Rumor control . . . NOT!

Gary Ovitt and Mark Kirk

I thought I’d share just a few of the rumors going around in political circles, corruption scandals, and elsewhere.  Of course, I never know when they make it my way in an effort to trace a source or start a real rumor.  But here they are no matter the case.

  1. Is Joey Jacaloni on the outs with Supervisor Bob.  Well, not exactly.  Rumor is that Supervisor Bob is trying to distant himself from Joey.  Now Joey says that he and Bobby spend more time talking to one another than they do their own wives.  But if I were Supervisor Bob, would I want to be standing for re-election with my enforcer threatening everyone who doesn’t do things his way?  Joey has single-handedly made more enemies for Supervisor Bob than Supervisor Bob has made for himself.  And that’s saying something!  I’m not sure I believe this rumor, but it’s out there in political circles.  Supervisor Bob would be smart to make sure the rumor is true.  But no one said Supervisor Bob is smart.
  2. Now this is a whopper!  Supposedly Colonies Four defendant Mark Kirk has some BIG political plans.  Once he is acquitted of all of the felonies against him, rumor has it he claims he is going to run the campaign against Supervisor Curt Hagman.  He wants Gary Ovitt back in office for one term and he wants to be Gary’s Chief of Staff once again.  Then, in 2022, he plans to run for Fourth District Supervisor himself.  Can you say sore loser?  Or pipe dream?  Or out of touch with reality?
  3. Along with Colonies Four Kirk’s plan, the rumor is that the current demand for a speedy trial is part of a Jeff Burum ploy to ultimately get everyone separated from Colonies Defendant Jim Erwin.  It seems there is some dissension among the defendants.  Yeah, they are all finally realizing none of them would be where they were at without Erwin’s . . . umm . . . “help.”  Yeah, thanks Jim.  Lou Cope’s comment that separate juries may be needed for Burum and Erwin “because statements they made to law enforcement may not be admissable in each other’s cases” is interesting.  Can anyone explain?
  4. There has been a revolt going on in the Third Distrct.  I guess some staff members are not too happy with the chief of staff.  The rumors go way beyond that though.  They are so far-fetched that I will not write about them.  Let’s just say conspiracy theory and Michael Lipsitz.  There is some pretty crazy stuff being said.  It is far-fetched but it would also explain a lot of what makes no sense with that case.

28 thoughts on “Rumor control . . . NOT!

  1. Administrator:

    Nice to see the site back up. Someone has been posting some silly old comments by Repairman on the other site, and I’d like to see some silly new ones.

    Plus, he never did get the opportunity to fully explain his flip flopping on Mike Ramos, once saying he should be prosecuted for his campaign violations, and later saying they were harmless mistakes.

    Repairman, are you still here?

  2. As to # 3 on your list, did your source tell you there are a couple of court decisions out there that might be real interesting? I mean real interesting?

    Not sure if you still believe this case has as much gas today as everyone was led to believe 3 years ago.

    You have a member of County Council telling the Grand Jury that the defendants are criminals and how the $102 million was obtained by fraud and corruption, that same lawyer going into another court trying to get insurance companies to give up money to recoup the counties loss saying the settlement was just and fair. WTF?

    Where in gods name does anything think a lawyer playing into two different theories on the same subject isn’t problematic for the criminal case?

    The county has recouped over half their money to date and the DA and members of the BOS at least one has been maintaining a false narrative for quite sometime.

    No different than a business owner firing and prosecuting a employee for theft and behind the scenes recovering the money and NOT telling anyone about it but the employer continues to suggest the employee is evil.

    It makes it real bad if the employer recovered his money through civil court and that court says the judgement is final and NO OTHER proceedings may take place related to this matter.

    But you the employer tell no one about that ruling.

    The freakin DA don’t even have their witness list ready AFTER 4 years.

    To ignore the other scandals that have occurred in the last several years involving the DA’s office and we can talk about those found factually innocent, and try and give the impression this case is different and solid is beyond laughable.

    I guess someone is hoping the jury is loaded with idiots and can’t detect BS on their own.

    It’s more laughable to see Difazios case stayed pending the outcome of the Colonies case.

    Either the man lied or he didn’t.

    They didn’t stay Rex’s case because he was connected to Burum and Postmus.

    It’s pathetic no matter what the case is, if it takes you years to prosecute ANYTHING.

    No Appeals or pending motions in the Charter School case. So explain that one?

    • The Colonies Crooks are really spinning this one. As Holtz just said, it’s OK to steal if the victim’s losses are covered by insurance. Wow! But the big spin here by the Colonies Crooks is that the county claimed in the insurance cases that the settlement was “just and fair”. The county never claimed that. All the county claimed is that the settlement was a loss that was covered by insurance. If the Colonies Crooks spent as much time trying to prove their innocence in court as they did trying to prove their innocence in the newspapers – which won’t help them in court one bit – maybe they’d have a shot at staying out of prison. Not likely, though.

      • Anonymous:

        This comment has “Red” all over it.

        Red Anon, if this isn’t really you, I recommend that you immediately determine who wrote it, and contact them to co-form a chapter of the “Fact Ignoring Supporters of Mike Ramos.”

        I would be happy to be a guest author in your initial newsletter, explaining how the burden “in court” will be on the prosecution to prove that the defendants are guilty, not on the defendant’s to “prove their innocence.”

  3. Well Anonymous here is another news flash for you that has NO spin and a little more bite.

    The 4th District Court of Appeals tentative ruling upheld Judge Smiths dismissal of ALL conspiracy charges against the defendant. That was in the Sun.

    So if the DA Crooks had handled their business in a timely manner we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

    Don’t take my words out of context as you did in the second line. Very simple don’t claim your a victim in one arena and secretly try to collect your losses in another and think it won’t impact your criminal case. I never said its ok to steal.

    Your DA friends have the pattern established of bringing BS charges in the last couple years. I noticed you didn’t touch on that glarring FACT.

    NO SPIN is when you tell people their is desention taking place among defendants and it’s a defense ploy when nothing of the sort is going on.

    So anonymous we will see how Mikey proves his crime of the century without conspiracy charges to set the stage.

    Stand around with your finger up your nose you miss the bus.

    Nice try with that simple line of yours I said it was ok to steal.

    One last thing anonymous maybe you can spin a line or two about the Feds stepping away from the case.

      • You most certainly said it’s OK to steal if the victim’s losses are covered by insurance. “No different than a business owner firing and prosecuting a employee for theft and behind the scenes recovering the money and NOT telling anyone about it but the employer continues to suggest the employee is evil.” What else could that possibly mean? You said quite clearly a business owner has no right to fire and press charges against a thieving employee and call him evil if the business owner recovers his losses. Anyway, the bigger question is, why do you spend so much time and effort taking up the cause of a wealthy developer and his well-pensioned cronies? If you think the prosecution is bogus, fine, maybe it is. But you sure do seem quite obsessed with it.

  4. Kenneth Holtz:

    Don’t expect a logical response from any Mike Ramos supporters to the fact that the FBI opened an investigation of The Colonies case, and closed it without any further action.

    Instead, look for responses that mischaracterize the facts, such as the one in the local media that suggested that the statute of limitations ran out before the FBI had a chance to send the defendants to prison.

  5. That’s true OoF, but the statue of limitations on RICO wasn’t.

    But that’s not the REAL reason the Feds stepped away. They had their own 600lb elephant to deal with AND a witness who gave conflicting statements.

    I suspect we will see at least one person from the federal government called come trial.

    Looking forward to that.

  6. Hey anonymous, if the Feds had filed on that witness for lying to them or believing they did, would you like to tell us that to would have NO impact on the States case?

    In my opinion a double conviction for lying is a real killer. That is one for the State the other for the Federal Government. That might be a local record of some kind.

    It’s obvious you have no clue on the judicial process but give it a shot anyways.

    And a background in politics sure a hell don’t put you at the head of the line in anything.

  7. The RUMOR there is problem in the defense camp among defendants is BULLSHIT!

    Ok you stick with the I said it was ok to steal. If that’s the best argument in all this let me LMAO!

    Your hero’s at the DA’s office are losing ground.

  8. I couldn’t care less about the DA, and the case may very well be BS. I’m just fascinated by how deeply you care about the poor, poor defendants in this case. Guilty or innocent, all four of them got undeservedly and unethically rich on the backs of the taxpayers.

    • Actually anonymous and I am sure you remember how Sharon spent many months trying to explain to readers and rehabilitate Bill Postmus who had PLED GUILTY to his crimes how methamphetamine was responsible for many of his problems. OK!

      On and on about poor Bill. Would you care to comment on that? These defendants are NOT convicted of anything.

      During election Grover Merritt was BASHED for his mere association with those charged with crimes.

      Association however slight with convicted felons has much more of a bite when compared side by side.

      Don’t hide in the house where different standards have been applied.

      Sharon can carry her flip sided coin and flip it anytime she wants, so CAN we.

      I just flipped mine. YOUR turn?

    • Actually I comment with equal intensity on other poor poor defendants in other cases. I often refer to them when arguing with fools who only talk about one case or two if you include Neil Derry.

  9. Anonymous:

    If you are Red Anon, I know that you have no interest in the facts, so you can stop reading my comment at this point.

    If you are not Red Anon, I recommend that you read Judge Warner’s ruling, which was reached after an 18 day trial where San Bernardino County was represented by nine attorneys. You might reach a different conclusion on who was unethical.

  10. Were those the same attorneys that walked out of that hotel room, refusing to sign off on the settlement reached in front of an out of town judge, on a weekend, calling it a gift of public funds?

    • And why do you think it was so incredibly important that the settlement be done right then, that a out out town judge was flown in from San Fransisco to preside over the proceedings in a hotel room on a weekend, collecting only a third of what they were owed, instead of going back to judge Smith’s court room and collecting the entire three hundred million dollars they were owed?

  11. LOL anonymous did you look in the mirror on deeply concerned.

    Yep you sound just like Red, can’t deviat from the same old story despite new facts that have come into play.

    Don’t lie to us you don’t give a shit about the DA. He holds your leash.

    Your a clown to suggest your concerned about the taxpayers when your pal has charged innocent people with crimes they didn’t commit.

    As usual your comments are a dead give away.

    You didn’t learn much in your days did ya boy? It clearly shows.

  12. Anonymous:

    Attorneys walking out of hotel rooms and an “out of town judge” being flow in “on a weekend,” ad nauseum. This is the same tired recital I have heard for over five years from Repairman, Red Anon, and other Mike Ramos cheerleaders.

    For the record, yes it was some of the same attorneys who had just been beaten in Superior Court that did not want to settle the case.

    And the “out of town judge” did not issue any ruling, he mediated the settlement. I always laugh when I hear that reference. Given that The Colonies supposedly bribed all the local judges, wouldn’t an “out of town judge” been better for the County?

    On second thought, don’t bother reading Judge Warner’s ruling; stick with Joe Nelson columns.

    • Observer Of Facts
      Just so I’m strait on your thinking, you see absolutely no problem with an settlement reached in a hotel room, by an out of town judge flown in for this one mediation, on a weekend, and after the county’s attorneys walked out refusing to sign off, calling it a gift of public funds, bestowing a hundred million dollars upon a developer? and that it is basically the attorneys faults for being poor losers? And why is it they didn’t just go back to Judge Warner’s court room for the settlement?
      I have my ideas , but would like to hear what you have to say since you seem to be the preeminent expert, and I may add one of a dwindling few who still believe.

      • Anonymous:

        I do not consider myself an “expert” on this case, but I have followed it closely over the years. As I have said in many prior comments, I enjoyed seeing a defiant bureaucracy finally bully somebody with the ability to fight back.

        Here is my understanding of the events: The Colonies sued the county, and a trial was held in Superior Court. The Judge issued a ruling that found the County liable, and both sides discussed settling the amount of the damages. Both sides agreed to have a retired Supreme Court Justice mediate the settlement, he did so, and a settlement was reached.

        Yes, the county attorneys who had lost in court did not agree with or ratify the settlement of the damages; they apparently wanted to keep fighting, as long as they could continue to bill the county $100,000 a month or so.

        I don’t know if the settlement was reached in a “hotel room” or “on a weekend,” and I do not see the relevance; to me those statements are just theatrics by the Mike Ramos supporters. I also don’t know why they didn’t “go back to Judge Warner’s court room for the settlement.”

        Finally, if you are not Red Anon, you have a lot in common: you should have used the word “straight” instead of “strait” in your comment.

        • Observer of Facts
          Thank you for your response, how ever your glazing over of how, where, when by who, and a few other little factoids that would set any smell detectors alarm off, does not place you very high on the credibility index. At least now I know how to gauge what you say.
          Thanks again

          • Anonymous:

            One of the “factioids” I base my opinion on is the actual settlement agreement document. At 28 pages, its extremely comprehensive, and makes your claim that the settlement was reached in a hotel room on a weekend seem illogical.

            Please explain the “how, where,when by who” as you understand it, and the supporting “factiods.”

          • Anonymous:

            By the way, here’s another “factoid:” The FBI opened an investigation, raided Jeff Burum’s office, and then closed their case with no action taken.

            I wonder if they searched the “hotel room” where you claim that the settlement was reached?

  13. Anonymous why don’t you explain ALL the conspiracy charges being dropped?

    Seems your hotel meeting is part of the conspiracy that is no more.

    Issue MOOT at his time!

    Like the FBI is NO more. That must be ruff for a expert concerned about taxpayers.

    • Kenneth Holtz:

      Here is a hypothetical Red Anon/Repairman/Anonymous response to your comments:

      1) If the Appellate Court judges affirm the Superior Court ruling to dismiss all the conspiracy charges against all the defendants, they were bribed.
      2) The FBI really wanted to prosecute all the defendants, but could not do so because the statue of limitations had expired.
      3) The statute of limitations expired because the defendants lied, stonewalled, etc.
      4) This is all Neil Derry’s fault.

      • Pretty much!

        1) The Court of Appeals has now reduced 13 pages of charges down to 5. Plus or minus 1 page.
        2) The U.S. Attorney didn’t prosecute because they found no evidence of a crime. What they did find is a FBI Agent who was over zealous in his conduct because he was trying to get his DA wife a promotion. To add misery to all that the primary witness in the States case tells a different story to the U.S. Attorney.
        3)The statue of limitations ran because Mike Ramos thought the defendants would not fight back and be bullied like many other defendants.
        4) Neil Derry is smiling right now.
        5) Jose Gonzales DID see Jeff Burum in China. Jim Brutle put up a cardboard cut out of Burum down the hallway to intimidate poor Josie.

Leave a Reply