Later Sheriff Ed Prieto called it a mistake and blamed it one on his lieutenants. There was a high degree of security around the arraignment with the defendant arriving in bulletproof vest (ironically similar to one that Deputy Diaz was shot and killed through). And his family was also provided with high security.
According to Court Executive Officer Jim Perry, the closure occurred due to a mistake by the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office.
Perry told the media:
“It was not intended that anyone was to be excluded. The court made no order to anyone to lock the doors”
Sheriff Ed Prieto told the media that someone:
“Forgot to tell somebody to unlock the doors… I think it was just an honest mistake, but somebody dropped the ball, and we should look into it.”
How big a mistake was this? That’s the real question. It was big enough that the Davis Enterprise which tends to be rather forgiving and deferent to law enforcement used the term “bungle” to describe the chain of events.
Judge David Rosenberg was quoted in the Sacramento Bee saying that the hearing should have been open to the public and the media.
“The doors are supposed to be unlocked when court is in session. This kind of hearing should have been open to the public. There are no excuses. It shouldn’t have happened.”
The Sacramento Bee went further, quoting several lawyers who had grave concerns about the proceedings, especially given the very personal interest that the Yolo County Sheriff’s department has in this case, on the one hand, one of their colleagues is the victim of this horrific crime and on the other hand they are charged with providing security and enforcing the rules for this case.
Several lawyers said Wednesday night that for the trial to remain in Yolo County, the court system would have to appear more even-handed.
Stewart Katz, a Sacramento criminal defense and civil rights attorney, called Wednesday’s events “flat-out wrong” and said the criminal justice system has to treat cases equally, regardless of the victims involved.
“You have a situation, obviously, where people are acting out of emotion,” he said. “But it sends the wrong message to everyone. It undermines confidence in the system when you have people who are personally involved getting to decide how the system operates.”
Sheriff Ed Prieto for his part promised that this would not happen again.
The good news here is that this was just an arraignment hearing and the Sheriff’s department obviously got enough heat and criticism for their handling of this event that it will not, as the Sheriff promised, happen again. In terms of actual damage, this rates very low.
On the other hand, I do not think you can simply dismiss this as a mistake. It just happened to occur during proceedings that very personally affected the Yolo County Sheriff’s office. No one can deny the horrific tragedy that occurred. On other hand, these are professionals and if they cannot fairly and properly administer their normal duties for this case, then maybe it should be moved to a different venue.
The fact that these “mistakes” just happened to occur in a case directly impacting the Sheriff’s department does not pass muster. Fortunately, in the scheme of things this is not the biggest problem in the world, as long as it does not repeat itself. However, it does not seem reasonable that we can merely shrug this off as an honest mistake.
Frankly from the standpoint of their fallen colleague, this is the last thing that needed to happen. It took the focus off the horrendous tragedy and put it back on the Sheriff’s department. It also makes us all wonder if this was merely a protection instinct on the part of grieving colleagues or is there something that they do not want the public to know. For the sake of decency, we need to give them the benefit of the doubt for right now, but the situation is no less troubling.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
meh…
meh…
meh…
meh…
It was not just the Sheriff’s dept. The DA was there and so was a judge – they could have stopped the proceedings and changed things.
Another small point – all of the officers were in uniform – does that mean they were being paid to do what they were doing? As the case moves forward I hope they do not plan to all sit in court rather than doing their jobs.
It was not just the Sheriff’s dept. The DA was there and so was a judge – they could have stopped the proceedings and changed things.
Another small point – all of the officers were in uniform – does that mean they were being paid to do what they were doing? As the case moves forward I hope they do not plan to all sit in court rather than doing their jobs.
It was not just the Sheriff’s dept. The DA was there and so was a judge – they could have stopped the proceedings and changed things.
Another small point – all of the officers were in uniform – does that mean they were being paid to do what they were doing? As the case moves forward I hope they do not plan to all sit in court rather than doing their jobs.
It was not just the Sheriff’s dept. The DA was there and so was a judge – they could have stopped the proceedings and changed things.
Another small point – all of the officers were in uniform – does that mean they were being paid to do what they were doing? As the case moves forward I hope they do not plan to all sit in court rather than doing their jobs.
David:
Come on. There is no scandal here.
They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.
Matt
David:
Come on. There is no scandal here.
They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.
Matt
David:
Come on. There is no scandal here.
They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.
Matt
David:
Come on. There is no scandal here.
They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.
Matt
The other strange thing from the Enterprise article is that the courtroom was ‘full’, no room for more, yet locked. Does this mean if the defendent’s family got there after the room was full, even if door was unlocked, they could not sit there? Strange all the way around, and tragic for sure.
The other strange thing from the Enterprise article is that the courtroom was ‘full’, no room for more, yet locked. Does this mean if the defendent’s family got there after the room was full, even if door was unlocked, they could not sit there? Strange all the way around, and tragic for sure.
The other strange thing from the Enterprise article is that the courtroom was ‘full’, no room for more, yet locked. Does this mean if the defendent’s family got there after the room was full, even if door was unlocked, they could not sit there? Strange all the way around, and tragic for sure.
The other strange thing from the Enterprise article is that the courtroom was ‘full’, no room for more, yet locked. Does this mean if the defendent’s family got there after the room was full, even if door was unlocked, they could not sit there? Strange all the way around, and tragic for sure.
Crazy. I actually agree with Rexroad. No scandal here. You are reaching, really.
The bullet-proof vest was ‘ironically similar’? Seriously? I would guess all bullet-proof vests in the county are supplied by the same vendor. And the deupty was shot by an AR-15, which is a civilian version of a military assault rifle. So no vest would have protected him. You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?
Crazy. I actually agree with Rexroad. No scandal here. You are reaching, really.
The bullet-proof vest was ‘ironically similar’? Seriously? I would guess all bullet-proof vests in the county are supplied by the same vendor. And the deupty was shot by an AR-15, which is a civilian version of a military assault rifle. So no vest would have protected him. You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?
Crazy. I actually agree with Rexroad. No scandal here. You are reaching, really.
The bullet-proof vest was ‘ironically similar’? Seriously? I would guess all bullet-proof vests in the county are supplied by the same vendor. And the deupty was shot by an AR-15, which is a civilian version of a military assault rifle. So no vest would have protected him. You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?
Crazy. I actually agree with Rexroad. No scandal here. You are reaching, really.
The bullet-proof vest was ‘ironically similar’? Seriously? I would guess all bullet-proof vests in the county are supplied by the same vendor. And the deupty was shot by an AR-15, which is a civilian version of a military assault rifle. So no vest would have protected him. You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh?
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh? “
Let me see, this was a prominent story in the Sacramento Bee, a front pager in the Davis Enterprise, and I’m reaching?
I did not say this was a scandal.
However Matt Rexroad does raise an important point:
“They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.”
If that’s the case, aren’t they and the public better off having someone else in charge of security for this case? That’s not meant as a shot against the Sheriff’s office, if that were my friend, I’d be just as distraught.
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh? “
Let me see, this was a prominent story in the Sacramento Bee, a front pager in the Davis Enterprise, and I’m reaching?
I did not say this was a scandal.
However Matt Rexroad does raise an important point:
“They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.”
If that’s the case, aren’t they and the public better off having someone else in charge of security for this case? That’s not meant as a shot against the Sheriff’s office, if that were my friend, I’d be just as distraught.
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh? “
Let me see, this was a prominent story in the Sacramento Bee, a front pager in the Davis Enterprise, and I’m reaching?
I did not say this was a scandal.
However Matt Rexroad does raise an important point:
“They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.”
If that’s the case, aren’t they and the public better off having someone else in charge of security for this case? That’s not meant as a shot against the Sheriff’s office, if that were my friend, I’d be just as distraught.
“You are really looking for ‘news’ today, huh? “
Let me see, this was a prominent story in the Sacramento Bee, a front pager in the Davis Enterprise, and I’m reaching?
I did not say this was a scandal.
However Matt Rexroad does raise an important point:
“They made a mistake under some difficult emotional circumstances.”
If that’s the case, aren’t they and the public better off having someone else in charge of security for this case? That’s not meant as a shot against the Sheriff’s office, if that were my friend, I’d be just as distraught.
DPD never used the word scandal, so Mr. Rexroad stands corrected.
I am glad that DPD, the Enterprise, and the Bee addressed these concerns.
Anytime that access to the public is shutdown by a person(s) who have the public’s trust, i.e. the Sheriff, Judge Rosenberg, and DA’s office THAT IS A PROBLEM.
It is not a scandal, but IT IS A PROBLEM.
I’m sorry for the family and their loss, but we must always have transparency in government.
DPD never used the word scandal, so Mr. Rexroad stands corrected.
I am glad that DPD, the Enterprise, and the Bee addressed these concerns.
Anytime that access to the public is shutdown by a person(s) who have the public’s trust, i.e. the Sheriff, Judge Rosenberg, and DA’s office THAT IS A PROBLEM.
It is not a scandal, but IT IS A PROBLEM.
I’m sorry for the family and their loss, but we must always have transparency in government.
DPD never used the word scandal, so Mr. Rexroad stands corrected.
I am glad that DPD, the Enterprise, and the Bee addressed these concerns.
Anytime that access to the public is shutdown by a person(s) who have the public’s trust, i.e. the Sheriff, Judge Rosenberg, and DA’s office THAT IS A PROBLEM.
It is not a scandal, but IT IS A PROBLEM.
I’m sorry for the family and their loss, but we must always have transparency in government.
DPD never used the word scandal, so Mr. Rexroad stands corrected.
I am glad that DPD, the Enterprise, and the Bee addressed these concerns.
Anytime that access to the public is shutdown by a person(s) who have the public’s trust, i.e. the Sheriff, Judge Rosenberg, and DA’s office THAT IS A PROBLEM.
It is not a scandal, but IT IS A PROBLEM.
I’m sorry for the family and their loss, but we must always have transparency in government.
According to the Bee, the bailiff did not comply with direction from the judge. If that is the case then the bailiff needs to be put on administrative leave and a proper course of disciplinary action decided upon. If the Bee is accurate then the judge should have halted the proceedings. The law must apply equally to all – I don’t want deputies taking the law into their own hands. What happens if they don’t agree with the courts findings or the sentencing? The system needs to be clear and strong to maintain its legitimacy.
We also need some serious attempt to get at what happened here. Too many versions and speculations. I am disappointed in the CYA response by Prieto – nothing happened and it won’t happen again.
According to the Bee, the bailiff did not comply with direction from the judge. If that is the case then the bailiff needs to be put on administrative leave and a proper course of disciplinary action decided upon. If the Bee is accurate then the judge should have halted the proceedings. The law must apply equally to all – I don’t want deputies taking the law into their own hands. What happens if they don’t agree with the courts findings or the sentencing? The system needs to be clear and strong to maintain its legitimacy.
We also need some serious attempt to get at what happened here. Too many versions and speculations. I am disappointed in the CYA response by Prieto – nothing happened and it won’t happen again.
According to the Bee, the bailiff did not comply with direction from the judge. If that is the case then the bailiff needs to be put on administrative leave and a proper course of disciplinary action decided upon. If the Bee is accurate then the judge should have halted the proceedings. The law must apply equally to all – I don’t want deputies taking the law into their own hands. What happens if they don’t agree with the courts findings or the sentencing? The system needs to be clear and strong to maintain its legitimacy.
We also need some serious attempt to get at what happened here. Too many versions and speculations. I am disappointed in the CYA response by Prieto – nothing happened and it won’t happen again.
According to the Bee, the bailiff did not comply with direction from the judge. If that is the case then the bailiff needs to be put on administrative leave and a proper course of disciplinary action decided upon. If the Bee is accurate then the judge should have halted the proceedings. The law must apply equally to all – I don’t want deputies taking the law into their own hands. What happens if they don’t agree with the courts findings or the sentencing? The system needs to be clear and strong to maintain its legitimacy.
We also need some serious attempt to get at what happened here. Too many versions and speculations. I am disappointed in the CYA response by Prieto – nothing happened and it won’t happen again.
On June 12th sentencing of Volarvich and Zielesch, a member of the Zielesch family was denied entrance. The courtroom was full. Why wasn’t space reserved for the families? The bailiff let other people in saying, “I’ll find room for you.” The person eventually got in, but without help of the bailiff. The room was taken up by CHP officers. One of them could have been asked to leave for the family member.
At no time in the 2 1/2 years of the horrible ordeal of the V and Z trial did anyone say anything about the families involved. Jim Smith mentioned being kind to the family of the man accused of shooting Officer Diaz and at that time included the families of V and Z.
Now they are talking about change of venue? Well, V and Z were denied change of venue. They should never have been tried together. The blood on V’s hands stuck on Zielesch. Unfair.
They (DA) will try to make the Diaz case as important as the Stevens case, but it will never happen. The media cameras were at the doors of the Valarich and Zielesch residences as soon as the news hit the TV. I didn’t see the same thing with the family of the accused.
The media keeps injecting the names of Volarvich and Zielesch when talking about the Diaz shooting. Do the families have to put up with this forever always reliving the case?
It is very sad that Officer Diaz was shot. Our sympathy and prayers go out to the Diaz family and the family of the accused.
To the family of the accused you will have to get used to remarks such as this that was shouted at Zielesch’s daughter, “You are the daughter of a murder.”
On June 12th sentencing of Volarvich and Zielesch, a member of the Zielesch family was denied entrance. The courtroom was full. Why wasn’t space reserved for the families? The bailiff let other people in saying, “I’ll find room for you.” The person eventually got in, but without help of the bailiff. The room was taken up by CHP officers. One of them could have been asked to leave for the family member.
At no time in the 2 1/2 years of the horrible ordeal of the V and Z trial did anyone say anything about the families involved. Jim Smith mentioned being kind to the family of the man accused of shooting Officer Diaz and at that time included the families of V and Z.
Now they are talking about change of venue? Well, V and Z were denied change of venue. They should never have been tried together. The blood on V’s hands stuck on Zielesch. Unfair.
They (DA) will try to make the Diaz case as important as the Stevens case, but it will never happen. The media cameras were at the doors of the Valarich and Zielesch residences as soon as the news hit the TV. I didn’t see the same thing with the family of the accused.
The media keeps injecting the names of Volarvich and Zielesch when talking about the Diaz shooting. Do the families have to put up with this forever always reliving the case?
It is very sad that Officer Diaz was shot. Our sympathy and prayers go out to the Diaz family and the family of the accused.
To the family of the accused you will have to get used to remarks such as this that was shouted at Zielesch’s daughter, “You are the daughter of a murder.”
On June 12th sentencing of Volarvich and Zielesch, a member of the Zielesch family was denied entrance. The courtroom was full. Why wasn’t space reserved for the families? The bailiff let other people in saying, “I’ll find room for you.” The person eventually got in, but without help of the bailiff. The room was taken up by CHP officers. One of them could have been asked to leave for the family member.
At no time in the 2 1/2 years of the horrible ordeal of the V and Z trial did anyone say anything about the families involved. Jim Smith mentioned being kind to the family of the man accused of shooting Officer Diaz and at that time included the families of V and Z.
Now they are talking about change of venue? Well, V and Z were denied change of venue. They should never have been tried together. The blood on V’s hands stuck on Zielesch. Unfair.
They (DA) will try to make the Diaz case as important as the Stevens case, but it will never happen. The media cameras were at the doors of the Valarich and Zielesch residences as soon as the news hit the TV. I didn’t see the same thing with the family of the accused.
The media keeps injecting the names of Volarvich and Zielesch when talking about the Diaz shooting. Do the families have to put up with this forever always reliving the case?
It is very sad that Officer Diaz was shot. Our sympathy and prayers go out to the Diaz family and the family of the accused.
To the family of the accused you will have to get used to remarks such as this that was shouted at Zielesch’s daughter, “You are the daughter of a murder.”
On June 12th sentencing of Volarvich and Zielesch, a member of the Zielesch family was denied entrance. The courtroom was full. Why wasn’t space reserved for the families? The bailiff let other people in saying, “I’ll find room for you.” The person eventually got in, but without help of the bailiff. The room was taken up by CHP officers. One of them could have been asked to leave for the family member.
At no time in the 2 1/2 years of the horrible ordeal of the V and Z trial did anyone say anything about the families involved. Jim Smith mentioned being kind to the family of the man accused of shooting Officer Diaz and at that time included the families of V and Z.
Now they are talking about change of venue? Well, V and Z were denied change of venue. They should never have been tried together. The blood on V’s hands stuck on Zielesch. Unfair.
They (DA) will try to make the Diaz case as important as the Stevens case, but it will never happen. The media cameras were at the doors of the Valarich and Zielesch residences as soon as the news hit the TV. I didn’t see the same thing with the family of the accused.
The media keeps injecting the names of Volarvich and Zielesch when talking about the Diaz shooting. Do the families have to put up with this forever always reliving the case?
It is very sad that Officer Diaz was shot. Our sympathy and prayers go out to the Diaz family and the family of the accused.
To the family of the accused you will have to get used to remarks such as this that was shouted at Zielesch’s daughter, “You are the daughter of a murder.”
I believe that this was merely a mistake. Locking the door to a public building while business is being done and members of the public are inside is a safety issue.
The deputies need to settle down and do the jobs that they do quite efficiently every day at the courthouse. I doubt that 40 deputies will be attending every appearance in the future, but expect that there will be co-workers at every hearing and the trial. For the arraignment, it must have been important to them that they gather together in support for each other and in support for the family of Officer Diaz.
I’m sure that Rosenberg will have things under control when things move over to his courtroom.
I believe that this was merely a mistake. Locking the door to a public building while business is being done and members of the public are inside is a safety issue.
The deputies need to settle down and do the jobs that they do quite efficiently every day at the courthouse. I doubt that 40 deputies will be attending every appearance in the future, but expect that there will be co-workers at every hearing and the trial. For the arraignment, it must have been important to them that they gather together in support for each other and in support for the family of Officer Diaz.
I’m sure that Rosenberg will have things under control when things move over to his courtroom.
I believe that this was merely a mistake. Locking the door to a public building while business is being done and members of the public are inside is a safety issue.
The deputies need to settle down and do the jobs that they do quite efficiently every day at the courthouse. I doubt that 40 deputies will be attending every appearance in the future, but expect that there will be co-workers at every hearing and the trial. For the arraignment, it must have been important to them that they gather together in support for each other and in support for the family of Officer Diaz.
I’m sure that Rosenberg will have things under control when things move over to his courtroom.
I believe that this was merely a mistake. Locking the door to a public building while business is being done and members of the public are inside is a safety issue.
The deputies need to settle down and do the jobs that they do quite efficiently every day at the courthouse. I doubt that 40 deputies will be attending every appearance in the future, but expect that there will be co-workers at every hearing and the trial. For the arraignment, it must have been important to them that they gather together in support for each other and in support for the family of Officer Diaz.
I’m sure that Rosenberg will have things under control when things move over to his courtroom.
Matt,
And, if no one objected to it, they’d just keep making the same “mistake” again and again.
That’s how Yolo County, and a lot of places, work. You do something you know is wrong, that you shouldn’t do, until someone calls you on it. Sadly, you run across that quite frequently in the public sector, but usually in sitautions that are unpublicized.
Fortunately, in this instance, someone did. It remains mysterious why the Sheriff’s Department, the DA and the Superior Court, all of whom know the obvious law here, weren’t able to conduct an arraignment in accordance with it.
–Richard Estes
Matt,
And, if no one objected to it, they’d just keep making the same “mistake” again and again.
That’s how Yolo County, and a lot of places, work. You do something you know is wrong, that you shouldn’t do, until someone calls you on it. Sadly, you run across that quite frequently in the public sector, but usually in sitautions that are unpublicized.
Fortunately, in this instance, someone did. It remains mysterious why the Sheriff’s Department, the DA and the Superior Court, all of whom know the obvious law here, weren’t able to conduct an arraignment in accordance with it.
–Richard Estes
Matt,
And, if no one objected to it, they’d just keep making the same “mistake” again and again.
That’s how Yolo County, and a lot of places, work. You do something you know is wrong, that you shouldn’t do, until someone calls you on it. Sadly, you run across that quite frequently in the public sector, but usually in sitautions that are unpublicized.
Fortunately, in this instance, someone did. It remains mysterious why the Sheriff’s Department, the DA and the Superior Court, all of whom know the obvious law here, weren’t able to conduct an arraignment in accordance with it.
–Richard Estes
Matt,
And, if no one objected to it, they’d just keep making the same “mistake” again and again.
That’s how Yolo County, and a lot of places, work. You do something you know is wrong, that you shouldn’t do, until someone calls you on it. Sadly, you run across that quite frequently in the public sector, but usually in sitautions that are unpublicized.
Fortunately, in this instance, someone did. It remains mysterious why the Sheriff’s Department, the DA and the Superior Court, all of whom know the obvious law here, weren’t able to conduct an arraignment in accordance with it.
–Richard Estes
Are we to the point of the Gulag Archipeligo that Solzhenitsyn wrote about so eloquently? I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
We live in a time when fundamental rights like habeas corpus, protection against warrantless searches and now, public trials, need to be defended viligently. Of course it is always the most despicable characters that cause us to test our abilities to defend the constitution in order that all of us remain protected from the abuse of power by the state.
I take Sheriff Prieto at his word that this won’t happen again and I hope that he makes it clear to his staff that there will be serious consequences if it does.
Are we to the point of the Gulag Archipeligo that Solzhenitsyn wrote about so eloquently? I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
We live in a time when fundamental rights like habeas corpus, protection against warrantless searches and now, public trials, need to be defended viligently. Of course it is always the most despicable characters that cause us to test our abilities to defend the constitution in order that all of us remain protected from the abuse of power by the state.
I take Sheriff Prieto at his word that this won’t happen again and I hope that he makes it clear to his staff that there will be serious consequences if it does.
Are we to the point of the Gulag Archipeligo that Solzhenitsyn wrote about so eloquently? I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
We live in a time when fundamental rights like habeas corpus, protection against warrantless searches and now, public trials, need to be defended viligently. Of course it is always the most despicable characters that cause us to test our abilities to defend the constitution in order that all of us remain protected from the abuse of power by the state.
I take Sheriff Prieto at his word that this won’t happen again and I hope that he makes it clear to his staff that there will be serious consequences if it does.
Are we to the point of the Gulag Archipeligo that Solzhenitsyn wrote about so eloquently? I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
We live in a time when fundamental rights like habeas corpus, protection against warrantless searches and now, public trials, need to be defended viligently. Of course it is always the most despicable characters that cause us to test our abilities to defend the constitution in order that all of us remain protected from the abuse of power by the state.
I take Sheriff Prieto at his word that this won’t happen again and I hope that he makes it clear to his staff that there will be serious consequences if it does.
ron glick said…
I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
Citizen oversight. I like that.
ron glick said…
I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
Citizen oversight. I like that.
ron glick said…
I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
Citizen oversight. I like that.
ron glick said…
I don’t think so but it is a good thing that people are making a big deal out of this to reaffirm our respect for the law and the right to a public trial under the sixth amendment.
Citizen oversight. I like that.
With Katz and Johannsen involved, conspiracy theories will abound and the truth will take a back seat to grandstanding.
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level. Thank goodness none of you are scrutinized to the degree to which you subject others.
With Katz and Johannsen involved, conspiracy theories will abound and the truth will take a back seat to grandstanding.
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level. Thank goodness none of you are scrutinized to the degree to which you subject others.
With Katz and Johannsen involved, conspiracy theories will abound and the truth will take a back seat to grandstanding.
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level. Thank goodness none of you are scrutinized to the degree to which you subject others.
With Katz and Johannsen involved, conspiracy theories will abound and the truth will take a back seat to grandstanding.
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level. Thank goodness none of you are scrutinized to the degree to which you subject others.
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level.
Yes, it must be truly revolting to encounter people who believe that you should conduct yourself consistent with professional standards and commonly understood legal requirements.
Yolo County has always found this notion challenging.
–Richard Estes
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level.
Yes, it must be truly revolting to encounter people who believe that you should conduct yourself consistent with professional standards and commonly understood legal requirements.
Yolo County has always found this notion challenging.
–Richard Estes
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level.
Yes, it must be truly revolting to encounter people who believe that you should conduct yourself consistent with professional standards and commonly understood legal requirements.
Yolo County has always found this notion challenging.
–Richard Estes
The armchair quarterbacking around here has reached a truly nauseating level.
Yes, it must be truly revolting to encounter people who believe that you should conduct yourself consistent with professional standards and commonly understood legal requirements.
Yolo County has always found this notion challenging.
–Richard Estes
I would agree with Matt (and several others who chimed in) that this was an honest mistake made under very trying circumstances. Ed Prieto is a man of enormous integrity and we’re fortunate to have him in Yolo County. Let’s turn the page on this episode and move on.
Val Dolcini
I would agree with Matt (and several others who chimed in) that this was an honest mistake made under very trying circumstances. Ed Prieto is a man of enormous integrity and we’re fortunate to have him in Yolo County. Let’s turn the page on this episode and move on.
Val Dolcini
I would agree with Matt (and several others who chimed in) that this was an honest mistake made under very trying circumstances. Ed Prieto is a man of enormous integrity and we’re fortunate to have him in Yolo County. Let’s turn the page on this episode and move on.
Val Dolcini
I would agree with Matt (and several others who chimed in) that this was an honest mistake made under very trying circumstances. Ed Prieto is a man of enormous integrity and we’re fortunate to have him in Yolo County. Let’s turn the page on this episode and move on.
Val Dolcini
vigilently
vigilently
vigilently
vigilently
Sharla, Rexroad, and others stop sucking up. The Sheriff’s Dept. does a good job but blocking access to the courtroom is unacceptable. Prieto and Rosenburg should know better. I don’t expect Riesig to know better.
Sharla, Rexroad, and others stop sucking up. The Sheriff’s Dept. does a good job but blocking access to the courtroom is unacceptable. Prieto and Rosenburg should know better. I don’t expect Riesig to know better.
Sharla, Rexroad, and others stop sucking up. The Sheriff’s Dept. does a good job but blocking access to the courtroom is unacceptable. Prieto and Rosenburg should know better. I don’t expect Riesig to know better.
Sharla, Rexroad, and others stop sucking up. The Sheriff’s Dept. does a good job but blocking access to the courtroom is unacceptable. Prieto and Rosenburg should know better. I don’t expect Riesig to know better.
Prieto’s has had problems following “the rules” before. It won’t be the last time.
Prieto’s has had problems following “the rules” before. It won’t be the last time.
Prieto’s has had problems following “the rules” before. It won’t be the last time.
Prieto’s has had problems following “the rules” before. It won’t be the last time.
Rexroad: “a mistake was made under difficult emotional circumstances”
…read… their emotional state overwhelmed their professional duties. A change of venue is obviously in order.
Rexroad: “a mistake was made under difficult emotional circumstances”
…read… their emotional state overwhelmed their professional duties. A change of venue is obviously in order.
Rexroad: “a mistake was made under difficult emotional circumstances”
…read… their emotional state overwhelmed their professional duties. A change of venue is obviously in order.
Rexroad: “a mistake was made under difficult emotional circumstances”
…read… their emotional state overwhelmed their professional duties. A change of venue is obviously in order.
No sucking up here. I think that it was wrong to not seat people on a first come-first served basis, except for maybe the family of the victim and the accused. The door to the building should never have been locked at all since there was security on site the whole time. It should have been minimally unlocked at 1:00 pm after the lunch hour, since this is a public building. Everyone else is just “the public” and should have received equal access. Having the first rows filled by deputies “for extra security” seems like a fallacy. With such a small room maybe one or two would have sufficed. I believe that the deputy in charge of logistics on that day wanted to make sure the family of the victim and his buddies got seats in the courtroom first before the general public was allowed access. This was a mistake on his part. I believe that the baliff was wrong to not go get the accused’s family from the sidewalk outside when the defense attorney and the Commissioner requested it and then seemed to say to the world that he was ultimately in power of who gets to attend and who doesn’t. This was a mistake on his part. I believe it was wrong for the Commissioner to turn a blind-eye to what was happening and not control her own courtroom. This was a mistake on her part. I believe that these were mistakes due to emotions and these deputies need leadership to get them to settle down. I believe that Commissioner Beronio erred here in not protecting the public’s right to access to the proceedings – something that she has apparently not been doing well, per the Enterprise. Now that is something that should be looked into.
Hopefully, Rosenberg will have this all straightened out when the case moves to his courtroom. I’m sure he’s working on it.
No sucking up here. I think that it was wrong to not seat people on a first come-first served basis, except for maybe the family of the victim and the accused. The door to the building should never have been locked at all since there was security on site the whole time. It should have been minimally unlocked at 1:00 pm after the lunch hour, since this is a public building. Everyone else is just “the public” and should have received equal access. Having the first rows filled by deputies “for extra security” seems like a fallacy. With such a small room maybe one or two would have sufficed. I believe that the deputy in charge of logistics on that day wanted to make sure the family of the victim and his buddies got seats in the courtroom first before the general public was allowed access. This was a mistake on his part. I believe that the baliff was wrong to not go get the accused’s family from the sidewalk outside when the defense attorney and the Commissioner requested it and then seemed to say to the world that he was ultimately in power of who gets to attend and who doesn’t. This was a mistake on his part. I believe it was wrong for the Commissioner to turn a blind-eye to what was happening and not control her own courtroom. This was a mistake on her part. I believe that these were mistakes due to emotions and these deputies need leadership to get them to settle down. I believe that Commissioner Beronio erred here in not protecting the public’s right to access to the proceedings – something that she has apparently not been doing well, per the Enterprise. Now that is something that should be looked into.
Hopefully, Rosenberg will have this all straightened out when the case moves to his courtroom. I’m sure he’s working on it.
No sucking up here. I think that it was wrong to not seat people on a first come-first served basis, except for maybe the family of the victim and the accused. The door to the building should never have been locked at all since there was security on site the whole time. It should have been minimally unlocked at 1:00 pm after the lunch hour, since this is a public building. Everyone else is just “the public” and should have received equal access. Having the first rows filled by deputies “for extra security” seems like a fallacy. With such a small room maybe one or two would have sufficed. I believe that the deputy in charge of logistics on that day wanted to make sure the family of the victim and his buddies got seats in the courtroom first before the general public was allowed access. This was a mistake on his part. I believe that the baliff was wrong to not go get the accused’s family from the sidewalk outside when the defense attorney and the Commissioner requested it and then seemed to say to the world that he was ultimately in power of who gets to attend and who doesn’t. This was a mistake on his part. I believe it was wrong for the Commissioner to turn a blind-eye to what was happening and not control her own courtroom. This was a mistake on her part. I believe that these were mistakes due to emotions and these deputies need leadership to get them to settle down. I believe that Commissioner Beronio erred here in not protecting the public’s right to access to the proceedings – something that she has apparently not been doing well, per the Enterprise. Now that is something that should be looked into.
Hopefully, Rosenberg will have this all straightened out when the case moves to his courtroom. I’m sure he’s working on it.
No sucking up here. I think that it was wrong to not seat people on a first come-first served basis, except for maybe the family of the victim and the accused. The door to the building should never have been locked at all since there was security on site the whole time. It should have been minimally unlocked at 1:00 pm after the lunch hour, since this is a public building. Everyone else is just “the public” and should have received equal access. Having the first rows filled by deputies “for extra security” seems like a fallacy. With such a small room maybe one or two would have sufficed. I believe that the deputy in charge of logistics on that day wanted to make sure the family of the victim and his buddies got seats in the courtroom first before the general public was allowed access. This was a mistake on his part. I believe that the baliff was wrong to not go get the accused’s family from the sidewalk outside when the defense attorney and the Commissioner requested it and then seemed to say to the world that he was ultimately in power of who gets to attend and who doesn’t. This was a mistake on his part. I believe it was wrong for the Commissioner to turn a blind-eye to what was happening and not control her own courtroom. This was a mistake on her part. I believe that these were mistakes due to emotions and these deputies need leadership to get them to settle down. I believe that Commissioner Beronio erred here in not protecting the public’s right to access to the proceedings – something that she has apparently not been doing well, per the Enterprise. Now that is something that should be looked into.
Hopefully, Rosenberg will have this all straightened out when the case moves to his courtroom. I’m sure he’s working on it.
“A change of venue is obviously in order.”
If a potential jury pool in Yolo County is likely to be biased in favor of the victim (more so than juries in other counties), then I would concur with your conclusion. However, just based on this mistake by the deputies and the court commissioner, I don’t see how that compromises the defense moving forward.
What I think ought to be the outcome of this incident — the Enterprise, in its editorial today outlines other recent failings of the Yolo County courts — is that the county needs to develop a formal written non-ad hoc process for punishing employees who make these sorts of mistakes.
It seems clear that the current process is not sufficiently disincentivizing procedural errors. If the person who made this mistake knew he or she was facing a 4-week suspension without pay for a first offense, he might have thought twice about locking out the press, the public and the family of the accused.
To affect the needed change, the supervisors — who supposedly work full-time for the county — should take up this cause, right away. If nothing else, they should pressure Sheriff Prieto to put a specific policy in writing ahead of time.
What I fear is that the deputies will never be punished, in part because the punishment was never laid out in advance, in part because the Sheriff might not take this infraction seriously, and in part because the deputies’ labor union won’t allow any ad hoc punishment that actually takes money out of the pocket of the offenders.
“A change of venue is obviously in order.”
If a potential jury pool in Yolo County is likely to be biased in favor of the victim (more so than juries in other counties), then I would concur with your conclusion. However, just based on this mistake by the deputies and the court commissioner, I don’t see how that compromises the defense moving forward.
What I think ought to be the outcome of this incident — the Enterprise, in its editorial today outlines other recent failings of the Yolo County courts — is that the county needs to develop a formal written non-ad hoc process for punishing employees who make these sorts of mistakes.
It seems clear that the current process is not sufficiently disincentivizing procedural errors. If the person who made this mistake knew he or she was facing a 4-week suspension without pay for a first offense, he might have thought twice about locking out the press, the public and the family of the accused.
To affect the needed change, the supervisors — who supposedly work full-time for the county — should take up this cause, right away. If nothing else, they should pressure Sheriff Prieto to put a specific policy in writing ahead of time.
What I fear is that the deputies will never be punished, in part because the punishment was never laid out in advance, in part because the Sheriff might not take this infraction seriously, and in part because the deputies’ labor union won’t allow any ad hoc punishment that actually takes money out of the pocket of the offenders.
“A change of venue is obviously in order.”
If a potential jury pool in Yolo County is likely to be biased in favor of the victim (more so than juries in other counties), then I would concur with your conclusion. However, just based on this mistake by the deputies and the court commissioner, I don’t see how that compromises the defense moving forward.
What I think ought to be the outcome of this incident — the Enterprise, in its editorial today outlines other recent failings of the Yolo County courts — is that the county needs to develop a formal written non-ad hoc process for punishing employees who make these sorts of mistakes.
It seems clear that the current process is not sufficiently disincentivizing procedural errors. If the person who made this mistake knew he or she was facing a 4-week suspension without pay for a first offense, he might have thought twice about locking out the press, the public and the family of the accused.
To affect the needed change, the supervisors — who supposedly work full-time for the county — should take up this cause, right away. If nothing else, they should pressure Sheriff Prieto to put a specific policy in writing ahead of time.
What I fear is that the deputies will never be punished, in part because the punishment was never laid out in advance, in part because the Sheriff might not take this infraction seriously, and in part because the deputies’ labor union won’t allow any ad hoc punishment that actually takes money out of the pocket of the offenders.
“A change of venue is obviously in order.”
If a potential jury pool in Yolo County is likely to be biased in favor of the victim (more so than juries in other counties), then I would concur with your conclusion. However, just based on this mistake by the deputies and the court commissioner, I don’t see how that compromises the defense moving forward.
What I think ought to be the outcome of this incident — the Enterprise, in its editorial today outlines other recent failings of the Yolo County courts — is that the county needs to develop a formal written non-ad hoc process for punishing employees who make these sorts of mistakes.
It seems clear that the current process is not sufficiently disincentivizing procedural errors. If the person who made this mistake knew he or she was facing a 4-week suspension without pay for a first offense, he might have thought twice about locking out the press, the public and the family of the accused.
To affect the needed change, the supervisors — who supposedly work full-time for the county — should take up this cause, right away. If nothing else, they should pressure Sheriff Prieto to put a specific policy in writing ahead of time.
What I fear is that the deputies will never be punished, in part because the punishment was never laid out in advance, in part because the Sheriff might not take this infraction seriously, and in part because the deputies’ labor union won’t allow any ad hoc punishment that actually takes money out of the pocket of the offenders.
I hope Sheriff Prieto doesn’t try to blame his Deputy when ultimately it was his fault that this happened. Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too. This is a shame and quite an embarassment. It’s the reason other courts often laugh at Yolo courts. Lack of professionalism.
I hope Sheriff Prieto doesn’t try to blame his Deputy when ultimately it was his fault that this happened. Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too. This is a shame and quite an embarassment. It’s the reason other courts often laugh at Yolo courts. Lack of professionalism.
I hope Sheriff Prieto doesn’t try to blame his Deputy when ultimately it was his fault that this happened. Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too. This is a shame and quite an embarassment. It’s the reason other courts often laugh at Yolo courts. Lack of professionalism.
I hope Sheriff Prieto doesn’t try to blame his Deputy when ultimately it was his fault that this happened. Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too. This is a shame and quite an embarassment. It’s the reason other courts often laugh at Yolo courts. Lack of professionalism.
“meh”
What does that mean? I am text message illiterate, and trying to learn this new language!!
“meh”
What does that mean? I am text message illiterate, and trying to learn this new language!!
“meh”
What does that mean? I am text message illiterate, and trying to learn this new language!!
“meh”
What does that mean? I am text message illiterate, and trying to learn this new language!!
“Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too.”
Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom. The people who were in that courtroom, in authority, violated the rules.
“What does that mean?”
I did not write it, but “meh” is a verbalization of a shrug of the shoulders meaning one doesn’t care so much about this matter.
“Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too.”
Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom. The people who were in that courtroom, in authority, violated the rules.
“What does that mean?”
I did not write it, but “meh” is a verbalization of a shrug of the shoulders meaning one doesn’t care so much about this matter.
“Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too.”
Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom. The people who were in that courtroom, in authority, violated the rules.
“What does that mean?”
I did not write it, but “meh” is a verbalization of a shrug of the shoulders meaning one doesn’t care so much about this matter.
“Judge Rosenberg should be held accountable too.”
Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom. The people who were in that courtroom, in authority, violated the rules.
“What does that mean?”
I did not write it, but “meh” is a verbalization of a shrug of the shoulders meaning one doesn’t care so much about this matter.
My impression of what happened is the folks from the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office were determined to protect the victim’s family from the media, so “filled up” the empty seats with officers so that there were “no seats left”. When there was a complaint made during the arraignment, not one person was sent to unluck the doors and open the courtroom to the media. Not until everything was over did anyone attempt to rectify a clear violation of the constitution – which requires ALL criminal proceedings be open to the public.
The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg. I don’t believe for one second this was an honest mistake. A mea culpa after the fact doesn’t cut it. As a member of the public, I have to wonder just what other legal requirements are these “legal professionals” going to ignore? In point of fact, this gives the defense attorneys the very excuse they need to change the venue, or drag the case on for years with appeals if this becomes a death penalty case. It also highlights the arrogance of the judicial/law enforcement system, which seems to think the law only applies when it suits them.
I have no sympathy for the perp, and every sympanthy for the family of the slain officer. But all the “legal professionals” who thought they were doing the victim’s family a favor did nothing but create a problem where one need not have existed. This is what
“getting off on a technicality” is all about.
My impression of what happened is the folks from the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office were determined to protect the victim’s family from the media, so “filled up” the empty seats with officers so that there were “no seats left”. When there was a complaint made during the arraignment, not one person was sent to unluck the doors and open the courtroom to the media. Not until everything was over did anyone attempt to rectify a clear violation of the constitution – which requires ALL criminal proceedings be open to the public.
The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg. I don’t believe for one second this was an honest mistake. A mea culpa after the fact doesn’t cut it. As a member of the public, I have to wonder just what other legal requirements are these “legal professionals” going to ignore? In point of fact, this gives the defense attorneys the very excuse they need to change the venue, or drag the case on for years with appeals if this becomes a death penalty case. It also highlights the arrogance of the judicial/law enforcement system, which seems to think the law only applies when it suits them.
I have no sympathy for the perp, and every sympanthy for the family of the slain officer. But all the “legal professionals” who thought they were doing the victim’s family a favor did nothing but create a problem where one need not have existed. This is what
“getting off on a technicality” is all about.
My impression of what happened is the folks from the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office were determined to protect the victim’s family from the media, so “filled up” the empty seats with officers so that there were “no seats left”. When there was a complaint made during the arraignment, not one person was sent to unluck the doors and open the courtroom to the media. Not until everything was over did anyone attempt to rectify a clear violation of the constitution – which requires ALL criminal proceedings be open to the public.
The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg. I don’t believe for one second this was an honest mistake. A mea culpa after the fact doesn’t cut it. As a member of the public, I have to wonder just what other legal requirements are these “legal professionals” going to ignore? In point of fact, this gives the defense attorneys the very excuse they need to change the venue, or drag the case on for years with appeals if this becomes a death penalty case. It also highlights the arrogance of the judicial/law enforcement system, which seems to think the law only applies when it suits them.
I have no sympathy for the perp, and every sympanthy for the family of the slain officer. But all the “legal professionals” who thought they were doing the victim’s family a favor did nothing but create a problem where one need not have existed. This is what
“getting off on a technicality” is all about.
My impression of what happened is the folks from the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office were determined to protect the victim’s family from the media, so “filled up” the empty seats with officers so that there were “no seats left”. When there was a complaint made during the arraignment, not one person was sent to unluck the doors and open the courtroom to the media. Not until everything was over did anyone attempt to rectify a clear violation of the constitution – which requires ALL criminal proceedings be open to the public.
The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg. I don’t believe for one second this was an honest mistake. A mea culpa after the fact doesn’t cut it. As a member of the public, I have to wonder just what other legal requirements are these “legal professionals” going to ignore? In point of fact, this gives the defense attorneys the very excuse they need to change the venue, or drag the case on for years with appeals if this becomes a death penalty case. It also highlights the arrogance of the judicial/law enforcement system, which seems to think the law only applies when it suits them.
I have no sympathy for the perp, and every sympanthy for the family of the slain officer. But all the “legal professionals” who thought they were doing the victim’s family a favor did nothing but create a problem where one need not have existed. This is what
“getting off on a technicality” is all about.
“The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg.”
I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?
“The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg.”
I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?
“The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg.”
I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?
“The court administrator, law enforcement, the DA all knew very well what the law was, as did Judge Rosenberg.”
I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?
For the deputies to fill up the small courtroom they had to arrange this in advance of the arraignment. It was probably done the day or night before. I don’t think it just happened on he spot the day of. They planned to fill up the room and keep everyone out. I’m sure it came from the top. They don’t do this kind of thing on their own. It’s a paramilitary organization.
For the deputies to fill up the small courtroom they had to arrange this in advance of the arraignment. It was probably done the day or night before. I don’t think it just happened on he spot the day of. They planned to fill up the room and keep everyone out. I’m sure it came from the top. They don’t do this kind of thing on their own. It’s a paramilitary organization.
For the deputies to fill up the small courtroom they had to arrange this in advance of the arraignment. It was probably done the day or night before. I don’t think it just happened on he spot the day of. They planned to fill up the room and keep everyone out. I’m sure it came from the top. They don’t do this kind of thing on their own. It’s a paramilitary organization.
For the deputies to fill up the small courtroom they had to arrange this in advance of the arraignment. It was probably done the day or night before. I don’t think it just happened on he spot the day of. They planned to fill up the room and keep everyone out. I’m sure it came from the top. They don’t do this kind of thing on their own. It’s a paramilitary organization.
What ever happened to the normal checks and balances that were taught (used to be taught apparently) in most 8th grade civics classes. The checks and balances were put into place to keep the powers of legislative, judicial and executive (i.e. police) branches from overlapping. Whenever a government begins to allow police officers to dictate the conduct of its courts, that government is on the road to facism.
What ever happened to the normal checks and balances that were taught (used to be taught apparently) in most 8th grade civics classes. The checks and balances were put into place to keep the powers of legislative, judicial and executive (i.e. police) branches from overlapping. Whenever a government begins to allow police officers to dictate the conduct of its courts, that government is on the road to facism.
What ever happened to the normal checks and balances that were taught (used to be taught apparently) in most 8th grade civics classes. The checks and balances were put into place to keep the powers of legislative, judicial and executive (i.e. police) branches from overlapping. Whenever a government begins to allow police officers to dictate the conduct of its courts, that government is on the road to facism.
What ever happened to the normal checks and balances that were taught (used to be taught apparently) in most 8th grade civics classes. The checks and balances were put into place to keep the powers of legislative, judicial and executive (i.e. police) branches from overlapping. Whenever a government begins to allow police officers to dictate the conduct of its courts, that government is on the road to facism.
“Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom.”
This is not accurate. The process is consultation between the court baliff and judge on security matters but the judge ultimately has authority and control of their courtroom. I believe that Rosenberg is now presiding judge in Yolo and the “buck stops on his desk”. He should have kept a closer eye on these potentially inflamatory proceedings since he is aware that a Commissioner, with less judicial clout, does these arraignments.
“Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom.”
This is not accurate. The process is consultation between the court baliff and judge on security matters but the judge ultimately has authority and control of their courtroom. I believe that Rosenberg is now presiding judge in Yolo and the “buck stops on his desk”. He should have kept a closer eye on these potentially inflamatory proceedings since he is aware that a Commissioner, with less judicial clout, does these arraignments.
“Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom.”
This is not accurate. The process is consultation between the court baliff and judge on security matters but the judge ultimately has authority and control of their courtroom. I believe that Rosenberg is now presiding judge in Yolo and the “buck stops on his desk”. He should have kept a closer eye on these potentially inflamatory proceedings since he is aware that a Commissioner, with less judicial clout, does these arraignments.
“Why? He was not in the courtroom. He does not have authority over the sheriff’s not in his courtroom.”
This is not accurate. The process is consultation between the court baliff and judge on security matters but the judge ultimately has authority and control of their courtroom. I believe that Rosenberg is now presiding judge in Yolo and the “buck stops on his desk”. He should have kept a closer eye on these potentially inflamatory proceedings since he is aware that a Commissioner, with less judicial clout, does these arraignments.
Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.
Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.
Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.
Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge and does have the responsibility of what happens in the Yolo County courts.
He failed this time and needs to fix it so it doesn’t happen again.
Some of the presiding judge’s job duties include: The Presiding Judge is responsible for leading the management and administration of
the court’s business, recommending policies and procedures that improve the court’s effectiveness, and allocating resources in a way that maximizes the court’s ability to
resolve disputes fairly and expeditiously…
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge and does have the responsibility of what happens in the Yolo County courts.
He failed this time and needs to fix it so it doesn’t happen again.
Some of the presiding judge’s job duties include: The Presiding Judge is responsible for leading the management and administration of
the court’s business, recommending policies and procedures that improve the court’s effectiveness, and allocating resources in a way that maximizes the court’s ability to
resolve disputes fairly and expeditiously…
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge and does have the responsibility of what happens in the Yolo County courts.
He failed this time and needs to fix it so it doesn’t happen again.
Some of the presiding judge’s job duties include: The Presiding Judge is responsible for leading the management and administration of
the court’s business, recommending policies and procedures that improve the court’s effectiveness, and allocating resources in a way that maximizes the court’s ability to
resolve disputes fairly and expeditiously…
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge and does have the responsibility of what happens in the Yolo County courts.
He failed this time and needs to fix it so it doesn’t happen again.
Some of the presiding judge’s job duties include: The Presiding Judge is responsible for leading the management and administration of
the court’s business, recommending policies and procedures that improve the court’s effectiveness, and allocating resources in a way that maximizes the court’s ability to
resolve disputes fairly and expeditiously…
“I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?”
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge over the Yolo courthouse. He is in charge of the whole shebang, and needs to run a much tighter ship. As was pointed out in the Davis Enterprise, this is not the first time the Yolo courts have chosen to do sloppy work or not adhere to mandates.
Interesting how the Davis Enterprise didn’t seem too interested about the sloppiness at the county courthouse until they were actually shut out of the courtroom. This is always the problem with looking the other way instead of making sure to call it when it happens. Eventually you may be the victim of that failure to follow procedure you didn’t bother to pay attention to way back when because it didn’t effect you!
“I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?”
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge over the Yolo courthouse. He is in charge of the whole shebang, and needs to run a much tighter ship. As was pointed out in the Davis Enterprise, this is not the first time the Yolo courts have chosen to do sloppy work or not adhere to mandates.
Interesting how the Davis Enterprise didn’t seem too interested about the sloppiness at the county courthouse until they were actually shut out of the courtroom. This is always the problem with looking the other way instead of making sure to call it when it happens. Eventually you may be the victim of that failure to follow procedure you didn’t bother to pay attention to way back when because it didn’t effect you!
“I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?”
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge over the Yolo courthouse. He is in charge of the whole shebang, and needs to run a much tighter ship. As was pointed out in the Davis Enterprise, this is not the first time the Yolo courts have chosen to do sloppy work or not adhere to mandates.
Interesting how the Davis Enterprise didn’t seem too interested about the sloppiness at the county courthouse until they were actually shut out of the courtroom. This is always the problem with looking the other way instead of making sure to call it when it happens. Eventually you may be the victim of that failure to follow procedure you didn’t bother to pay attention to way back when because it didn’t effect you!
“I’m sure you’re right. But what could Rosenberg have done about this incident when he was not there and had no charge over the sheriffs in that courtroom?”
Judge Rosenberg is the presiding judge over the Yolo courthouse. He is in charge of the whole shebang, and needs to run a much tighter ship. As was pointed out in the Davis Enterprise, this is not the first time the Yolo courts have chosen to do sloppy work or not adhere to mandates.
Interesting how the Davis Enterprise didn’t seem too interested about the sloppiness at the county courthouse until they were actually shut out of the courtroom. This is always the problem with looking the other way instead of making sure to call it when it happens. Eventually you may be the victim of that failure to follow procedure you didn’t bother to pay attention to way back when because it didn’t effect you!
“Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.”
A presiding judge (Rosenberg in this case) has control of every courtroom, including whether it is closed to the public or not, and that would include supervision of any law enforcement officer carrying out court administrative duties. It is bedrock principle that every part of the criminal process must be public, period, including the arraignment process.
“Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.”
A presiding judge (Rosenberg in this case) has control of every courtroom, including whether it is closed to the public or not, and that would include supervision of any law enforcement officer carrying out court administrative duties. It is bedrock principle that every part of the criminal process must be public, period, including the arraignment process.
“Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.”
A presiding judge (Rosenberg in this case) has control of every courtroom, including whether it is closed to the public or not, and that would include supervision of any law enforcement officer carrying out court administrative duties. It is bedrock principle that every part of the criminal process must be public, period, including the arraignment process.
“Rifkin is actually correct. The Sheriff, Ed Prieto, is responsible in this case, not Rosenberg. As presiding judge, Rosenberg can only admonish the commissioner, not the deputies.”
A presiding judge (Rosenberg in this case) has control of every courtroom, including whether it is closed to the public or not, and that would include supervision of any law enforcement officer carrying out court administrative duties. It is bedrock principle that every part of the criminal process must be public, period, including the arraignment process.
Rosenberg has done very few things right. Why should he start now?
Rosenberg has done very few things right. Why should he start now?
Rosenberg has done very few things right. Why should he start now?
Rosenberg has done very few things right. Why should he start now?
It was not a mistake but a deliberate attempt to violate the US and California Constitutions. Those responsible should be fired or recalled. What a shame. i tis not the first time they done this as reported by the Sac Bee today.
It was not a mistake but a deliberate attempt to violate the US and California Constitutions. Those responsible should be fired or recalled. What a shame. i tis not the first time they done this as reported by the Sac Bee today.
It was not a mistake but a deliberate attempt to violate the US and California Constitutions. Those responsible should be fired or recalled. What a shame. i tis not the first time they done this as reported by the Sac Bee today.
It was not a mistake but a deliberate attempt to violate the US and California Constitutions. Those responsible should be fired or recalled. What a shame. i tis not the first time they done this as reported by the Sac Bee today.
You obviously don’t know Judge Rosenberg, nor have ever been in his courtroom. One thing that people do say about Judge Rosenberg is that he is fair to everyone who comes before him.
You obviously don’t know Judge Rosenberg, nor have ever been in his courtroom. One thing that people do say about Judge Rosenberg is that he is fair to everyone who comes before him.
You obviously don’t know Judge Rosenberg, nor have ever been in his courtroom. One thing that people do say about Judge Rosenberg is that he is fair to everyone who comes before him.
You obviously don’t know Judge Rosenberg, nor have ever been in his courtroom. One thing that people do say about Judge Rosenberg is that he is fair to everyone who comes before him.