Re-electing Paul

How many of the above comments came from Sleazy Salzman, his dog Sara or new aliases? Truth is that Paul is a failure in office and we are suffering for it.
While we're at it, why are Gags signs popping up on properties with out the owners permission? Notice how many signs are posted on vacant properties or in locations where they may not be noticed by the owner?

Honestly wrote:

<quoted text>
The Quigley case brings up so many emotions, but this cannot be the only reason to vote for someone. Obviously there was a plea deal after the evidence was reviewed. The public is not always privy to all the facts. I trust the DA's office to make sound decisions on the public behalf and not based on emotions. My heart goes out to the Quigley family, but after watching the debate, I will be voting for Paul. Oh, and by the way, I am a Republican..party affiliation should have nothing to do with the right person for the job.

Two things.
ONE PG did not get enough time for the dirtbag Whitmill on his previous conviction.
TWO PG did not charge/prosecute dirtbag Whitmill for his wanton murder of Nicole Quigley so he will be eligible to be back into society while he is still "fairly young". The guy should be "nuked" and we would be rid of this parasite forever.
Quit giving these worthless bums another chance to devastate someone else's family.

The "conviction" Gallegos got on Gundersen was pure crap! The whole case reeks of a scam to get his wife's client full custody in a years long custody battle against Gundersen! He should've stuck with the case he was making on Darcie Seal for trading guns to her ex-brother-in-law Carl Patton for drugs. Who by the way used one of the guns in the attempted murder of his girlfriend!(who should've filed a civil lawsuit) He got his charge reduced. Darcie should've been charged as an accessory to that crime! Darcie admitted stealing evidence and trading it for drugs! She also admitted giving grow equipment to set up a grow in one of their rentals. Gallegos let Seal off even on perjury after she went back on the immunity deal she'd made with him. How is it justice when you let an admitted dirty cop go free...and still allow her to possess weapons?!

I dont know how much time you have spent in court or dealing with our Disrict Attorney but I can assure you that the year I spent doing both assured me that we are in desperate need for change. Mr Gallegos is a pleasant person but has no business running the District Attorney's office or trying to prosecute anyone.

Honestly wrote:

<quoted text>
The Quigley case brings up so many emotions, but this cannot be the only reason to vote for someone. Obviously there was a plea deal after the evidence was reviewed. The public is not always privy to all the facts. I trust the DA's office to make sound decisions on the public behalf and not based on emotions. My heart goes out to the Quigley family, but after watching the debate, I will be voting for Paul. Oh, and by the way, I am a Republican..party affiliation should have nothing to do with the right person for the job.

Whitmill got twice as much time as Cody Baker did in Trinity Co.
Whitmill got as much time as Bradshaw.

Whitmill got 14 yrs on an 11 year max?Please explain?

Thanks to The DA's office:
Where's Gundersen now?On probation & Not wearing a badge.
Where's Darcie now? Not wearing a badge?
Where's Whitmill now? In prison for the next decade.
Where's Bradshaw now? In prison for the next decade?
Where's PALCO? GONE from Humboldt County forever.

Palco isn't gone due to our current DA silly.

By the numbers wrote:

Whitmill got twice as much time as Cody Baker did in Trinity Co.
Whitmill got as much time as Bradshaw.
Whitmill got 14 yrs on an 11 year max?Please explain?
Thanks to The DA's office:
Where's Gundersen now?On probation & Not wearing a badge.
Where's Darcie now? Not wearing a badge?
Where's Whitmill now? In prison for the next decade.
Where's Bradshaw now? In prison for the next decade?
Where's PALCO? GONE from Humboldt County forever.

Cody Baker's sentence was a joke also, so comparing the two just shows what injustice there is in the backwoods courts of CA.

Honestly wrote:

<quoted text>
The Quigley case brings up so many emotions, but this cannot be the only reason to vote for someone. Obviously there was a plea deal after the evidence was reviewed. The public is not always privy to all the facts. I trust the DA's office to make sound decisions on the public behalf and not based on emotions. My heart goes out to the Quigley family, but after watching the debate, I will be voting for Paul. Oh, and by the way, I am a Republican..party affiliation should have nothing to do with the right person for the job.

honestly I don't believe you. Yes, you can base a lot on that one case and you are right, it is all about electing the right person for the job. Over and over again we see cases that give minimal sentences for vehicular deaths; Speed, run over a pedestrian and kill them.... get probation; honestly, it seems the procecution, or lack thereof, of these cases has a lot to do with the outcome.

blame paul wrote:

ok. here it is. ready? we all know that the cops all hate paul. now lets take an honest look at the top three reasons that the cops hate paul, and boy howdy, the cops indeed hate paul. here they are, the three top reasons that cops h8 paul
1. cops arrested.
2. cops indicted.
3. cops convicted.
enuff said. vote paul, unless your the fuzz, then, well, we still love you.

Really? So, you've asked our local law enforcement members to determine this is how they feel? If you could manage to use some logic you might figure the good cops don't mind the bad ones being weeded out. Why would they want the bad cops around making the rest of them look bad? I haven't met a single officer who has complained about the other officers who have been convicted. I take that back. I have heard compliants that some bad officers should have received harsher punishment.

Ken Quigley wrote:

I dont know how much time you have spent in court or dealing with our Disrict Attorney but I can assure you that the year I spent doing both assured me that we are in desperate need for change. Mr Gallegos is a pleasant person but has no business running the District Attorney's office or trying to prosecute anyone.
<quoted text>

I stand behind you, Mr. Quigley. We have never met however, I respect your opinion. May I also add how tremendously sorry I am for your loss and for the way the matter has been handled in court. My heart hurts for you and your family as I have watched this case play out.
I work in the system and have had dealings with Paul myself which have not left me with a good feeling about the way things are being done. It is time for a change. Please, people of Humboldt, VOTE FOR CHANGE!

Keith Stone wrote:

<quoted text>
Cody Baker's sentence was a joke also, so comparing the two just shows what injustice there is in the backwoods courts of CA.

The stats don't show any injustice.
In fact the "backwoods court" judges of Lake, Del Norte,Humboldt,Trinity & Mendocino counties are notoriously tough on DUI cases.

Cody Baker agreed to a longer sentence,who got greedy?I thought 10 years was appropriate for a tragic accident.

Motive - one of the key words of our justice system.

HeresYourSign wrote:

<quoted text>
The stats don't show any injustice.
In fact the "backwoods court" judges of Lake, Del Norte,Humboldt,Trinity & Mendocino counties are notoriously tough on DUI cases.
Cody Baker agreed to a longer sentence,who got greedy?I thought 10 years was appropriate for a tragic accident.
Motive - one of the key words of our justice system.

I bet you'd think better of the sentence if it was one of your kids in the car he was driving. I agree with the key word "motive"; getting into a car when he had alcohol related issues before and now under the influence again, allowing passengers and then speeding to their death seems like plenty of motive to me, but it's over and done with and has nothing to do with this.

It seems the most that like PG like his stance on drugs and general liberal views, so that's their motivation; I drive past Ken's daughter's memorial everyday on my way to and from work and that's my main motivation to vote for someone else that will do a better job.

Keith Stone wrote:

<quoted text>
I bet you'd think better of the sentence if it was one of your kids in the car he was driving. I agree with the key word "motive"; getting into a car when he had alcohol related issues before and now under the influence again, allowing passengers and then speeding to their death seems like plenty of motive to me, but it's over and done with and has nothing to do with this.
It seems the most that like PG like his stance on drugs and general liberal views, so that's their motivation; I drive past Ken's daughter's memorial everyday on my way to and from work and that's my main motivation to vote for someone else that will do a better job.

Again - the only candidate for Humboldt DA that was involved with the Baker case was Al Jackson.How'd that work for the victim's families?
Whitmill got exactly what was coming to him.But he was hood-winked into giving up his appeal rights.How come none of Ken's supporters ever mention the Judge?or the Defense Attorney?Sometimes you act like the Humboldt DA is God who just snaps his fingers and stuff happens.NOT.

HeresYourSign wrote:

<quoted text>
The stats don't show any injustice.
In fact the "backwoods court" judges of Lake, Del Norte,Humboldt,Trinity & Mendocino counties are notoriously tough on DUI cases.
Cody Baker agreed to a longer sentence,who got greedy?I thought 10 years was appropriate for a tragic accident.
Motive - one of the key words of our justice system.

You say "tragic accident" which is a total joke. An accident is something that happens when no one really has any control of the situation. This was totally under Baker's control and should be judged that way. HANG HIM

Someone asked "Who drove to the bar?".
Guess it was by pure accident that they made it to the bar to begin with.

Accident - motive - opportunity - alibi - excuses

I love your "An accident ...blah .. blah ..anything that suits my argument....blah..blah...contr ol of the situation.....Yeah right.

HeresYourSign wrote:

Someone asked "Who drove to the bar?".
Guess it was by pure accident that they made it to the bar to begin with.
Accident - motive - opportunity - alibi - excuses
I love your "An accident ...blah .. blah ..anything that suits my argument....blah..blah...contr ol of the situation.....Yeah right.

Bottom line, who was driving when the CRASH occurred? Was he drunk when the CRASH occurred? Did he know he was drunk when he got in the drivers seat with passengers? Murder Two, 4 counts, send him away for life, period, end of story. Why are you defending this cull. I bet you wouldn't be if one of your friends or loved ones was in the car or on that road while he was.

Cody

yes

yes

Murder 2 was unprovable on all 4 counts & life sentence was not an option.

I defend the purity of JUSTICE not this defendant.

I spent 6 months in the hospital after being injured in a single car accident many years ago.The driver was a friend who was drunk.He was never charged and I still have aches from that night.It was an accident and we were all LUCKY.

HeresYourSign wrote:

Cody
yes
yes
Murder 2 was unprovable on all 4 counts & life sentence was not an option.
I defend the purity of JUSTICE not this defendant.
I spent 6 months in the hospital after being injured in a single car accident many years ago.The driver was a friend who was drunk.He was never charged and I still have aches from that night.It was an accident and we were all LUCKY.

Hey dipstick, driving drunk is not an ACCIDENT it is a decision.