Vote NO on the DA Recall - Friends of Paul Gallegos - Humboldt County District Attorney - Not for Sale

From the Publisher
by Judy Hodgson

February 26, 2004

You've heard all the rhetoric, but when you go to the polls Tuesday, remember one thing: A defendant in a pending fraud case, Pacific Lumber, is financing a recall election against the very same district attorney who brought charges against the company.

That is as wrong as it can be. Vote no on Measure F.

The fraud charges pending against PL ultimately may be dismissed. Or the case may go to trial and PL may be found not liable. Or not. But in the meantime, the case is in litigation and financing a recall is a blatant attempt to derail an effort to enforce the law. Remember when another large corporation with deep pockets -- Wal-Mart Inc. -- rather heavy-handedly hired signature-gatherers to force Eureka to rezone a parcel of waterfront land? Voters said NO rather emphatically. They said our legal system is not for sale.

How did this recall come about?

A young defense attorney had the temerity to challenge the 20-year incumbent, something the old DA's own deputies dared not do. This attorney promised a different prosecutorial approach -- an emphasis on hard drugs over marijuana, for one thing. He said the public's physical safety was important, but he would not ignore white collar crimes. Voters responded to his message and the upset took many by surprise -- even Gallegos himself.

He took over an office of prosecutors, some of whom he had faced in court before. Those attorneys, no matter how competent and professional, were hand-picked by and loyal to their former boss, Terry Farmer. It was a rough transition for Gallegos, not only learning the ropes and managing his new staff, but switching sides from being a defense attorney to that of being a prosecutor, fulfilling a promise to actively try cases himself. Then, just weeks into his tenure, after filing a lawsuit against the county's largest private employer for alleged fraud, a recall is launched. It's been chaos ever since. Even front-line law enforcers, police and sheriff's deputies who may have been cross-examined by Gallegos in the courtroom, have piled on the recall bandwagon. This state of turmoil is not unlike a company defending itself against a major lawsuit while trying to carry on business as usual.

Gallegos' work in the courtroom and out has been under the microscope since that day he filed against PL. Did he flub a chance to add additional charges to the Ferndale child molest case? We can all try to second guess, but in the end he had to weigh the option of sending that guy away for 16 years against the flight risk of the daughter and her mother, both illegal aliens. (For another perspective in this edition, read about a strikingly similar case prosecuted in 1992 under DA Terry Farmer, page 11). Does Gallegos' medical marijuana policy (99 plants in a maximum garden of a 10-by-10-foot plot) prove he is more lenient on pot than his predecessor? Farmer's old 10-mature-plant limit would certainly exceed, under the guidance of a competent gardener, anything Gallegos was recommending.

Most of what has been reported in the local newspapers regarding this election has been pretty good journalism, accurate and factual. Unfortunately, most of what you've been reading in ads, mailers -- and most importantly the non-stop TV and radio ads -- has been a bunch of hooey. Don't fall for it.

As far as replacement candidates, we cannot recommend any of the three on this week's cover. Steve Schectman is a bulldog civil litigator who should stick to what he does best -- suing big companies on behalf of the downtrodden. Gloria Albin Sheets strongly favors the recall. If she doesn't see anything wrong with a defendant financing a DA recall, it shows a serious lapse in moral judgment. Ditto for Worth Dikeman, an able prosecutor who should wait until the next election if he is so confident he can do a better job for the citizens of Humboldt County.