Thursday, April 1, 2010

New Gang Math to the actions by the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors and Budget concerns

Lets review the new Gang math that the media is trying to portray as realistic on there T.V. reports. Supposedly a big Gang fight recently broke out in the county Jail and was reported on T.V. Now in this particular report they mentioned two numbers I wish to review and question for there relevance. The first number is that currently our jail is being populated by 35% Gang members or about 230 persons. Now for me what I find difficult to believe is the Gang math being used in discussing gangs in Santa Barbara. First off depending on which data you use there are allegedly between 750 to 850 members throughout Santa Barbara. Now if 230 are currently being housed than how many represent the north (Santa Maria) vs the south (Santa Barbara) county and here is why. You must remember in “Gator roll” over 2oo eastside gang members allegedly were already sent to either State or Federal prison. So is it a north county or south county issue in regards to our jail population? The media report I saw made it feel to me it was a Santa Barbara issue? They also mentioned that 35 inmates were there for charges of attempted murder. So my question again is this; is that a north or south county problem? Let’s take the attempted murder charges one step further. Does that reflect the actual actions of those being accused or the willingness of our District Attorneys office in further practice of Malicious Prosecution? In all honesty the media has done the damage they sought out to do while making this report. To miss lead the general public while at the same time polluting public opinion. Than to also contaminate the jury pool with further unethical reporting as we have all grown accustom to seeing. Since I mentioned “Gator Roll” lets review the application of the R.I.C.O. act to local Gangs. Now during the actual implication of “ Gator Roll” Police Chief Cam Sanchez lead the press and public to believe it was cutting edge action by Law enforcement. I find that odd because I Googled Gangs and R.I.C.O. charges and found it has been a common practice in California since 2001.Still the bigger problem I find and have always questioned was the lack of making public the Federal Indictments and results. A long with the concern and review by our local City Council, and I was wrong. Upon further review and since the R.I.C.O. act was simultaneously used in both Santa Barbara and Santa Maria the responsibility to review these Indictments also fell to our Board of Supervisors. It was only upon reviewing the actions of other counties and there Board of Supervisors did I discover this.

I hate to jump around on you but because of the current Budget crisis and our Public Defenders Gregory Paraskou pleading before our Board of Supervisors recently I thought I needed to re-share a past posting. During Mr. Paraskou’s pleading for funding he made a truthful but misleading use of criminal statistics. He referred to crime data and funding from 10 years ago and I feel purposely mislead the Board and Public on some more relevant facts. The facts are that criminal felony filings are down almost 25% these past 2 years from just 3 years ago as verified by the State Of California’s Judicial Council at the web site listed below. If only 35 cases are put to Jury trial County wide would that surprise you? When you add the failure of our Board to recognize that the District Attorneys office had already and with the approval of the board reduced salary commitments last year with the offer of early retirement to the D.A. office. Which we must question the wisdom of offering service credits to an already challenging pension fund crisis. Maybe that is not as surprising as the closed door meetings when dealing with the pension fund in the first place?

Well below is a portion of an earlier posting and what I feel proves Malicious Prosecution across the Board by our Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office.

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 that is tracked of special interest to me and that would be ; 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. stats.htm


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





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


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, oh well maybe my MAGIC is limited to the Courts?

No comments: