Tag Archives: bob schreiber

iePolitics: Exclusive: The Eyler/Postmus witness list – Updated

Posted on by Administrator
21

Editor’s Note:  For a blog that “no one reads,” stories that are printed on it sure do have the tendency to create havoc.  We knew there would be several additional names to this list, but then presents drop from the sky.  And those presents were read by the defense.


iePolitics has obtained a partial list of witnesses expected to be called as a part of the upcoming corruption trial in People v. Postmus, et al.  Attorneys for the defendants have given the judge an expected length of seven to eight weeks for the trial.  Here are the names we have been given so far:

Continue reading →

SBGrapevine: Editorial: Time for the US Department of Justice to Step in: Compelled to Deceive – Part Three

Posted on by Administrator
3

Adam Aleman

www.sbgrapevine.com

Are you listening US Attorney?  San Bernardino County is in crisis.  It is a crisis that mocks our justice system; one that distorts the truth; and one where integrity is a forgotten.  Bringing about justice is no longer the highest priority of our county prosecutors; winning at any and all cost  is their goal—a goal that has little to do integrity, truth or . . . justice.

There are many lesser-known stories of justice gone awry in our county. Ours  starts with a little-known manager at the local Outback Steakhouse who went on to make headlines.  His name is familiar to all of us.  It is Adam Aleman.

Aleman caught the attention of then-Supervisor Bill Postmus many years ago.  He eventually left Outback Steakhouse to become a member of Postmus’ Board of Supervisors staff.

Continue reading →

iePolitics: A much calmer courtroom

Posted on by Administrator
2

Bob Schrieber

The atmosphere in Judge Michael Smith’s courtroom today was 180 degrees opposite of just a week ago.  Much of that likely had to do with a notable absence, PIU boss Bob Schreiber, who was never to be seen today.  Even the bailiff seemed to have a change of heart and tried to be helpful.

The always-bigoted Bud Hollis toned down his testimony as well today as he got lesson after lesson about telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  He had to admit that he had never read county policy regarding exempt employees.   For example, during three years of investigation and a price tag already of $4 million, he had never bothered to read the part of the Exempt  Compensation Plan that says: Continue reading →

iePolitics: Bob Schreiber has a history of intimidation

Posted on by Administrator
3

We have talked about Brady issues here on the blog before in relationship to the District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit.  The unit is headed by former San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department deputy Bob Schreiber.  Schreiber is a walking Brady issue.

You see I’m hardly the first person Schreiber has tried to intimidate in reference to court proceedings.  He has a history of it.  And it ain’t pretty!

But the best part is still to come.  You see some of you may remember the Alvarez case involving real estate fraud.  Originally bail on that case was set at $1 million but the case ended up having to be dismissed altogether.  Why?

Continue reading →

iePolitics: Brady issues in the District Attorney’s office

Posted on by Administrator
6

We have been saying all along that there are some “issues” with the District Attorney’s investigation in the corruption scandal.  Now we have proof.

For those not familiar with Brady, here is an excerpt from a previous post:

There is a case entitled Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).  The Wikipedia entry reads (emphasis added):

. . . in which the prosecution had withheld from the criminal defendant certain evidence. The defendant challenged his conviction, arguing it had been contrary to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Maryland prosecuted Brady and a companion, Boblit, for murder. Brady admitted being involved in the murder, but claimed Boblit had done the actual killing. The prosecution had withheld a written statement by Boblit confessing that he had performed the act of killing by himself. The Maryland Court of Appeal had affirmed the conviction and remanded the case for a retrial only of the question of punishment. Continue reading →