• Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

On Wednesday, August 24, a superior court judge declined to quash a subpoena that was served on San Diego County district attorney Bonnie Dumanis.The subpoena reportedly demands her as a witness in the case against renegade attorney Michael Pines.

An attorney representing the D.A.’s office asked judge Timothy Casserly to withdraw (or make ineffectual) the subpoena, saying Dumanis would have no value as a witness. Defendant Pines, who is acting as his own attorney, said Dumanis “...knowingly and purposely aided and abetted the banks in stealing people’s homes.”

Pines told the judge, “The reason that she is doing it is that she is getting contributions from the banks.” Five felonies and 20 misdemeanors are now charged against former Carlsbad attorney Pines. An amended complaint was filed today by prosecutor James Romo.

The prosecutor alleges felony stalking and harassment of two persons who moved into a home they purchased after Pines’s clients were forced out of the same home in a foreclosure.

Seventeen of the misdemeanors allege that Pines continued to practice law after the California State Bar declared him “not eligible to practice law” in May of this year.

Bonnie Dumanis may or may not appear in the Vista courthouse for Pines’s preliminary hearing, now scheduled for Friday, August 26.

The subject of this piece, Michael T. Pines, is not to be confused with Michael Pines, a San Diego attorney.

Pictured: Michael Pines

Photographer: Nick Morris

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

More from the web

Comments

Gail Powell Aug. 25, 2011 @ 9:09 a.m.

I have heard whisperings about this allegation against Bonnie Dumanis for years now. A distraught woman on Yelp contacted me after I Yelped the D.A.'s office (with 1 Yelp Star) & told me that she lost her own home in Chula Vista this very same way. She said that when she went to the D.A.'s office to allege fraud against the bank & lawyers who kicked her out of her home, that the D.A. refused to see her or even consider her case. I hope that when Bonnie gets up on the witness stand, the Judge throws the book at her--the same way she has thrown the book at all the medical marijuana patients through the years that were simply (legally) medicating with dispensary pot (and others).

0

tomjohnston Aug. 25, 2011 @ 10:54 a.m.

fooforever, I haven't smoked anything but the "occasional" j since my days at Berkeley, over 35 yrs ago. I suppport the complete and total legalization of weed, not just for medicinal purpose. That said, let me ask you this. Doesn't the Controlled Substances Act still classify mj as a Schedule 1 drug? Under federal law, that makes it illegal and federal law overides state law. So, strictly from a "legal" standpoint, they weren't " simply (legally) medicating with dispensary pot". They were actually breaking the law which which would be Dumasses logic. Not saying that it's right or that I disagree with you, I'm just sayin'.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 25, 2011 @ 12:57 p.m.

Under federal law, that makes it illegal and federal law overides state law. So, strictly from a "legal" standpoint, they weren't " simply (legally) medicating with dispensary pot". They were actually breaking the law which which would be Dumasses logic.

But as a state prosecuting attorney Dumbass has no legal jurisdiction over a federal law or misdemenaor laws within the SD city limits, she is only allowed to file felony charges under state law in state courts.

0

tomjohnston Aug. 25, 2011 @ 2:42 p.m.

Fair point and I stand corrected on that point. But just because it may or may not be "legal" under state laws, doesn't mean you can't be prosecuted, apparently in this case by a federal prosecutor for violating a federal law.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 25, 2011 @ 9:08 p.m.

Yep, the federal authorities will prosecute, but that is a POLICY decision from DC.

The feds could ignore the drugs laws all day long (and they do ignore many "laws"), it is all political. Changes by who is in the WH and their ideology.

It is also very common to be selectively prosecuted based on ideology or association.

0

tomjohnston Aug. 25, 2011 @ 11:28 p.m.

"It is also very common to be selectively prosecuted based on ideology or association."

Or persecuted. Trust me when I say I know from personal experience that very fact.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 25, 2011 @ 1 p.m.

. http://members.calbar.ca.gov/courtDocs/10-O-10600-1.pdf .

I cannot figure out why Pines would allow the State Bar Court to enter a default against him.

Losing on the merits is one thing, losing due to not contesting the charges is ridiculous.

Alwasy contest the charges.

0

MrsKramer Aug. 27, 2011 @ 6:20 a.m.

Something tells me there is MUCH more to this story. If reading between the lines right, Pines was representing clients who lost their home from fall out of derivative trading fraud. Bonnie went after him to shut him up. Pursued a claim of him stalking. The State Bar, of which Bonnie sits on the board of governors, aided with the process to silence him.

Too bad Bonnie did not pursue the stalking complaint of Diana Gonzales. She's dead now at the hands of her ex-husband while Bonnie offered no protection.

Pines sounds similar to the Phil Kay case. He had his license suspended after he won a $30M trial for employee discrimination. Judge Anello (now a federal judge in SD) filed a fraudulent complaint against him with the Bar.

Justice Huffman of the SD appellate court covered for Annello. Bonnie did nothing about a judge filing a fraudulent complaint containing perjury in the statement, and a justice covering for him.

I, myself, blew a whistle on a fraud in US public health policy. They have tried to shut me up with a libel suit in SD by the use of perjury to establish needed reason for malice, etc. So far, 11 San Diego judges & justices have ignored the evidence of perjury by the authors of the fraudulent policy (paid to be written for US Chamber).

Can evidence that the courts changed documents in their computer records and changed the names of the parties on appeal. Bonnie was given the undeniable evidence that SD judges have been aiding & abetting with a malicious litigation, which aids fraud to continue in policy, which aids insurer fraud. (BILLIONS, primarily workers comp). She refuses to investigate.

The State Bar has irrefutable evidence of one of their licensees suborning perjury while strategically litigating. They do nothing to shut it down, while aiding to cover up corruption in the SD Appellate Court - along with Bonnie. We pay for the fraud with our taxes.

Justice Huffman, is charge of overseeing ethics and accountability in the governance of CA's judicial branch via the Judicial Council. His son is (or was) a Deputy DA under Bonnie.

There is another case, Judge DeAnn Salcido. She blew the whistle on corruption in SD's family courts involving the DA's office & Huffman's son. Huffman heard her writ & denied it, involving his own son, Bonnie's employee.

Justice McConnell, who is the presiding justice of the appellate court,is also involved with aiding the fraud in my case. She is in charge of overseeing ethics for all CA judges via the Commission on Judicial Performance.

Just a few examples. There are MANY more. From what I have personally witnessed and from speaking to others who have gone to Bonnie for help - only to have her aid with retailiation and not protect people unless she thinks it will look good on her resume'..

...WHEN IT COMES TO MONEY, POLITICS & CRONYISM, BONNIE DUMANIS IS AS DIRTY AS THE COME!!!!

0

SlimeyPiney Aug. 29, 2011 @ 11:42 a.m.

Please correct this article and the article from the 26th on Pines titled Bonnie Dumanis a No-Show, Michael Pines “Cannot Focus”. Please use his middle initial “T” in the title and body of the article. His name is Michael T. Pines.

There is another attorney in San Diego, named Michael Pines getting bad publicity from the criminal acts of Michael T. Pines and his name is being further dragged through the mud when Michael T. Pines should be the individual getting the bad publicity from his actions, not Michael Pines, who has a clear record with the State Bar of Califiornia, unlike Michael T. Pines.

Further, your article does not show up in search results when someone puts “Michael T. Pines” in the Google or Yahoo Search Bar. Therefore, the many victims of Michael T. Pines can’t find articles pertaining to his additional criminal acts.

0

Eva Knott Sept. 22, 2011 @ 5:53 a.m.

UPDATE. Michael Theodore Pines was ordered to show up for a mental competency examination, which is now set for October 14 at the forensic psychiatric clinic in San Diego's downtown detention facility. At a hearing September 20 in the Vista courthouse, Judge Maino warned Pines that a bench warrant would be issued if he failed to show up for the exam. This after prosecutor James Romo said that Pines has "failure-to-appears" in Orange and Ventura County courts, with outstanding warrants, and Romo urged the judge to remand Pines into custody without bail. Judge Maino reminded Romo of his jurisdictional limits, and declined to order Pines into custody at the Sept 20 hearing.

0

Sign in to comment