CHEATING BY SD COUNTY DA OFFICE

1. Right off the bat, the disregard for my rights and my time began, as the DA never bothered to write me a letter to let me know that the DA was not going to prosecute the original citation. So I wasted my time driving in to court from Pine Valley (a two hour roundtrip) for nothing. A tiny inconvenience considering what would come later, after Bonnie got warmed up.

2. Went forth on my Birthday in January, citing a different code than was on the ticket written by officer; but after citing me with violation of Elections Code Section 18340, the DA would never admit that any party had ever done any investigation leading to the Elections Code charge, or that the investigative agency had ever done an investigation of the matter. Supposedly, the decision to charge me with violating Elections Code section 18340 just appeared out of nowhere. Finally, after I kept hammering on the issue during discovery procedures and correspondence to the DA, the DA suddenly made their own motion to drop the Elections Code 18340 charge altogether. The charge disappeared without the DA ever having to admit they hid discovery from me (the investigator’s report that led to the 18340 charge).

3. On 2/18 I sent an informal request for discovery to the DA. The request was completely ignored and never answered.

4. DA representative was present at arraignment and did not offer me any discovery or the complaint I had requested on 2/18.

5. On March 4th, 2009, at the arraignment, I entered a demur with the court. I had a written demur with me and it was explicitly accepted on the record by the judge, who, as a matter of efficiency, also entered a non-guilty plea for me. In the interest of conserving judicial resources, I did not object to the entry of a plea, since my demur was accepted on the record – by the judge - before the plea was entered. I had no idea that the DA was going to try and deceive the court and use my generosity – with the court – against me. But that’s what the DA ended up doing. The DA filed a response to my demur which initially focused upon the filing of my demur. Despite the DA being present in the court when my demur was expressly accepted into the record by Judge Shelton – before a plea was entered for me by the judge - the DA attempted to deceive the court by arguing that my demur had not been entered before my non-gulty plea was entered into the record, and that therefore, my demur was ineffective. The DA acted as if their representative either wasn’t at my arraignment or that the representative didn’t hear or understand what Judge Shelton had done and said (on the record). 

6. The demur I filed raised several issues. It was well researched and the laws I cited were on-point and the law I cited was good caselaw. I included a succinct statement of the case and statement of facts that was done in a manner that ensured no prejudicial material was improperly introduced in to the record of the case. See link to my demur in the menu to the left. The demur focused upon Due Process issues related to lack of notice of the charges I faced and other important issues.

7. The response to my demur that I received from the DA was shocking on several levels. First, of all the DA included a short statement of the law that was misleading and full of mistakes.

8, Next the DA included a statement of facts that was done in a wholly unprofessional manner, and that was full of unattributed garbage and purposeful misstatements of facts. The entire statement of facts reviewed and focused upon events and ‘facts’ that seem to have nothing to do whatsoever with the matter at hand. The DA’s complaint refers to the DA prosecuting me for allegedly disrupting a debate held on October 22nd, but the ‘statement of facts’ never even mentions any events from that date, and instead it focuses upon acts I did at a debate held on October 28th, 2008.

9. At the demur hearing held on March 25th, Judge Ervin overruled every argument I made and the DA won the hearing without ever even making any oral argument. In other words, they stood on the demur response submitted to the court; never explained the problems with their demur that were addressed in my demur response, and won. Apparently I missed something that the judge, who is far more experienced with the law than I, understood about my demur arguments, that led to the defeat of my motion.

10. I was amazed and actually a bit pleased when I read the DA’s response to my demur. I had never been allowed any access to the complaint before the demur was heard (San Diego style due process per the DA), so I had no idea which debate/meeting I was alleged to have disrupted. I was arrested on 10/22 and again on 10/28. Reading the DA’s response it was obvious that the DA didn’t seem to care about what occurred on 10/22, and instead, the entire focus of the DA’s case involved my arrest on 10/28. I decided before the demur hearing that it wouldn’t really matter too much If the judge said the case could proceed (instead of ruling in favor of my demur and dismissing the case with leave to amend the complaint) because I felt there was zero chance I could be convicted of doing anything at all, based upon the acts I did on 10/28/09 (proceeding my arrest on that date). So, when Judge Ervin read off his rulings, I never objected to any of them (setting up grounds for a writ/appeal), even though I disagreed strongly with his findings. I decided that if the DA wanted to proceed to try and convict me for disrupting the debate held on 10/22, I would just as soon proceed asap, regardless of the due process concerns I held (and which I expressed in my demur). I much preferred defending against an allegation based upon my conduct at the debate held on 10/28 (as opposed to my conduct at the 10/22 debate), since I believed any argument that I had ‘substantially’ disrupted the debate held on 10/28 could never withstand a motion for directed verdict in my favor.

11. At the conclusion of the demur hearing, Judge Ervin asked if there were any other motions pending or being contemplated by the defense. I responded that I intended to file a motion to compel, since my informal request for discovery (sent to the DA on 2/18) had been completely ignored. The judge asked the assistant DA (Patricia O’Mara) if she knew why the discovery request hadn’t been answered, and she replied that she was unaware that any informal discovery request had even been received from me. She then turned to me and declared that the discovery was normally picked-up by defendant’s at the DA’s office on the fifth floor, and she expressed surprise that I hadn’t known about that fact. In other words, it was my fault my informal discovery request was completely ignored. I should have known (sic).

12. Judge Ervin made an oral motion that the DA turn over the discovery I had requested (according to CCP 1054 etal) to me by April 1st. He also directed me and the assistant to DA to meet after our hearing and work out details regarding how and when discovery would be made available and turned over to the defense.

13. I met with Patricia O’Mara in the back of the courtroom after the demur hearing concluded. At that time, Patricia O’Mara stated that she would have discovery ready for me to pick-up at the DA’s office within a day or two at the most. She stated to me that she needed to take the casefile and copy all the pertinent material and compile it into a discovery packet.  I also inquired about the existence of any recordings related to the case, and Patricia O’Mara said she had seen a CD in the DA office with recordings related to the case and that she would make sure the cd was included with the discovery I would be receiving.

14. On March 27th I went to the DA’s office and I received a packet of Discovery material from the DA. The cover on the packet declared that the packet had been prepared on January 30th, and that it had been available for pick-up any time after that date. Patricia O’Mara’s statements regarding having a discovery packet prepared from casefile materials indicates the date placed on the discovery material’s cover was fabricated to make it look like the discovery had been available all along, and the defenses lack of knowledge of DA procedures and policies was to blame for the DA’s malfeasance.

15. The discovery I received consisted of the copy of the officer’s citation, a complaint, along with three separate police reports written by officers of the Grossmont-Cuyamaca College Police department. One police report (by Officer Nanquil) included an addendum consisting of an additional report written by a fourth officer (Officer Cooper). According to the discovery statutes governing criminal cases, and in accordance with the request for discovery I sent to the DA on February 18th, I should have received a list of witnesses the DA intended to call at trial, along with a number of other items that would enable me to prepare my case for trial. Simply stapling together a bunch of police reports does not qualify as compliance with discovery procedures, so I wrote to the DA’s office on March 31st and I requested that the DA turn over additional material as the law prescribed. See my correspondence to the DA, dated 3/31, at the link to the left.

16. After reading the complaint (see links to left for copy), I was astonished to realize that the entire statements of facts presented in the DA’s response to my demur had absolutely nothing to do with the case at all. The DA said in their complaint that they were prosecuting me for allegedly disrupting the debate held on 10/22. So, the DA’s statement of facts, served no purpose at all, other than to mislead me into inadvertently waiving my rights to appeal the demur rulings. Once I realized the DA was pursuing me for events occurring on 10/22, I  was screwed because I had no way to vindicate my due process concerns by way of writ, and I was forced to proceed, and have been forced to proceed ever since that time, without any knowledge regarding how the DA intends to meet elements contained in PC 403. I am left not knowing what ‘unlawful’ act I am alleged to have committed and what elements will be the basis of the charge; since PC 403 contains alternate paths to conviction.

17. I had become increasingly concerned with the DA’s behavior so I decided to follow-up on my request for additional discovery (sent on 3/31) with a request that was much more specific in regards to what exactly I was requesting be turned over to me (in accordance with the law).

MORE COMING SOON. JR

Is Deborah Seilor (SD Registrar) corrupt to the core? Can Election Results be trusted in San Diego County as long as the Seilor reign of political-terror and crime continues?

WHY DID NEOCON, FASCIST, DUNCAN HUNTER jr. GET INVOLVED IN GETTING JOE RYAN ARRESTED FOR HIS SPEECH?

Its' obvious to casual observers of the political scene, that Duncan Hunter jr must be as dumb as a rock, for he has been shielded from all scrutiny and ushered around by his handlers like he's incapable of putting two consecutive coherent sentences together in-a-row. He lives in a political-bubble no one can penetrate. Apparently Duncan has no confidence in his own intellectual abilities, and apparently he was actually scared half-to-death to debate me, because I have received discovery (that I had to file a motion to drag out of the Police and DA) that indicates that Duncan Hunter jr got involved in having me arrested on 10/22/08. He was apparently so afraid to debate me, that after assuring me in person that he had no problem with my debate participation, he ran to his Daddy's Friends, and he made sure I would be arrested (if I dared to try and speak in the debate held on 10/22 at Cuyamaca College). The fact that Duncan Hunter jr acted like a political coward shouldn't surprise anyone who has followed the 'exploits' of the Hunter gang (Dad and son). Duncan jr wears his military service as a shield against criticism and he emphasizes the same for political gain, but he's nothing less than a globalist traitor, working for the globalist mafia. Fannie Mae bailouts, REAL ID (the future of gun control) and defense contracting fraud are the hallmarks of the family. The Hunters do whatever the zionist tell them to do. If they meet any political opposition, the neocon Hunters are protected by their neo-liberal comrades. Criminals like Bonnie Dumanis harass their political opponents. The charges against me (Joe Ryan) are so baseless, that the mere bringing of the charges constitutes a crime that Dumanis and Hunter should rot in federal prison for committing. They should have a cell right next to all the East County Chamber of Commerce officials and Grossmont-Cuyamaca College officials, involved in the open and obvious conspiracy to violate my civil rights, that is still in progress and that shows no signs of abating (as Dumanis's bogus charges prove).