than yes falsifying numbers for State and Federal funding must be a crime.

I have often talked of malicious prosecution by a select few Santa Barbara district attorneys? What would you say if I can show that as high as 30% were wrongfully charged with felony allegations during 2007-08 would that not prove Malicious Prosecution as a policy across the board by our Santa Barbara District attorneys office? Well if 2308 felonies were filed in 2007-08 and 637 were dismissed or transferred into thin air that equals 27.5% were wrongfully charged but wait what about the 12% of cases that were not concluded in 12 months? 12% x 2308 = 276 X 27.5% = 75.9 + 637 = 713 wrongfully accused persons of felonies by the Santa Barbara district attorneys office for the year of 2007-08 based on the case load trend data or 30% WOW. Please remember these are official numbers and represent the WHOLE SANTA BARBARA COUNTY provided by the Courts and State Bar, none of this is my personal opinion. What fool wants to challenge me on facts, oh wait that’s right there is a book out; Josh Lynn Misconduct 4 dummies!

Now please remember that30% is with out a single case being reduced to a misdemeanor talk about fiction. Recently I have read countless rants on the Craigslist about the deficit and our President Obama’s new budget. Let’s clear a few things up. Dear Republicans due to your past poor performance in Governing our country the people of the United States did not allow you the further opportunity to be in the Office of President. Now to the credit of our President I see him looking for solutions rather than making up mock charts that might reflect what a Republican deficit might show should they have been able to keep the Office. So having said that what would happen if our President could only save 7 of every 10 branch’s of any bank chain the Untied States is currently invested in? What if GM and Ford could only sell 7 of every 10 cars and trucks produced in there factories? What if for 1.6 trillion dollars we could only save 7 of every 10 stocks on Wall Street? Our country would collapse. Than why do we allow such abuse in our Judicial system? Than to make matters worse we trust LAWYERS to SELF-REGULATE that branch of Government. They wrote a best selling book titled “Unlimited income 4 Dummies” that’s what they are calling it.

Now back to Case load trends anyone happen to hear of a thing called prop 36 or drug court, or how about suspend charges based on probation completion? The Magic of the numbers these days is to find meaningful ones that actually mean something.

If you like what I have written please share it, Damn Indy oh well maybe my MAGIC is limited to the Courts?