capoot memorial, 11/18/11

A Vallejo Police Department honor guard folds the flag that was draped over Officer James Capoot's casket during his memorial service, Nov. 30, 2011, at Corbus Field at Vallejo High School. The case against Capoot's suspected killer, Henry A. Smith Jr. of Fairfield, is caught up in the current controversy surrounding Solano County autopsies. (Brad Zweerink/Daily Republic)


Judge blasts DA’s office over autopsy controversy

By From page A1 | March 26, 2014

VALLEJO — A judge blasted the Solano County District Attorney’s Office on Monday in a scathing 37-page ruling, then ruled that a murder trial will go forward after denying a defense effort to throw out the case because of prosecutorial misconduct.

Judge Daniel Healy repeatedly used the word “absurd” in describing claims and arguments made by prosecutors in recent weeks as they explained why and how they did not share with defense attorneys hundreds of pages of documents about several homicide autopsies, including documents related to a secret investigation into the competency of Dr. Susan Hogan, who did the autopsies, and her abrupt firing in October 2013.

Healy described what the District Attorney’s and Sheriff-Coroner’s offices did as an “epic” mishandling, saying their “blundering” was “undermining confidence in the criminal justice system and potentially costing the taxpayers substantial sums.”

“Their abject failure to adequately handle and disclose these materials is troubling, and their public effort to blame each other for what was a joint obligation is nothing short of disgraceful,” Healy wrote.

Defense attorneys for Michael Daniels only learned recently about the documents that could offer evidence of mistakes or inadequate efforts in dozens of Solano County autopsies, including the autopsy of Daniels’ ex-girlfriend, who he is accused of suffocating in a Vallejo motel room in August 2012.

“The prosecution is deluding itself when it suggests defense (attorneys) trying to expose the (evidence) problems are just a ‘weak attempt to cobble together unrelated facts to manufacture what would be a rather bizarre conspiracy,’ ” Healy wrote.

Healy was referring to laws, often referred to as Brady laws, that require prosecutors to promptly share with defense attorneys any evidence that is discovered that might point toward the innocence of the accused.

District Attorney Donald A. du Bain touts his Brady policies as being a “gold standard.” Healy disagreed.

“The prosecution does nothing but reveal its own obliviousness to its obligations under the law. (A) policy has no value when prosecution’s deeds do not match its words. The defense in this case, other cases, this court and the public at large all deserve better,” Healy wrote.

“. . . (T)he problems at issue did not arise as a result of this laudable ‘Brady policy,’ ” Healy wrote, “but instead by a systematic failure on the part of the responsible government agencies to execute those policies effectively.”

Healy said du Bain was right to call for a meeting with Sheriff’s Office officials shortly after Hogan was fired to figure out the impact it would have on homicide cases, but that positive note was short-lived in his ruling.

“The undisputed evidence, unfortunately for all involved, established that after this initial burst of rationality, the prosecution and the sheriff completely failed to act for the next four months, taking no meaningful action regarding the Hogan report materials,” Healy wrote. “. . . It does not appear to this day that those offices recognize or assume any responsibility for their mishandling of these issues.”

Du Bain has repeatedly, and as recently as Monday, declined to comment on the controversy, saying it would be unethical to comment on pending cases.

Prosecutors previously blamed county counsel for the mishandling the policy.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Jeff Kauffman testified under oath that a county attorney told du Bain there was nothing about Hogan to share with defense attorneys. The county attorney followed Kauffman on the witness stand and denied Kauffman’s version of what was said in a meeting and then showed an email from du Bain sent after the meeting that confirmed her version of the facts.

Healy labeled Kauffman’s testimony as “false,” but stopped short of labeling it perjury.

“. . . (T)he prosecution’s effort to absolve itself of responsibility by blaming others is clearly erroneous,” Healy said.

Healy also criticized prosecutors for not revealing a Jan. 10, 2013, meeting Hogan had with authorities about the autopsy in the Daniels case. Healy concluded that “three deputy district attorneys and two police officers, all advocating for a position contrary to Dr. Hogan’s, in and of itself suggests an effort to intimidate, regardless of who organized the meeting.”

“The fact that not one of these five persons have any forensic medical training but nonetheless are trying to convince a doctor to change her mind about forensic evidence, is in and of itself both troubling and absurd.”

Prosecutor Andrew Ganz said he did not share details of the meeting because it offered “nothing new” despite the fact that Hogan had given specific, additional forensic information she used to bolster her conclusion that the death in the Daniels case was not a homicide. Healy wrote that Ganz’s “nothing new” characterization should be embarrassing.

Healy also ripped Ganz for not recognizing the legal need to share details of the meeting, saying Ganz’s thinking “suggests a prosecutorial attitude either incapable or disinterested in maintaining the minimum ethical standards that all prosecutors are sworn to uphold.”

Healy’s ruling also criticized a bigger organizational issue about the mindset law enforcement officials shared in dealing with Hogan. Healy said the Hogan report was lacking any objective scientific analysis.

“It simply concludes that Dr. Hogan has erred when her findings are not supportive of the wishes of prosecutors or police,” Healy wrote. “Rather than submit the dispute to a qualified third party to assess the dispute, the sheriff simply chose to accept as true the version more favorable to a prosecution theory. . . . Nowhere . . . is there any concern voiced about the need for Dr. Hogan to be ‘independent from . . . law enforcement and prosecutors’ with the goal of producing a ‘neutral and objective medical . . . cause and manner of death.’ ”

Healy ended his ruling by pointing out that the impact and significance of the prosecution failure remains unclear.

Reach Jess Sullivan at 427-6919 or [email protected] Follow him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/jsullivandr.

Jess Sullivan

Jess has covered the criminal justice system in Solano County for several years. He was an embedded reporter in Iraq in 2003.

Discussion | 85 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • Bill of RightsMarch 25, 2014 - 4:37 am

    Just shameful! Funny, I just received my political mailer from Don duBain. What a disgrace. He has given the "Good Guys" such a political black eye, this will take years to rebuild. My vote is Krishna Abrams for Solano County District Attorney.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ArachneMarch 25, 2014 - 8:37 am

    Got mine, too. Made confetti out of it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 25, 2014 - 4:43 am

    The targeting of employees whom have refused to look the other way over the Sheriff's Admin.'s deceptiveness has been a way of conducting business for years, I know, I worked there for over twenty years. I am pleased to see that some of these abusers of the rights of those whom they have taken an oath to protect, have finally been exposed for what they are. Sheriff Ferrara, your "Dog and Pony show" will only take you so far. When the smoke clears and dust settles people will see you and your hand selected circle of followers for what you are. Conspiring with the prosecution to affect the outcome of any criminal proceeding is a very serious thing!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SakrootsMarch 25, 2014 - 5:17 am

    Leonard, why don't you run for Sheriff? Don't know you from Adam but I hear and feel a lot of genuine passion in your words!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • LeonardMarch 25, 2014 - 5:20 am

    Sakroots, with all due respect.....Have you bumped your head ?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mike (Former SO Deputy)March 25, 2014 - 3:26 pm

    Leonard, you should run for sheriff. I am still dealing with the sheriffs office lies in criminal court and still waiting for the county to do the right thing and fix my knee, it's only been since 2006. I have court documents showing a Sheriffs Sgt lied in my prelim and the sac dda handling the case knew it and allowed him to do it. I then uncovered solano county court documents that show the investigator in my case lied in a criminal/ internal case in solano county and the case was dismissed due to his conduct. Guess what I found out in my case, the same misconduct, lies, withholding evidence as in the other case and he still works at the SO, nice gold standard. Yet the media does not think it worthy of reporting this or the recent ATF/ FBI investigation that occurred regarding missing automatic weapons.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterMarch 25, 2014 - 3:52 pm

    Mike and Leonard, there were only two sheriff candidates who had their paperwork in on time for this coming election... the incumbent and Tom Toler. Toler's qualifications have been called into question by the bent Registrar's office but should be settled soon by a court in favor of Toler... I would assume. No one other than these two people can be sheriff in Solano County for the next 4 years. You can have the incumbent or Toler... that's it. Next time around, both of you guys, get out there and run for Sheriff. But this time, you can either reward corruption or you can fight corruption. I'm voting for Tom Toler for Sheriff.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeniseMarch 26, 2014 - 12:31 am

    Mike, I agree with you and The Mister. I don't like not having a choice and being stuck with someone I don't trust to be Sheriff does not sit well with me. Just like The Mister is doing, why can't we write Leonard's name on the ballot on election day? I know he meets all the requirements and he has got more law enforcement, military and life experience than Ferrara. I don't believe that there is anything out there that precludes those of us that want to do so from doing it. It's either that or Ferrara, and all politics put aside I can't with a clear conscious vote to re-elect someone with such a dark cloud hanging over his head and with many answered questions?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • knutMarch 25, 2014 - 6:33 am

    DuBain for DA, Toler for Sheriff!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Bill of RightsMarch 25, 2014 - 6:58 am

    @knut, have you bumped your head?? First off, Toler can't even meet the minimum qualifications, much less handle this complicated job. It's too bad a qualified person did not join in the race because with all the swirling controversary surrounding the DA and the Sheriffs Office, this would have been an easy seat to win. As for duBain, well, what else can you say...... Lowest conviction rate, next to San Francisco County, a revolving door of employees, implementing a Brady policy that all the Police/Shrtiff associations, along with every police chief in the county opposed. And now that policy is getting thrown back in his face!!! Odd! And finally this swirling controversary, that had such severe reprocussions to the public (financially and a matter of public safety). The only people who support duBain are the people who stand to loose something if he loses his job! I want a DA that will convict criminals! And do so with tenacity, morality, and conviction! Everything else is secondary. Abrams for DA.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMarch 25, 2014 - 7:26 am

    I will vote Abrams for DA. Ferrara for Sheriff.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ShannonApril 25, 2014 - 8:29 am

    Solano County residents deserve and should demand a DA who' s ACTIONS reflect honesty, integrity, and the ability to always do the right thing even when it isn't easy, when it's not the popular choice, or doesn't further their personal interests. Don Du Bain's actions do not meet these essential job requirements. My vote is Krishna Abrams for Solano County District Attorney.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensMarch 25, 2014 - 7:12 am

    Healy is a jerk too. Healy has also met ex parte with the DA and sheriff and discussed cases outside the courtroom. Healy talks big and pontificares, but his Lordship Healy won't sanction his pals in any way. And because of those facts, Healy's courtroom is truly a ridiculous farcical theater of the ABSURD.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mescMarch 25, 2014 - 7:47 am

    Let's not forget Healy is nothing more than a criminal defense attorney who wants to let all violent perps go free. He harkens from the time when attorneys got paid "by the word" thus he issues a long long long ruling when he could have the same legal impact with a few paragraphs. Ego in place is not a motto of his. Healy is not done running for office. Give the "I support Rose Bird" guy a little time. While I do not know for whom I am voting as of yet, I do know I will not vote for anyone based on 1 person's rant.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Reality CheckMarch 25, 2014 - 8:38 am

    Mesc- I couldn't agree more. Someone clearly has a god like complex. Healy was and always will be a defense attorney. It should not be surprising to anyone that his friends Maher, Russo, Honeychurch are top backers for Abrams for DA. These hearings weren't designed to uncover any truths. They were designed to make the DA's office look bad while his buddies are busy supporting Abrams for DA. And he has the perfect forum since Jess Sullivan, a personal friend of Abrams, writes the articles to campaign for her. It's quite disgusting that Abrams champions herself as a voice and advocate for victims yet has aligned herself with the defense attorneys who make a living calling victims liars and shaming them in court.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • General Fadi BasemMarch 25, 2014 - 2:22 pm

    RC- here is my take on why some members of the local defense bar are choosing Mrs. Abrams over Mr. du Bain. If you were a criminal defense attorney, who would you want to have seated in that chair closest to the jury? Would you want Mr. du Bain, or would you want Mrs. Abrams? Defense attorneys who support Mrs. Abrams are smart enough to recognize that when Mrs. Abrams is running the office from a desk upstairs, she is not in the courtroom sticking her foot a couple of feet up their bottom holes. Those late night visits to the Proctologist are no longer necessary. Again, just my opinion.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CasperMarch 25, 2014 - 2:00 pm

    I spent approximately 25 years in the same "arena" as Dan Healy. He is an affable guy and a competent legal scholar, but his disdain for the DA's office is palpable. He's one of these guys who thinks he never represented a guilty client. His ruling in this case probably could have been written in 10 pages or less, but he needed the extra 25 pages to rant. The Sheriff's office and the DA's office have certainly exhibited some level of incompetence in this matter and Healy has been licking his chops for an opportunity like this for many many years. It's a shame that this has unfolded in his courtroom and not in that of a more seasoned jurist, where we could expect facts and the law, and not personal opinions at every opportunity.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 8:19 am

    I have a question for Judge Healy. This article says, ".. then ruled that a murder trial will go forward after denying a defense effort to throw out the case because of prosecutorial misconduct." So I understand the ruling that the Judge clearly thinks there is enough evidence that a murder has taken place. But then later in the article it describes more of Healy's ruling about all this misconduct which appears to be because law enforcement and the prosecutors didn't believe Hogan's findings were accurate that the case was not a homicide. So here's what I don't understand Judge Healy, if you're letting the case continue then clearly you don't believe Dr. Hogan either do you? It sounds to me as if Doctor Hogan had speculated about something that was outside of the scope of the forensic medical examination and put it in an email to the prosecutor instead of in her official report. The prosecutor and law enforcement did not agree with her so this entire mess started. But in the end here's a Judge who clearly also doesn't believe the Doctor was correct or else he has an obligation to throw the case out. I guess I'm missing something here.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 8:28 am

    And just to clarify my above comment, my understanding of this case from previous articles is Dr. Hogan sent an email to the prosecutor saying something to the effect of she thought this suffocation could have occurred during consensual rough sex between adults. So I understand the Doctor's statement, but who does the Doctor think she is, Quincy? Not knowing any of the other facts of the case, I'm not sure how the Doctor comes to the conclusion that the sex may have been consensual based on an Autopsy. Seems to me like that is something that should be determined by Law Enforcement through interviews of witnesses and the suspect, physical evidence at the scene, and the results of the autopsy. The autopsy alone is not going to tell us if this was a consensual act or not. Clearly the Judge agrees with this. Now for the handling of this information by the prosecutors, that in itself sounds like it could have been done a lot better, but the it sounds to me in my opinion, that the Dr. speculated about something she should not have and everybody seems to agree with that.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • just a thoughtMarch 25, 2014 - 10:14 am

    MDS, I think you are missing something here. Based on your understanding of this case regarding the casual sex explanation. That allegation was made in a case that was not mentioned in this particular article. The defense in the above mentioned Daniels case claims she choked to death on her own vomit I believe? My reason for pointing this out is that none of us have all of the facts, but it seems you may have over looked this as well as some other details of this case?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • just a thoughtMarch 25, 2014 - 10:30 am

    *consensual sex

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 10:44 am

    I did in fact look that up I think what has happened here is the media is screwing up the info. The info of Dr. Hogan claiming the incident may have happened during consensual sex comes up in this case as well as another one. I couldn't figure out from the articles whether the same issue happened in both cases, or in just one them.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • just a thoughtMarch 25, 2014 - 10:51 am

    I see where the confusion stems from. Both murder cases come up frequently in the articles surrounding this whole debacle. It is indeed the case of the young girl in Fairfield that the consensual sex theory stems from. On a side note while attempting to hit the reply button I hit the report an abusive comment button. My apologies.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 11:02 am

    So now that I've read more articles I see the confusion, but like I pointed out, the point I was trying to make is the same. But now that I see the Doctor's email was related to the 13 year old victim case, that makes it worse? The Doc allegedly wrote, "She says, “just between you and me […]” the strangling may have happened accidentally during consensual sex." The victim's body was found naked in Allan Witt park. The victim was 13 and the suspect was 32. What fricking info could the pathologist have had to make a claim that this may have been consensual sex? If the doc had attended law school instead of medical school she would have known there is no such thing as "consensual sex" with a 13 year old girl. And then the pathologist sends an email to the DDA on the case and says "just between you and me." This is a forensic pathologist? What kind of a moron would send such an email to the Deputy DA? A Forensic Pathologist should know better. No wonder she was fired.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 10:54 am

    To just a thought, I did some more reading of old news stories and you may be correct in that the consensual sex issue did not come up in this case. However, what does come up is the Dr. saying she couldn't all the case a homicide. So my original point still stands in that if the Judge is letting the case proceed, then he also must not believe the doctor's version of the case.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SteveMarch 25, 2014 - 8:37 am

    No you aren't missing anything. In fact you are spot on. The Brady rule requires prosecutors provide the necessary information prior to a preliminary hearing. They are not in violation of any laws until they fail to do so. Which is why Healy can't rule that there was prosecutor misconduct. There has been no preliminary hearing yet. Also, Healy has dragged Dr. Hogan through the media mud by releasing her personnel information to the public. Whether you believe she had issues or not, she does have rights. And Healy walked all over them. Healy has as many issues here as the DA, Sheriff, Public Defender or County Counsel. The problem for the others is Healy, unfortunately, has the last say, and the newspaper simply reports it. I'd like to see an investigative report about the "Brady" rule itself. Inquiring minds want to know more.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 8:43 am

    Actually Steve, the law saws all Discovery must be provided 60 days before trial, not before the prelim, however, general accepted practice is to provide everything they have by prelim. I also did not realize this case hasn't been to prelim yet.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SteveMarch 25, 2014 - 9:05 am

    I stand corrected. I had understood "trial" to include the preliminary hearing. One other note, doesn't anyone think the issues regarding Dr. Hogan required the DA and the Sheriff to be very careful about the investigation and what was released when? To me, it looks like the public defender got in a fizz when the information wasn't provided when they apparently thought they should get it, not when it was required. Given the judge's statements, if he could have ruled prosecutor misconduct, he would have.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 9:53 am

    Steve, although I have no idea what went on between the Sheriff, DA, and County Counsel, other than what's been in the news, I think it is likely they were stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one hand you have a criminal court that is going to want all of the info available. On the other hand you have laws that protect employee records. The laws and the courts sometimes conflict. The job of the DA and the Sheriff in this case was to try to do what was best and correct for both issues, and it doesn't sound like the Judge thinks they did a good job of doing that.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jacob EdwardsMarch 27, 2014 - 8:53 pm

    Actually MDS, Brady applies at the preliminary hearing. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8724612662729324175&q=214+Cal.App.4th+343&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 28, 2014 - 1:13 pm

    Yup Jacob, that is a new case and that does appear to be what the appellate court has ruled. The facts are a little different in this case, but they are similar. This ruling does appear to overturn section 1054.7 of the Penal Code which is the law that says all discovery must be provided within 30 days of trial. But as I also mentioned, even though the Penal codes does say that (I originally said 60 but the statute says 30) it has been common practice for the prosecution to turn over Discovery and soon as they have it. Also the material I was referring to is Discovery, which is everything in the case. Brady material refers to information in possession of the prosecution that is helpful to the defendant. So it also is Discovery, but "Brady material" does not mean discovery. In the particular case, it sounds like the prosecution did not turn it over because they did not think it was Brady material that needed to be turned over. The Judge did not agree.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 9:01 am

    Steve, I just did some checking on this and according to the news reports there has been a preliminary hearing and the case was set for trial.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterMarch 25, 2014 - 8:34 am

    The Sheriff and the DA and their winged-monkeys are just corrupt, filthy, incompetent, and, apparently, stupid. But the Solano County corrupt machine goes further than these two offices... for a fact it extends to the Registrar's Office who finalized the fix so the current corrupt Sheriff could run unopposed. Regardless, I'm writing in Tom Toler for Sheriff. Toler has been a victim of this corrupt machine, as has countless other people in Solano County. Fight corruption, Vote Tom Toler!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SteveMarch 25, 2014 - 8:38 am


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Reality CheckMarch 25, 2014 - 8:48 am

    How is it a cover up if prosecutors questioned the effectiveness of the pathologist, asked the sheriff to look into it instead of simply turning the other cheek, the sheriff did investigate it instead of turning the other cheek, and then fired her when they determined through an investigative process that her work was sub standard? And then when the investigation was finished it has been released to the Da and defense. Sounds like people were doing there jobs.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SteveMarch 25, 2014 - 8:57 am

    Yours appears to be the most concise and accurate summary of the situation.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensMarch 25, 2014 - 11:38 am

    The assertion that Dr. Hogan was incompetent has not been proven. But what has come out is that the Sheriff and the DA both suborned perjury and coached her testimony along with altering her previously determined scientific findings while illegally withholding exculpatory ''Brady'' material! If there was legally sufficient cause to fire Dr. Hogan, then why did it take so long and how do we know that their case against Dr. Hogan wasn't solely based on her lawful unwillingness to be part of their conspiracy to lie, falsify, and deny rights?! I'm not buying the DA and County thug shills coming in here with ex post facto excuse making and equivication! If I were Dr. Hogan, I would go to the US Attorney and the FBI and I would give affidavits in support of the facts of what DuBain and his thugs are doing to undermine the rule of law.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fairness AdvocateMarch 25, 2014 - 5:48 pm

    How do you know the Hogan report found Dr. Hogan's work to be sub-standard? Where has that been published? It seems the "firing" was suspect and that they turned Dr. Hogan into a scapegoat.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 8:46 am

    So you clearly believe that the solution to corruption is to allow Toler to break the law and appear on the ballot even though he doesn't meet the qualifications as set out in that law? How does more corruption fix what you perceive as a problem?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterMarch 25, 2014 - 9:03 am

    MDS, your answer to corruption is to reward the current corrupt Sheriff by voting him in for another term? There is the corner... now where is that pointy hat?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SteveMarch 25, 2014 - 9:11 am

    The sheriff receives information that the doctor performing autopsies is coming to questionable conclusions. He launches an investigation and contacts the District Attorney. They inform and include County Counsel. The investigation is conducted and they make conclusions. The doctor is no longer employed. And she is not currently contesting that decision. What about this is corrupt?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • InterestingMarch 26, 2014 - 9:15 am

    How do you know she's not contesting it? Get your facts strataight. Her attorney has been at all hearings.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 9:13 am

    The solution to your problem seems to be to have somebody who is qualified run for Sheriff. If the Sheriff is so corrupt as you believe, then why didn't somebody who meets the qualifications in state law step up and run against him? That is the solution to the problem. Nobody did that, so you have the current sheriff for another four years.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMarch 25, 2014 - 9:33 am

    The Mister, Toler is his own worst enemy and not a reasonable substitute. I won’t steer you wrong here, promise.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DonsatoadMarch 25, 2014 - 2:44 pm

    If enough people ask for one, we could get an independant investigation conducted by the FBI. If the DA and Sheriff did something wrong, they can be charged with civil rights violations. If not, the case just dies. Lets all call the FBI and request an unbiased investigation.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 25, 2014 - 3:26 pm

    You can of course contact the FBI if you like, however, they don't start investigations based simply on numbers of complaints they receive. They have their own criteria as to what they will investigate

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensMarch 25, 2014 - 3:34 pm

    Call the US Attorney too while you're at it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Curious ObserverMarch 25, 2014 - 6:30 pm

    Where have all you been when I have been arguing the same points by myself over the last couple weeks? Although I made the suggestion the Grand Jury should do the investigation.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Typical County WorkerMarch 26, 2014 - 8:08 am

    The State Bar of California needs to do some investigating and see if some lawyers should no longer have their bar cards. Looks like, at minimum, some ethics violations have occurred.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • streetMarch 26, 2014 - 11:07 am

    I wonder if the doctor is going to fill suit over the release of her personnel files? And if she is an "at will" employee, capable of being released for no cause? It appears at first blush that only the judge had released her information, and that the DA and Sheriff cannot, based on the Code of Civil Procedure. That tells me why they have not commented publically on this mess.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensMarch 26, 2014 - 2:38 pm

    So how did Healy "blast" the DA and the Sheriff's thugs? Did he use a shotgun or something?. Face it----Healy and his judge pals are not going to sanction the DA or the Sheriff's thugs in any way shape or form. This is all just a farcical theater of the ABSURD and the suggestion a judge will hold the porkers or that DA accountable is RIDICULOUS. It makes a good story with lots of posturing and grandstanding for all. Healy, Nelson, DuBain, Ferrarra are all pals and meet together in the hallways and chambers everyday to discuss cases in an ex parte manner.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JackShoeMarch 26, 2014 - 6:17 pm

    Sherrif Ferrara has short man's complex. How this twit ever got elected in the first place is beyond me. Little known fact: as a 18-19yo kid he had a replica red Gran Torino like Starsky & Hutch. You can't make this stuff up.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DonsatoadMarch 26, 2014 - 7:41 pm

    Jackshoe, he didn't get elected. He was appointed after Stanton retired. This is his first election. All those aspirations of being Starsky or Hutch and he went to work for Isleton PD. Yeah, he's got small mans complex alright. Didn't become a real cop because he lives in fear of real bad guys. And he's endorcing duBain. 2 peas in a pod. If duBain didn't have money he wouldn't be DA either. Both are complete cowards, kids who wore kick me signs on their back their entire childhoods and hide behind their badges for power. duBain lets Terry Ray run the office and Ferrra lets Elliott run his. Both these clowns need to go. duBain may not be re-elected but Ferrera is here for at least four more years. Hopefully Abraams wins the DA race and rings Ferrera's bell by prosecuting him

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RobertMarch 26, 2014 - 8:30 pm

    Donsatoad and JackShoe, we can always do a write in. I am personally writing in the name of this former Deputy who resigned two years ago with as many years just shy of retirement. This guy was put thru hell fighting the Ferrara Administration. This former Deputy is former military and over twenty plus years with the SO, I don't Ferrara ever served a day in the Armed Forces. If anyone can clean things up and quickly, it's him. He knows all the players and that is a very big plus. Just spend a few minutes with him and you will see for yourself that what you see is what you get. There are no smoke and mirrors here. I am personally writing in Leonard R Alexandre for Sheriff.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensMarch 26, 2014 - 8:17 pm

    All of those jerks reek of corruption. This is just a theater of the absurd and ridiculous. Healy isn't going to do anything to them. They are his pals and that's what sucks about all of them---bring in the Feds!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Miss SolanoMarch 26, 2014 - 9:08 pm

    When all these issues started to unfold within the SO I started following these news feeds out of mere curiosity, but now I find myself disgusted by all this information that's never been shared with any of us; the concerned voters. At this point I have no reason to trust in even my own community. One would think we should have faith in those who swore to protect this county but I am appalled to see that even our current Sheriff is a symbol of corruption. Honestly I agree with Robert; what this county needs, what each and every community member needs is someone with honor, integrity, knowledge, and experience. Whoever this man is I would love to know more about him, and maybe a write-in isn't such a bad idea it's time for a change in Solano County.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Lilly RMarch 26, 2014 - 9:34 pm

    I'm writing in Leonard Alexandre for sheriff!!!!!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Johnathan AgueirMarch 26, 2014 - 9:39 pm

    I'll write in if the dude is as honest as he appears! I mean I am old enough to vote now. Lol

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Abraham AlkersMarch 26, 2014 - 9:54 pm

    If Toler doesn't get on the ballot and he doesn't rally for a write in I'm voting a write in for Leonard Alexandre.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Angelica AlexandreMarch 26, 2014 - 10:05 pm

    Miss Solano, if you're really interested in knowing more about this man I would love to share. His name is Leonard R. Alexandre, although there are many people that would love to judge him and quickly say they know so much about him, as his daughter I want you to know the type of man that Leonard Alexandre really is. Ever since I was little he had me right by his side. I grew up in that Sheriffs office watching the few that worked hard everyday to protect this county, while others just stood by and watched, but he was one of those that never just stood by. Honestly, there are days I don't understand how he did as much as he did. One minute taking me to softball practice right after a long day of working with the honor guard, the same honor guard that he built from the ground up. Always concerning himself with helping people, he tried his hardest to do what was right, to help those around him maintain their morals, even in such a corrupt department. He put everything he had into the SO, from training to fundraisers, to memorials, he gave it his all, yet still managed to take me out after school just for hot cocoa. I apologize if this is too sentimental, but this is the side of him that no one ever shares, the personal side. In our household I was always taught that there are values that we need to live by, and without them we lose our sense of pride and humanity. This man is my dad, and I'm so proud to say that I'm his daughter because I have seen how much time and effort he has put into bettering our community, just trying build something that we can all have faith and pride in. Please, build your opinion for yourself, but just take this all into account. Leonard Alexandre is a man that fought for an honest department, day and night, but, in the end there are many who don't want the truth, they wanted someone who would sit quietly and follow the herd. But, my father, that will never be him. I know he still wants to see this department become something great, I just hope there are others out there willing to rise up together for the CHANGE you say we need so much. I know that this man would never let any of us, The People, down. I know he would be honored to serve this community and show us all what an honest department can do for its people.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 27, 2014 - 5:16 am

    Angelica my daughter, I am touched and humbled by your words. Not because you must have spent quite a bit of time describing me to the world, but for the realization your words brought me to. All that I have done in my life became less significant as I read your posting. It is the man whom you see as your father that matters to me not whatever anybody else thinks. I am very proud of you my daughter.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ScrewthepoliticsMarch 26, 2014 - 10:28 pm

    I don't trust any one in power in Solano county right now. It's seriously is time for some honesty. And how can you comment saying that the judge thinks there is still substantial evidence to prove the defense guilty. No. The judge is doing his honest and just job in making sure it's done as right so as possible. The judge believes the truth with shine through regardless of the prosecutions and their supervisors errors. Wise up Solano county, dirt is a surfacing.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RobertMarch 26, 2014 - 11:24 pm

    screwthepolitics I am with you. I am writing in Leonard R Alexandre for Sheriff!!!!! on election day. I am sick and tired of these politicians lack of integrity and honesty. Let's reinstall Honesty and Pride back into our legal system! Leonard R Alexandre for Sheriff!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DarleneMarch 27, 2014 - 4:19 am

    Having worked with Mr. Alexandre and knowing the personal sacrifice I saw him make time and time again in Solano county I know he'd make a great sheriff. If ever there was a genuine guy I felt I could trust it's be him. Plus it'd be nice to see his smile around the office again! :) write in Leonard. That's what I'm doing.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 27, 2014 - 4:57 am

    Hi Darlene, thank you for the kind words it's humbling. I miss many of you as well.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • "Yoda"March 27, 2014 - 6:46 am

    Wow! Wake up people, it's like the old burning bush parable. Now the FBI has arrested another State Legislator-Senator for corruption. This guy was conspiring to illegally engage in the sales of weapons...... I hope that the Feds are working their way south. "Leonard Alexandre" the force is strong with you...stay the course Mr. your accomplishments speak for themselves. I knew brother that you would never give up....Semper Fidelis Marine!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMarch 27, 2014 - 7:30 am

    There used to be a code of ethics in every professional practice. Law enforcement, Doctors, Dentists whatever, and of course Politicians have always lead the pack when it comes to shadiness and now they are all failing us. At the very least, they used to keep issues in house as much as possible and out of the public eye. How long has this been going on and when did it become okay to screw everyone that counts on you for their well-being? Some companies add mysterious charges the phone companies and utilities among the worst. Then when you call, they remove them. But those that don't call are paying millions in mistaken or deliberate practices. Shameful! All the way up the ladder it goes until we have no idea who is doing what. You have to be really aware just because those we once counted on are no longer responsible. In fact, they are downright criminal in their unscrupulous dealings. Thanks for looking out for us, nice!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 27, 2014 - 9:32 am

    Mr. Alexandre still has to register to be a qualified write-in candidate.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RobertMarch 27, 2014 - 1:51 pm

    Oh all knowing MDS, how did you come up with this latest assessment????????????

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 27, 2014 - 2:08 pm

    I read the law, "Under California's vote-enacted Top Two Open Primary Act, the rules for write-in candidates have changed. In order to be eligible to receive write-in votes and have them actually count, a candidate must file a written statement declaring him or herself to be an official write-in candidate for a particular election."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MaryMarch 27, 2014 - 10:12 pm

    Wow that's insane, I can't believe this is actually true. This is such a corrupt system. You know what? I think people shouldn't let that stop them, even if the votes don't count imagine how terrified Ferrara and all of his people would be if they heard about a bunch of write-in votes for Leonard Alexandre. Why not step up and show them that we all still have a voice?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 27, 2014 - 10:47 pm

    Mary, I won't deny that my phone has not stopped ringing for the past few days. I am actually surprised with the number of former co-workers who have contacted me about a write in. With that being said, I am very flattered with your vote of support. There isn't a single doubt in my mind about my ability to run that department 10 times more professionally and trustworthy of the Public trust than Ferrara ever could. However, if you guys and gals want this to happen you will have to make it happen. There is no way that I could even think about doing this on my own. If you don't think for a second that the Ferrara Public Relations Machine won't be coming after me, than you are all kidding yourselves. There is a Sgt. working at that agency that in previous elections all that this Sgt. did was nothing else but write letters to the editor on behalf of the sitting Sheriff. So, I will be busy with my own Alexandre Public Relations Machine and let me tell you if they want the truth out in the open, than Ferrara you fire the first shot!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • streetMarch 27, 2014 - 11:33 pm

    If you want to do it, then do it. Do not let other people decide for you. Think about what you want, disregard all the rants on the blog, and make your own decision. It is for YOU to decide. The choice is yours; have faith in what you believe, or continue to blog with all the others. I know you, and it is time for you to decide.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 28, 2014 - 8:03 am

    street I respect your straight forwardness and you are the type of person who's opinion carries iron in it's words, you are right! I did some research last night with reference to write-in election law. As MDS stated earlier on this blog, Write-in votes are allowed without the filing of a "Declaration of Write-In Candidacy unless the specific voting district does not allow open write in votes.If that is the case, the write-in candidate would be required to file a "Declaration" at least 71 days prior to election day. I don't proclaim to be a genius mathematician but either today is the last day for filling as a write-in or it's too late. Regardless, I would just like to say this: With the exception of the time when I was cop in Alameda County, the bulk of my law enforcement career was with the Solano County Sheriff's Office. During my tenure at the Sheriff's Office, I met many people with so much talent just waiting to be given an opportunity to reach their highest potential. Unfortunately due to the "Haves and Have Not," many of these hardworking man and women will never get the opportunity to become their best. For those of you that called me and asked me to run, thank you I am very honored and touched. You guys and Gals will always be in my thoughts, for I know how Police Officers, Deputy Sheriff's and Correctional Officers have to overcome the challenges of they jobs each day. I have the utmost respect for those who wear their badge with honor and live up to the trust bestowed upon them by the Public. To all those of you who put your lives on the line everyday, "Thank You" and keep the powder dry.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 28, 2014 - 8:34 am

    Leonard, I don't know you or Ferrara and I'm really not that familiar with what's going on in that agency. But I do have experience in other similar situations and there have been many cases where members of a Sheriff's Office have stepped up to run against their boss. It isn't an easy task, but if change really needs to be made then somebody should have done it. I would commend you for now wanting to jump in, but you would have to realize it's almost impossible to win a write-in election. The majority of voters are going to look at their ballot and make a selection not even realizing you are running. But if you decide to do it good luck. You can probably call the Registrar and see what the requirements would be to file a declaration. I tried to find it on the Sec of State website and could not as it pertains to local elections.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 28, 2014 - 10:01 am

    @ MDS and CD Brooks, I have been following both of your postings for quite sometime, and never in a million years would I have ever expected to get your support. I admire you both for the passion you project in your postings. Thank you......I have contacted the Voter Registrar's Office to determine whether or not Solano County has an open write-in vote. The answer we got was, "we don't know, but I will have my supervisor call you back." Well, it's been over an hour I am still waiting on them!!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterMarch 28, 2014 - 10:35 am

    Leonard, I wish you all the luck in the world because we share the same goal of dismantling the corrupt empire that has been allowed to grow like a cancer throughout our County government. Let me offer this to you; the Registrar's Office has been caught recently being dishonest. They are also heavily invested in the Incumbent Protection Program. If the Registrar's Office does their job of keeping challengers out of office, then the corrupt incumbents (and we have plenty of 'em) can continue aggrandizing themselves and covering up their crimes.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 28, 2014 - 11:02 am

    Leonard, just to clarify my position, I do not know the current Sheriff and I don't think I've ever met him. I really have no opinion about what he may or may not be doing wrong or whether he needs to be replaced. I don't even know Mr. Toler, but I know of him and I know some things he's done, and I don't like them. I do not think a man like Toler is what is needed to fix whatever problems the Sheriff's Department may be having. He seems to me to be motivated by revenge and that is a disaster waiting to happen. The simply fact that he's trying to scam his way onto the ballot with a fake police job in New Mexico just reinforces my opinion of him. And then I see some potential new information that he doesn't even have the little law enforcement experience he claims to have had. According to a source on here (I don't know if it's valid or not) Toler was only a reserve officer in Winters and then didn't even make it off probation with Vacaville PD. If this is true, that means the New Mexico scam didn't matter anyway as he doesn't have the necessary experience even without it. The legislature wrote this law back in the 80's requiring a Sheriff to have some law enforcement experience just for people like Toler.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R. Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 28, 2014 - 4:43 pm

    After doing some research of my own and consulting a very reliable source on the matter of becoming an official write-in candidate, I have been informed that I am within the filing period and will be able to submit all of the required paperwork for the election. What this means is I, Leonard R. Alexandre, will be declaring myself as an Official Write-in Candidate in the 2014 election for Solano County Sheriff. Thank you for all of your support.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MDSMarch 28, 2014 - 7:59 pm

    Good for you and good luck. I don't need to tell you, but you have a huge uphill battle. You'll have to work twice as hard without your name on the ballot because you have to convince a lot of people to write your name in. You're going to have to do several mailers and those aren't cheap. Hopefully all the people that don't like the current sheriff and all the people on here who are big talkers will also come through with their checkbooks for you. Mailers are not cheap. The good news is the June primary normally has a low turnout. You'll be able to purchase voter records from the registrar's office that will tell you who the reliable voters are that are likely to vote in the June primary. Put all our money into trying to reach those people. Don't waste money on targeting people that won't vote. That's the limit of my advice, but a campaign consultant will tell you the same.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 29, 2014 - 12:04 am

    @MDS, thank you.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • I do not know you, if you are a good candidate or not butMarch 29, 2014 - 8:54 am

    You should definitely have an opportunity to introduce yourself to the voters to let the people decide... So you probably already know this but... 1. Someone should help you get a website up and running... 2. You need to do press releases to all the country papers announcing your candidacy 3. Propose a Forum/Debate with the current office holder?...4. Get the voter registration list from the County Registrar's office.... (helps to contact people who are actually registered to vote) 5. ???? One big disadvantage to a write in campaign is that you will not get a campaign statement printed on the actual ballot...Maybe pay to have a campaign statement published in the paper, of course this would go on any mailers also 6. Set up some phone banking with volunteers.... Good Luck

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Leonard R Alexandre - Former Deputy SheriffMarch 29, 2014 - 9:24 am

    Thank you for all your advise it is well received and welcomed, please keep them coming. Ever since I made the decision to do the right thing I have been working tirelessly in contacting people within the community who are well respected. I have recently secured the unconditional support of a very prominent and respectable man. This man has "Honor" and he knows the kind of man I am. I am working with some news media contacts in putting my word out. Soon you will know more about me, my accomplishments and my vision for the Sheriff's Office. One thing that I am getting tired of hearing is, "There is no way you can do it!" Well as a former Marine when I see the word "Amer-ican" the last four letters spells out I-C-A-N. Not ICANT

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • "Yoda"March 29, 2014 - 9:29 am

    I told you the Force is Strong with this one! These nay sayer's need a crash course on U.S. Marine Corps 101.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.