Pages

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Trutanich's ties to porn industry questioned

Former Los Angeles Mayoral candidate Walter Moore believes that City Attorney Carmen Trutanich's lawsuit to ban a ballot measure on condom use in porn movies is simply a publicity stunt designed to raise Trutanich's profile.


Moore may be right. The ballot measure would require the use of condoms by actors in porn movies made in the City of Los Angeles. The San Fernando Valley is, of course, the Hollywood of the the porn movie industry and porn movie moguls are vehemently opposed to the measure.

The ballot measure is backed by Councilmembers Rosendahl and Koretz and has garnered some 71,000 signatures - way more than the 41,000 required to qualify the measure for a place on the ballot in the June 2012 elections. Notwithstanding the overwhelming support for the measure, Trutanich has filed a lawsuit to ban the measure from appearing on the June ballot.

Trutanich says that the City of LA has no legal right to require the use of condoms because that is something that only the State of California can do through Cal/OSHA. According to Trutanich, if the ballot measure passes, the City of Los Angeles could be challenged in a lawsuit filed by the porn movie industry, and that's a lawsuit he would have to defend, and that's a waste of his resources.

So rather than 'waste' his resources defending a possible future lawsuit, Trutanich's bizarre legal logic is to 'waste' his resources on a lawsuit now, over something that may or may not happen in the future. As Walter Moore says, it makes no sense from a legal standpoint, but plenty of sense from a publicity stunt standpoint.

Moore is not the only one to cast doubt on Trutanich's legal logic. The head of the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is responsible for administering these laws, has said that the City of Los Angeles actually has jurisdiction to pass this law. A statement that directly conflicts with Trutanich's lawsuit.

In a statement to KPCC Michael Weinstein, the Executive Director of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, said "I think that Mr. Trutanich, the City Attorney, has a confused relationship with democracy,"  and questioned who has a better idea of who is in charge - Cal/OSHA or Trutanich? "It doesn't make sense." Weinstein said.

In addition to the criticism leveled against Trutanich by Moore and KPCC, the LA Times Editorial Board weighed in with their own condemnation of the undemocratic and highly questionable abuse of office displayed by the City Attorney, also questioning the logic in the light of Cal/OSHA's lack of opposition.

Whether it makes sense or not, Trutanich is determined go forward with his lawsuit to overturn the will of the democratic process. The real question is why?

The lawsuit and Trutanich's anti-AIDS prevention stance is likely to be a 'hot button' issue and will generate plenty of free publicity for him. It is publicity that Trutanich desperately needs. He is expected to be forced to confess that he has been secretly campaigning to become District Attorney during the time he was supposed to be fulfilling the obligations of his $220k taxpayer funded job as City Attorney.

It's going to be a painful confession. It appears that while Trutanich was on the city's payroll he is believed to have raised $1M in campaign donations using city resources such as a full-time LAPD security detail to ferry him to and from his fundraisers in a city-funded chauffeured SUV. It's a scandal reminiscent of Trutanich's predecessor and mentor, Rocky Delgadillo

Trutanich may therefore need the distraction of his anti-AIDS prevention lawsuit to create a distraction from the corruption allegations that will likely follow his confession. But the free publicity generated by Trutanich's pointless lawsuit may not be the only thing Trutanich stands to gain. As well as generating free publicity, Trutanich could generate hundreds of thousands of campaign donations from the porn industry.

Whether those porno industry campaign contributions have already been made will likely be revealed when Trutanich's fundraising disclosure statement becomes available for investigation at the end of this month. The campaign contributions would certainly explain the reason for Trutanich's lawsuit, which is very troubling for a variety of reasons. Trutanich's apparent willingness to sell his services to help advance his political career might be acceptable to the City Ethics Commission, however, in the larger scale of things, with Trutanich determined to move to the District Attorney's Office, he would acquire the is ability to sell justice and give a pass on criminal conduct if the price is right. Based on his track record, few doubt that result.

Who gives money to Trutanich and what they expect to get in return has always been a troubling question. In recent disclosure statements it was revealed that Trutanich had received donations to both his City Attorney Officeholder Account, and his District Attorney campaign account from members of the law firm Albright Yee & Schmit. Trutanich, coincidentally, awarded that law firm $767,000 in four separate contracts to 'assist the City Attorney with the legal representation' in various matters. Is that 'pay to play?' To some, the words of another conman may come to mind "There is no innocent explanation," for Trutanich, the likely response is "Would you rather believe me or your own damn lying eyes?"

Trutanich is expected to shortly issue a statement confessing to his secret District Attorney campaign.

&tc.

No comments: