Pages

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Alan Jackson Secures Death Penalty Verdict In High Profile Case

District Attorney candidate Alan Jackson busy campaign commitments did not interfere with his trial skills. Jackson successfully prosecuted gold trader James Fayed for the 2008 murder of his wife, Pamela, in a Century City parking garage.


Today the jury returned the death penalty verdict, as reported in the LA Times.

Jackson's successful prosecution in this complex case stands in marked contrast to the flagging fortunes of opponent City Attorney Carmen 'Nuch' Trutanich, according to  The Politics Without Mercy blog. PWM reports that Councilmember Bernard Parks, is recommending that Trutanich be stripped of the power to represent the City of Los Angeles in civil cases.

PWM speculates that Parks, who chairs the City Council's Budget and Finance Committee, may have grown alarmed at the recent string of losses in cases handled by Trutanich, as well as his increasing commitments to his campaign to become District Attorney. Those commitments, PWM says, "could result in lapses of judgment and attention to the job of actually being City Attorney."

&tc.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nicely done. That case sounded like it was made for the movies.

Anonymous said...

I agree that Alan Jackson did a good job in obtaining a death penalty verdict in the Fayed case, but don't forget that he was co-counsel with DDA Eric Harmon who really did the heavy lifting in the case. 11:16am is right about the case being made for the movies - I believe that Law & Order Los Angeles is doing a 1hr show based on the case. Not sure if Jackson and Harmon will have cameo roles.

Also appreciate the way you spun this around to kick Nuch in the nuts. With all the helpers Nuch has at the City Attorney's Office, he cannot run a campaign for DA while running his office. Press will rip him apart. I hear LA Weekly is doing a piece on the "Porcupine Defense" with prominent attorney saying "I've never heard of it" and Erwin Chemerinsky saying "It's not an appropriate law school subject."

Anonymous said...

Check out the article “Steve Cooley under siege” in this month’s edition of California Lawyer magazine:

www.callawyer.com/story.cfm?eid=916117&evid=1

Looks like Steve Cooley has a long history of dirty tricks. Wait til the Federal Jury hears proof that Steve Cooley also has a blogger on County payroll who does nothing but fire off political smears against the ADDA all day long.

Anonymous said...

6:09PM, didn't you get Hyatt's email order NOT to post on the Dragnet? It's read by too many DDAs and the board majority position always comes out looking bad. Keep it quiet until after the vote is in, and you can go after Windscale aka Berger as much as you like.

Also, don't use that link to the California Lawyer because it only says that Lacey advised Dvir as a friend and did nothing else. That's not good for the federal case against her, and if she's dismissed from the case along with Trujillo, then they're in the clear.

You really must listen to what you are told and stay off this blog. You are not helping our cause.

Anonymous said...

6:09pm = ADDA Board Majority troll says "...fire off political smears against the ADDA all day long."

Yup, that's the ADDA Board Majority party line for any criticism or questioning of the ADDA Board Majority (i.e. Ipsen) view of the way things should be.

Guess what. In a democracy ALL voices should be heard, The way the ADDA Board Majority is trying to rush through the affiliation vote should send alarm bells ringing.

Anonymous said...

Nice try 6:09. The article that this ADDA shill is referring to is a four or five paragraph puff piece. Looks like the "long history" is nothing more than the same warmed over baloney the ADDA has been serving during the past two years. Same allegations, same lack of proof.


But 6:09's post is very revealing. The union - which loves to scream about civil rights - can't wait to stomp on the throat of anyone who dares to speak out against it. DDAs keeping up with this blog (and, apparently, from what I have been hearing in the hallways and elevators, there are alot of you)know that they can come here for the inside scoop on much of what goes on in the office.

Most of the guys on the ADDA board also check this blog on a daily basis. But their response is to salivate at the thought of shutting it down. So much for employee rights.

As all DDAs consider affiliation or agency shop, the ADDA's hostility to your rights is an important thing to keep in mind.

Your right to have your own opinion, speak your own mind, and (yes) support the candidate you wish, is at stake. The ADDA clearly has an agenda that its ready to force on DDAs and its own political dirty deals to enforce.

Anonymous said...

Dragnet's story (the story all these comments are pinned to) was a story about Alan Jackson kicking butt and a murderer getting what he deserves. You'd think these ADDA guys would post something like "good job Alan" or "well done."

But then look at the 6:09

Lets face it, the ADDA guys are not concerned about justice or the prosecutor in the trenches. It's about power, and attacking anyone who challenges them. And in this case, with the ADDA pushing Ipsen as a DA candidate, they can't let Alan enjoy a little satisfaction and Glory. These SOBs are so freakin petty.

Anonymous said...

ADDA Board Majority is all about getting Ipsen elected as DA, Seligman will be the Chief Deputy and a nightmare as bad as Trutanich at the CA's Office begins.

I didn't become a DDA for this shit. I don't want to be "affiliated" was a big labor union, I don't want those goons telling me how to think, vote, and who to support. Screw the ADDA Board Majority - No on everything. Break it down and start again with something that supports our mission - the reason why we go to work every day isn't anything that the ADDA Board Majority represents.

Anonymous said...

Hey Windscale/Berger. I don't know who or what your sources are for information about the ADDA, but they're not very good. Why don't you ask them what the ADDA has done about the potential exposure of its members to Identity Theft?

Identity Theft, that's right. Last year one of the ADDA goons decided it would be a good idea to scan all those $30 checks that DDAs gave to the ADDA so they could vote. Of course, those checks contain DDAs names, addresses and account numbers. Well it seems that another ADDA goon had all that data on a laptop together with work related data, when the laptop was stolen from the goon's car. Pretty stupid to leave a laptop in plain view with so much confidential data.

So did the ADDA comply with California Civil Code section California Civil Code Section 1798.82(a)? Did they "disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the data to any resident of California whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person."?

I don't think so.

Also, how do you feel about the ADDA having so much of your personal data? Why scan those checks, and why not disclose the potential identity theft issue? Does anyone trust these bozos with anything?

As as for you ADDA superheros, you bunch of morons, why don't you read about your legal duty to report ID Theft issues at California Office of Privacy Protection's website: http://www.privacy.ca.gov/

Anonymous said...

I'm not a big ADDA supporter but if the data was on a work laptop then it was encrypted and no reporting is required. All DA laptops have full disc encryption. If it was a personal laptop then obviously it depends on what encryption if any that laptop had. Before accusations of violating the law are made its important to have all the facts. You know, something they teach in DDA basic training.

Anonymous said...

9:48AM "I'm not a big ADDA supporter …" Yeah right, you are probably the goon that illegally scanned checks and stored it on your laptop and then left it in plain sight in your car, only to have it stolen. Asshole.

Now you are lying to cover up your screw up, and just like the bunch of screw ups on the ADDA's so-called "Board Majority" you don't even know the applicable law,;

SB-1386,
California SB-1386,
California State Bill 1386,
The Security Breach Law,
California's Database Security Breach Notification Act,
California Security Breach Information Act , and
Civil Code Sec. 1798.80-1798.82

All of which REQUIRES you to notify me and all the others that not only did you store my financial information without my permission, but you also lost it.

It makes no difference whether the data was encrypted, because as any Hi-Tech expert will tell you, any encryption can be hacked - look what happened to Sony who have far greater security than the ADDA goon has. But Sony reported the data loss as required by law.

You guys are the limit. You care nothing about making DDAs victims of ID Theft and worse, letting our home address and spouse names become known to criminals. Fuck, to think I wrote a lousy check to you last year, and you treated my private information like it was yours to deal with, and then covered up the theft. WTF???

Here's the link to the LAW asshole,

http://www.datagovernance.com/adl_data_laws_california_security_breach_notifi.html

You have the nerve to talk about DDA basic training? Don't even go there. I'm pissed that you have compromised our security and then covered it up.

Anonymous said...

You can see my reply in the other thread.

1. Try reading the actual law instead of a summary (I've quoted it in the other thread)

2 I'm not going to respond to name calling, but for your info I'm not a member of ADDA or close to anyone on it's board, mostly because I still have trust issues with the current board.

Amazing you think your style of discourse is actually going to persuade anyone