Saturday, October 29, 2011

Maybe Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley's Office needs top file another illegall Ex Parte Gag order to hide the truth (People of the State of California v. Tony DeNunzio) ? Read the Public Comments!

People of the State of California v. Tony DeNunzio
updated: Oct 28, 2011, 4:30 PM

Source: Joyce Dudley's Office
Re: People of the State of California v. Tony DeNunzio
As you are aware, our office has been asked by Criminal Defense Attorney Darryl Genis to provide him a copy of the "dash-cam" video that recorded portions of the October 21, 2011, Driving Under the Influence arrest of Tony DeNunzio.
Our office is in the process of re­-interviewing every currently known witness that was at the scene of the incident at Gelson's parking lot on October 21, 2011. In addition, we are seeking the assistance from anyone who may have been witness and has not yet come forward. We are interested in any witness accounts of what happened and any possible photographs, video or audio recordings.
Thus far, no criminal charges have been filed. The decision to file any criminal charges will be made after the Santa Barbara Police Department and the District Attorney's Office completes their investigation. In the interest of fairness to all involved parties, our office will not release the "dash-cam" video at this time. History has taught us that the hearing or viewing of this type of evidence can taint the true recollections of eyewitness accounts; our office will not facilitate this possible obstruction of justice. We must not make a rush to judgment or allow a case to be tried in a public forum. Our court system exists for determining the truth. Only after a thorough and complete investigation has been concluded will our office make a decision on filing criminal charges, at which point all reports and recordings will be released to the legal representatives of those affected parties.


Subscriber Comments for
People of the State of California v. Tony DeNunzio

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

 COMMENT 227488P
2011-10-28 04:41 PM
seems to me that tudor and fortuna should not able to patrol until investigation is complete. if the witnesses are right you are putting all of us citizins at risk of excessive force for an illegal lane change.
 COMMENT 227488P
2011-10-28 04:44 PM
does joyce dudley have an email.
 COMMENT 227494
2011-10-28 04:47 PM
Wait a second. Why is the DA (the prosecution) talking to witnesses for Denunzio (the defense). Are there not proper legal procedures for this. I am not an attorney but it is my understanding that witnesses need to be subpoenaed and should have an attorney present with them while they are questioned. It seems that by not pressing charges she is going around the law and doing whatever she wants, calling it an "investigation". Mr. Genis, or any other attorney if you read this can you please clarify what is going on because this seems strange. I received a subpoena once and this was not the way it was done. I may be wrong though. As soon as I heard she wanted to talk to witnesses and get her hands on any other recording or audio I became very suspicious. Now she says she hasn't even filed charges.
 COMMENT 227495
2011-10-28 04:48 PM
Someone needs to proof their documents before hitting the send button...just sayin.
2011-10-28 04:49 PM
The Business of Justice..They poo things differently in SB CO..:)
 COMMENT 227498P
2011-10-28 04:51 PM
"Only after a thorough and complete investigation has concluded will our offence make a decision "Oops, a big Freudian slip in this press release.
So, we don't get to see the video in case the witnesses see it and it interfers with justice. Let me guess, the cops involved haven't seen it either. Somehow, I doubt that.
 COMMENT 227502P
2011-10-28 04:56 PM
Sounds like someone is hiding something..... we want to see the footage!
 COMMENT 227498P
2011-10-28 05:08 PM
"Re: People of the State of California v. Tony DeNunzio"....
"Thus far, no criminal charges have been filed. "

What do they mean they haven't filed charges? They titled it as if charges have been filed.
 COMMENT 227509P
2011-10-28 05:10 PM
I think the statement makes perfect sense.
If anyone is allowed to see the video before witnesses make their statements, then the defense lawyer could throw all the witness statements out the window because of tainting.
That would not be a good thing for the person who was beaten up.
 COMMENT 227530
2011-10-28 05:51 PM
Something is terribly wrong here. You have Sanchez stating his "clearly" nonsense The video clearly shows that Mr. Denunzio, upon being told to get back into his vehicle, looked back, did not comply with Officer Tudor's verbal commands, and in fact began to walk away and blathering how horrible this guy was and now Dudley, We must not make a rush to judgment or allow a ease to be tried in a public forum. Our court system exists for determining the truth. Really? what about the POA departments statement. The cover up is always the demise.
 COMMENT 227529
2011-10-28 05:51 PM
Slow down, folks.
How the criminal justice system works here: The police make an arrest, conduct their investigation then submit all of their reports and evidence to the DA's office for them to review the reports etc., investigate more if needed, and then decide if to file charges, and if so, what charges to file.
If charges are filed, the suspect makes his first appearance in court typically a month or so after the arrest, at which time the court makes sure the defendant has an attorney, assigns a trial date, etc.
This takes much longer in the real world than it does on TV. Any trial date will be months away.
Prior to trial the DA's office MUST turn over all reports, video, lab results, etc., etc. to the defense. Mr. Genis knows perfectly well that the DA's office will eventually turn over all reports and evidence - including the video - to him. His demand for the video now is grandstanding and an effort to inflame the community and poison the jury pool well before trial.
2011-10-28 06:00 PM
(Holds up hand: Me! Me!)
This release is appallingly written. I'm simply volunteering to work inexpensively as a copy editor. Resume provided upon request.
2011-10-28 06:13 PM
why would the police file charges? its either a ticket for lane changing and maybe some disorderly and drunkness, oh and also some driving without a license....etc. But isnt it Mr. D who is wanting to file something against the police? Who does an investigation, on something that hasnt been filed yet? Im confused all of this a bunch of media talk? Has anything at all been filed? Is Mr. D charged with anything aside from the driving charges?
 COMMENT 227540
2011-10-28 06:29 PM
You bloggers are really a piece of work...
 COMMENT 227557P
2011-10-28 08:00 PM
She talking about potentially filing charges against the cop, too.
 COMMENT 227561
2011-10-28 08:21 PM
An officer can't stop someone for NO reason.
In this case, he was using 'illegal lane change' as the ONLY legal way that he could stop someone who he suspected was putting people in danger.
Once the vehicle was off the street and the suspect out of his car, the officer attempted, by LEGAL means, to gain his attention, but was IGNORED. He was forced to make one of two choices:
1. Let the suspect go free.
2. Pursue the matter further with what info was available to him to make a more postive determination of what he'd witnessed would really endanger others.
Had he taken road #1 and the suspect returned to driving, then killed innocent people later, that officer's negligance would be front page headlines across the country.
He chose #2 and people were bruised, but NO lives were lost. If the suspect had NO reason to worry he could have easily cooperated. Instead, he chose to force the issue, resuliting in what happened.
 COMMENT 227566P
2011-10-28 08:42 PM
Criminal charges against DeNunzio? Or against the thug cop?
 COMMENT 227569
2011-10-28 08:51 PM
This whole rant is the epitome of people who think they are the authority on everything. I think the people elected Ms. Dudley to serve our community to the best of her ability with a team who is professional and understanding of the gravity of this case. Her office is reviewing the case expeditously and thoroughly. The letter (albeit with a typo or two) was written to let everyone know that the wheels of justice are turning. Everyone should just take a chill pill and wait for the chips to fall.
Here's how it works: PD arrests, PD writes report, PD sends report to DA, DA decides if there is adequate evidence to prosecute using available reports/video/interviews, etc. This happens every day, every week.
In this case, DA is looking at tapes to decide if there was any misconduct. DA's office needs time to do their job. We should be happy that there is video to review. Take a deep breath and be glad that we are in the good ol US of A.
 COMMENT 227572P
2011-10-28 09:07 PM
Oh my gosh, more 360 degree whining. Someone has said they think witnesses should not be interviewed because they are witnesses for the defense.
Arggh. Witnesses are witnesses. They are not for or against the defense, because there are no charges yet. Most of us jumping on this topic are insanely ill-informed and should watch from the sidelines, not make comments that are nonsensical.
 COMMENT 227573P
2011-10-28 09:07 PM
I didn't elect Ms. Dudley, I voted for Josh Lynn.
And I saw a Chevy Avalanche like the accused was driving. The back window has black tinting on it. Makes a little more sense that he might not have seen the red & blue lights on the police car.
 COMMENT 227498P
2011-10-28 09:41 PM
Ms. Dudley to serve us to the best of her ability? This press release sure isn't confidence inspiring. Can we please hire YIN YANG as DA?
2011-10-29 07:01 AM
Some free loaders are a piece of four letter words too..
2011-10-29 07:23 AM
People, take it easy. Here is how the process works:
1) the police make an arrest and file a report
2) the DA's staff review every report to look at the evidence and determine what law (if any) has been broken, and what charges are appropriate to file against the defendant. In this case, the DA's staff is being extra cautious and requests that all additional witnesses and possible evidence - evidence coming from eyewitnesses to the incident, not the police - be turned over so it can be reviewed as well. Based on ALL the evidence, they'll know what charges (if any) to file against either the driver or the arresting officer.
If charges are filed against either or both parties, their attorney will get full access to all evidence & testimony.
The system is working and our DA is doing a great job. Let's let the process be completed before we start making assumptions.
The system is working the way it's supposed to.
 COMMENT 227599
2011-10-29 07:30 AM
Ms. Dudley and SBPD routinely release audio/video footage of cases that are not yet filed but merely "under review". For an ongoing example watch any episode of 'On Patrol with SBPD'.
The law clearly allows her to release the video, but she chooses to 'interpret' the law in a manner that allows her to conceal evidence under color of authority.
Her idea of fairness is that SBPD can openly make slanted comments on the case with the advantage of having viewed the video, but neither the public or the defense should be allowed to see or hear the video until she says so. That is not the law, and it demonstrates Dudley is disingenious in saying she is interested in the truth. She represents 'the people' poorly: the people she represents want to see and hear that video themselves. They don't want to rely upon her and her thug cops to tell them what is on the video.
 COMMENT 227530
2011-10-29 07:56 AM
2011-10-29 07:30 AM
Ms. Dudley and SBPD routinely release audio/video footage of cases that are not yet filed but merely "under review". For an ongoing example watch any episode of 'On Patrol with SBPD'.
Thank you. Clear and concise.
2011-10-29 08:01 AM
Lighten up! This guy is a criminal violating his parole and for all we know, he may have been about to plow into somebody in his drunken stupor. So he got a little roughed up, big deal!
 COMMENT 227599
2011-10-29 08:12 AM
Mayor Helene Schneider says, " the video tape from an in car camera of the controversial police stop at State and Las Positas last week, that left Denuzio with injuries should be released for public viewing."
This was the last quote on the KEYT web article.
Doesn't Chief Sanchez answer to the Mayor, and not the other way around?
 COMMENT 227619
2011-10-29 08:35 AM
If you are attacked by anyone other than a police officer you have the legal right to defend yourself and onlookers have a legal right to help you. But if you are attacked by a cop, God help you.
 COMMENT 227621
2011-10-29 08:43 AM
I think folks who say Mr. Denunzio got what he deserved at the hands of the cop in Loreto Plaza are ancestors of folks who showed up in the Place de la Concorde in Paris in 1789......
 COMMENT 227630
2011-10-29 09:05 AM
Video cameras don't lie... That's why the tape is being withheld.
 COMMENT 227632
2011-10-29 09:07 AM
BOOMERSOONER aka: Officer Tudor
 COMMENT 227647
2011-10-29 09:40 AM
Who said law enforcement and/ or the DA's office desires fairness? Their goal is always to convict, period! No blind justice here ever. That's how law and order reputations are usually


 COMMENT 227656P
2011-10-29 10:00 AM
Edhat comments eventually break down into two categories, no matter what the original subject. The comments break into those of nice people, and those of mean people.
You've got to be pretty mean to approve of the police breaking a man's nose, several of his ribs, discharging a taser 13 times while he's down, and making the man's face appear as though it was put through a meat-grinder. That behavior is unacceptable to nice people. It should be unacceptable to everyone.
 COMMENT 227530
2011-10-29 10:21 AM
Everyone needs to settle down here. They are just holding onto the tape for ratings sweeps week for their hit show "On Patrol".
 COMMENT 227668
2011-10-29 10:27 AM
It's laughable that people comment like they are an authority. Let the judicial process do it's thing and stop jumping to conclusions. Almost all of these people were not there. Someone swerving in their lane, driving drunk on a suspended license, and resisting arrest deserves to go to jail for a long time. Don't disrupt this process.
 COMMENT 227694P
2011-10-29 11:03 AM
De Nunzio's face looks bad but not like one attacked by a meat grinder. No one wants to see what remained of the face of my cousin after he and his dog were mown down and killed by a drunk driver.
 COMMENT 227707
2011-10-29 11:38 AM
Love to have a press released from the DA as to why it is OK to have their police witnesses view the tape while such viewing by others would taint them. This is so weak.
 COMMENT 227710
2011-10-29 11:48 AM
Try to practice what you preach 668. You advocate letting the judicial process take it's course and not jumping to conclusions, yet you infer Mr. D should go to jail for a long time. I'll tell you what isn't laughable and that is when cops think they are above the law. Tudor go home, you're no long welcome in this town.
 COMMENT 227725
2011-10-29 12:28 PM
HEY #227668.
Mr. Denunzio was pulled over for changing lanes three times without signalling, beaten and tasered before the officer knew he was driving on a suspended licence, or even had a drink. None of us are jumping to conclusions, just BIG QUESTIONS. I dont what this officer to ever think he can do this to me.
S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!

No comments: