• News Ticker alerts

The San Diego county Deputy District Attorney's Association has been piling up some major cash for its push against Proposition 34, the anti-death penalty measure on November's ballot, as well as in favor of Republican Steve Danon, the Brian Bilbray congressional aide seeking a seat on the county board of supervisors, which oversees the budget of the district attorney's office.

As of October 20, the group's political committee, San Diegans Against Crime, still had $190,383 of cash in the bank. $10,055 had been spent on behalf of fellow deputy district attorney Robert Amador's bid for Superior Court and $11,534 for Republican Steve Danon's run for county supervisor.

In filings since then, the deputies have disclosed putting up $2,200 to defeat Proposition 34.

With a week to go until election day, observers expect more spending, but the county-paid lawyers will have a hard time catching up to the cash expended by wealthy San Diego pro-34 forces, led by once-imprisoned La Jolla super lawyer Bill Lerach and his fellow capital punishment opponent, Democratic billionaire Irwin Jacobs.

Jacobs and his wife Joan have given $80,000 to pass the death penalty repeal.

Lerach and his wife, lawyer and downtown La Jolla cupcake bistro proprietor Michelle Ciccarelli, along with their legal friends and La Jolla neighbors, staged a lavish, celebrity laden summer fundraising blow-out on their sprawling La Jolla Farms estate for the initiative in July.

In addition to the La Jollans, the local chapter of the ACLU has kicked in $100,000.

  • News Ticker alerts

Comments

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 30, 2012 @ 3:52 p.m.

That is rich, Bonnie Dumbass opposing sensible sentences, when she herself should be disbarred AND in the Joint for fabrication of evidence in a 1st degree murder trial!!!!!

Gotta love the Dumbass.............at least she has no chance at becoming mayor.

1

Justin Powell Oct. 30, 2012 @ 7:52 p.m.

SurfPuppy619, you're the best!! Your comments are always spot on. Dopey Dumanis is dead in the career water.but I bet she would have a great time locked up in the big house with all those bad girls!

http://sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2012/oct/30/34684/

0

cvres Oct. 30, 2012 @ 8:10 p.m.

Appreciate this story. It helps me to tie Danon, Amador, and the 34 together. I can vote against the proposition and Amador at least.

0

CBernstien Oct. 31, 2012 @ 11:15 a.m.

Most of what the proponents argue to support the proposition are simply false. The provisions in addition to banning the death penalty achieve nothing, but serve as bribes to get the conservative votes of those who haven't investigated the proposition thoroughly.

The 729 on death row murdered at least 1,279 people, including 230 children. 43 were police officers. 211 were raped, 319 were robbed, 66 were murdered in execution-style killings, and 47 were tortured. 11 murdered other inmates.

No “savings” & Increased Violence. Alleged savings ignore increased life-time medical costs, which often double during the last 25 years of life and in some cases exceed $1 million a year. The alleged savings also requires housing these killers in less-restrictive prisons where they share cells. Proponents also want to provide them opportunities for work, where they have more freedom, access to other inmates and guards, and more chances to make weapons.

Michael Genest, former State Of California Finance Director, reported:

While I credit the LAO for a fair and impartial attempt to quantify the costs and savings that may result from the enactment of Proposition 34, the savings claims of the proponents of the measure are grossly exaggerated.

The LAO’s official ballot pamphlet analysis pegs the net savings to state and local governments combined at $100 million annually, growing eventually to $130 million. While I think that the LAO made a good faith effort to guess at what the fiscal effects would be, their estimate is based on a few key assumptions about which they acknowledge there is substantial uncertainty and which may well be wrong.

Moreover, the absence of the threat of a death penalty could substantially increase the total number of murder trials by taking away a major incentive for murderers to plead guilty. based on a study by a California organization, the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, is that elimination of the death penalty would reduce plea bargains and increase trials in murder cases by 11%. That would mean trials and appeals in over 140 additional murder cases a year, an added expense that could completely eliminate the savings from trying a much smaller number of cases as life-imprisonment rather than capital cases.

0

SurfPuppy619 Oct. 31, 2012 @ 10:15 p.m.

Go home Carl, your book long propaganda comments is dull sleep inducing spin.

0

CBernstien Nov. 4, 2012 @ 2:46 p.m.

Don't appreciate the truth? Find the truth dull, preferring the lies of Prop. 34. Hopefully the voters are willing to become more educated and informed.

0

SurfPuppy619 Nov. 4, 2012 @ 7:26 p.m.

LOL...I guess that is why LA DA Cooley is voting FOR 34, as is the Santa Clara and SF DA's.........go home, and take your dumb book long comments with you!

0

CBernstien Oct. 31, 2012 @ 11:15 a.m.

No “accountability.” The proponents claim that inmates will have to work and pay their victims. The maximum earnings for any inmate would amount to $383/year (assuming 100% of earnings went to victims), divided by the number of qualifying victims. Hardly accounts for murdering a loved one.

No “full enforcement” as 729 inmates do not receive the penalty given them by jurors. Also, for the 34,000 inmates serving life sentences, there will be NO increased penalty for killing a guard or another inmate. They’re already serving a life sentence. This should scare the hell out of any prison guard. Also, efforts are also being made to get rid of life sentences. (Human Rights Watch, Old Behind Bars, 2012.) On 9/30/12, Brown passed the first step, signing a bill to allow 309 inmates with life sentences for murder to be paroled after serving 25 years. Life without parole is meaningless. Remember Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan. While not released, they have been up for parole several times despite initially receiving a death sentence. Governors are also notorious for releasing inmates who should never be released. Convicted killers get out and kill again, such as Darryl Thomas Kemp, Kenneth Allen McDuff, and Bennie Demps.

Arguments of innocence bogus. Proponents can’t identify one innocent person executed in CA. They can’t identify one person on CA’s death row who has exhausted his appeals and has a plausible claim of innocence. See http://cadeathpenalty.webs.com/ and http://voteno34.org/ for more facts explaining why you should not be supporting Prop. 34.

0

Visduh Nov. 1, 2012 @ 2:57 p.m.

Hear, hear. If this passes, the voters will be most disappointed in the result. The "problem" with the death penalty in our state rests squarely with the 9th Circus Court of Appeal in overturning death sentences and convictions,and supporting specious appeals such as the claim that the state protocol for lethal injection was cruel (this has held up everything for several years now.) Some time back the voters kicked three state supreme court justices off the bench for blocking enforcement, but then the federal court took up the torch.

If we want to fix the death penalty, we need to put pressure, not on each other, but on our senators to take a close look at the judicial nullification being practiced by the 9th Circus. If a few of those many "justices" were facing possible impeachment for blocking executions for no good reason (as has been the usual case) they might start singing a different tune and the system could do its job.

0

SurfPuppy619 Nov. 1, 2012 @ 10:53 p.m.

Some time back the voters kicked three state supreme court justices off the bench for blocking enforcement, but then the federal court took up the torch.

That would be Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joe Grodin in 1986, and what THEY were doing is a whole world away from the 9th Circuit.

The problem with the DP is 1) it is not applied in an even handed manner, 2) the lawyers who are assigned the appeals or Habeas Corpus petitions are only paid $75 an hour (less than a GED cop) and suck eggs, and 3) the appeals process is simply too costly/.

Listen, I am ALL FOR killing guys like Charlie Manson, Richard Allen Davis and the like, but the fact is there are far too many who don't fall into that category that get charged and railroaded...........

0

Visduh Nov. 2, 2012 @ 9:32 p.m.

So one must assume that your moral outrage is not that these baddies are going to escape the punishment they deserve, but that some others managed to avoid it. Please step back and closely examine your logic. If you're "all for" killing those creeps, why do you support abolition of the penalty? No comprendo, Senor.

0

SurfPuppy619 Nov. 3, 2012 @ 12:31 a.m.

As I said, the system does not work properly, I never said I want to "abolish it". If it DID work I would support the death penalty100%, 100% OF THE TIME. But it doesn't, it varies from county to county and the biggest factor is the amount of $$$ one has. The best example is OJ Simpson, He was an easy call for the DP, EASY. But the LA DA did not go after him with the DP, WHY??? 1) He was famous, 2) he had $$$$ and 3) he had connections. If OJ was some poor ghetto kid without a dime to his name he would have been charged with the DP and convicted, as he would not have had a $2 million defense fund to get Johnnie, Carl and Shapiro to work their magic..........the ones who "manage to avoid" the DP are the rich, the powerful and the connected, so if they don't face it why should the poor??????? Make it fair or get rid of it. If they can make it fair-to all- then I will egt back behind it.

0

dudleysharp Nov. 5, 2012 @ 10:05 a.m.

PROP. 34: The Truth Will Kill It Dudley Sharp

An honest discussion about Prop 34 would result in its overwhelming defeat.

COSTS

Are the cost claims made by the pro Prop 34 folks reliable (1)? No.

The ACLU cost review was easily destroyed (1) and Mitchell and Alarcon, of the $4 billion study infamy, refuse to share their database (1), which we can presume has problems and, therefore, no one can, responsibly, depend upon that review.

Is it possibly that life without parole (LWOP) may cost more than the death penalty? Yes (1).

Is it required that California citizens allow their representatives to be so irresponsible with both their state budget and death penalty management? Of course not.

Virginia has executed 75% of those sentenced to death and has done so within 7.1 years, on average.

All states, inclusive of California, could implement similar protocols and save money over LWOP.

INNOCENTS MORE PROTECTED WITH THE DEATH PENALTY

Is it true that innocents are better protected by a death penalty protocol? Yes, in three different ways (2). Innocents are more at risk without the death penalty (2).

PROP. 34: UNPRINCIPLED? APPARENTLY.

Ask the media (or insert any industry) this question.

How principled are you?

If you had a group of corrupt people, who only wanted to shut down the media, by sabotaging the media, would you say, OK, shut down all media?

Or would you say, let's clean it up, get you bad folks out of the picture, and make it work?

A vote for Prop 34 is a vote for folks who have intentionally obstructed justice in these cases, meaning anti death penalty legislators, the defense bar and judges who have made the death penalty so irresponsible and who are the same folks telling us to reward them by giving them what they have been working for, based upon the horrible system they have engineered.

A better idea.

How about demanding a responsible system, such as Virginia's, whereby 75% of those sentenced to death have been executed within 7.1 years, on average - a system similar to what Ca should have, if responsible folks were in charge.

Calif has executed 1.4% of those sentenced because such mismanagement is what such obstructionists (read Prop 34) had in mind.

95% OF MURDER VICTIMS' LOVED ONES SUPPORT DEATH PENALTY: ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE (3)

In addition, 80% of US folks support the death penalty for, truly, "death penalty eligible" murders (3), just as from 56% to 83% have also supported the death penalty when, wrongly, asked about their approval for the death penalty for murders, for which about 90% are not death penalty eligible (3).

contd

0

SurfPuppy619 Nov. 5, 2012 @ 11:42 a.m.

More phony balonye cliams from the ultra partisan......................

0

Sign in to comment