Can you imagine this SCUM BAG CRIMINAL DA allowed a MURDERER SNITCH (MAN GETTING SOMETHING IN HIS FAVOR TO STAB A MAN ON HIS SIDE IN THE BACK) TO GET A DEAL IF HE RATS OUT SOME MORE SHIT BAGS LIKE HIMSELF (MURDERER SNITCH).  Our tax dollars at work letting one scum off softly to catch another scum all while being scum yourself! wow, you are a piece of work!

Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer’s Office is Dirty and Corrupt from the TOP DOWN, the good one’s that work there have to fear their own boss! PURE EVIL SCUM SOCIOPATH TODD SPITZER

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division announced today, based upon a thorough investigation focused on custodial informant activity from 2007 through 2016, that the Orange County District Attorney’s Office and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department operated a custodial informant program that systematically violated criminal defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Fourteenth Amendment right to due process of law.

Specifically, the department found reasonable cause to believe that Orange County prosecutors and Sheriff deputies violated the Sixth Amendment by using jailhouse informants to elicit incriminating statements from people who had been arrested, after those individuals had been charged with a crime. The department also found that Orange County prosecutors violated the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence about those custodial informants to criminal defendants. The department believes that OCDA and OCSD stopped using informants as agents of law enforcement to obtain statements from charged defendants in the Orange County Jail in 2016.

The Justice Department provided a comprehensive, written report of its investigative findings to the Orange County District Attorney and Sheriff. The report explicitly acknowledges the reforms that the District Attorney’s Office and the Sheriff’s Department have implemented already, and identifies the additional remedial measures that the department believes are necessary to fully address its findings.

“All persons who are accused of a crime are guaranteed basic constitutional protections that are intended to ensure fairness in criminal proceedings and due process of law,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke. “Prosecutors and law enforcement officers have an obligation to uphold these rights in their fight against crime and in their pursuit of justice, including in the way that they use custodial informants against criminal defendants. The failure to protect these basic constitutional guarantees not only deprives individual defendants of their rights, it undermines the public’s confidence in the fundamental fairness of criminal justice systems across the county.”

The evidence uncovered by the department reveals that custodial informants in the Orange County Jail system acted as agents of law enforcement to elicit incriminating statements from defendants represented by counsel, and that for years Orange County Sheriff deputies maintained and concealed systems to track, manage, and reward those custodial informants. The evidence also reveals that Orange County prosecutors failed to seek out and disclose exculpatory information regarding custodial informants to defense counsel.

The department opened this investigation in 2016. The department reviewed thousands of pages of documents, conducted numerous site visits and interviewed dozens of witnesses, including Orange County prosecutors. The department also monitored developments in criminal cases, including those that culminated recently. Orange County officials cooperated throughout the investigation.

The Special Litigation Section of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C., conducted the investigation pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which prohibits state and local governments from engaging in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives individuals of rights protected by the Constitution or federal law. The statute allows the department to remedy such misconduct through civil litigation.

Click Here to read more about this corrupt criminal District Attorney Todd Spitzer’s Office by the ACLU

• IN (JUSTICE) in ORANGE COUNTY A Case for Change and Accountability ACLU REPORT or Here from GoodShepherdMedia.net

• IN (JUSTICE) in ORANGE COUNTY A Case for Change and Accountability ACLU CASE STUDY SUMMARY or Here from GoodShepherdMedia.net

Did Orange County District Attorney officials cover up evidence that DA Todd Spitzer solicited bribes and engaged in pay-to-play fundraising to get into office?

That’s the explosive allegation levied by former DA investigator Damon Tucker in a legal claim he filed this month after being fired by Spitzer’s administration late last year.

Spitzer, in turn, calls Tucker a “dirty cop,” saying his claim is part of a conspiracy by his predecessor, former DA Tony Rackauckas and his political handlers to tarnish Spitzer’s reputation.

There’s an 11-page report from the DA’s office that could shed light on the situation, according to Tucker’s legal claim. He alleged the report shows that obvious investigative leads – like gathering bank records – weren’t followed up on by the DA’s office.

So far, Spitzer and other officials aren’t releasing it.

Last week, Voice of OC asked for a copy of the 11-page memo, which was leaked to the OC Register in 2017.

In response, Spitzer said he was “indifferent” as to whether it’s released but that it would need to undergo a legal review because investigative reports are confidential.

“[A different DA investigator] was investigated for unlawfully releasing it Why? Because investigative reports are private,” Spitzer told Voice of OC via text message Wednesday.

“I’m happy to encourage you to file a [public records request] and let county counsel advise whether it’s public or not. This office cannot pursue discipline over leakers and then turn around and release investigations without an analysis,” he added.

“I’m indifferent but it’s not my call and it impacts precedent for future requests of confidential investigations….There needs to be a legal analysis done.”

Voice of OC followed up the same day with a Public Records Act request for it, which hasn’t yet yielded the document.

In his legal claim, Tucker is alleging a cover-up of evidence that Spitzer engaged in criminal conduct – including soliciting bribes and giving favorable treatment to defense attorneys who donated to his campaign.

Tucker, a 30-year law enforcement veteran who was fired as a DA investigator late last year, alleged he made a major discovery in 2018 when he was assigned to investigate the leak of an investigation report.

Tucker says he found “overwhelming evidence Spitzer had committed serious crimes” – including money laundering, terrorist threats, extortion, and solicitation of bribes by a public official.

Tucker says Spitzer was improperly cleared of wrongdoing in a 2017 investigation report that was leaked to the OC Register – after the DA investigator assigned to the case failed to follow up on obvious investigative leads like getting bank records.

And after taking office in early 2019, Tucker says Spitzer began “monetizing and corrupting the OCDA office in a ‘pay to play’ scheme” similar to what Spitzer was investigated for in 2017 when he was a county supervisor approving major contracts.

As an example, he alleges Spitzer’s administration tasked him with helping a campaign donor by illegally looking up police records about someone who was suing the donor.

Tucker claims he was fired this past December for refusing to “circumvent the law by reporting, investigating and preserving evidence of public corruption and criminal conduct of public officials to his supervisors.”

In response, Spitzer says Tucker has a blatant conflict of interest because of his close relationship with former DA Tony Rackauckas – whom Spitzer ran against and defeated in 2018 – and Rackauckas’ chief of staff and campaign manager, Susan Kang Schroeder.

“This is nothing more despicable than an unethical cop misusing taxpayer resources to try to dig up dirt for his friends on a political enemy,” Spitzer said in a statement about Tucker’s claim.

Tucker’s close relationship with Schroeder, Spitzer noted, included a Facebook post in which Tucker talked about a private jet trip to Las Vegas with Schroeder and others that involved “clothing optional pools.”

“This investigator no longer works for the Orange County District Attorney’s Office because he misused his authority as a sworn police officer to unilaterally open a closed investigation without the approval or knowledge of a supervisor,” Spitzer added.

As for the corruption investigation, Spitzer says it was purely an unethical effort by Rackauckas to go after him ahead of the 2018 election.

“This was a blatant conflict of interest and an absolute misuse of government resources for political gain,” Spitzer said.

“The district attorney investigator assigned to investigate me completely exonerated me from any wrongdoing.”

Tucker’s attorney said Spitzer didn’t actually dispute the allegations in his lengthy statement.

“Mr. Spitzer’s continued character assassination against Mr. Tucker is not only unfounded and unmerited but significantly, the fact that Mr. Spitzer fails to refute the very allegations made against him speaks volumes,” said attorney Neda Roshanian in a statement to Voice of OC.

Voice of OC reached out to Spitzer for his response to Tucker’s attorney saying he hadn’t actually refuted the allegations. The DA then disputed the allegations.

“None [of Tucker’s claims] are true and all were already found to be untrue by the [California Fair Political Practices Commission] and Investigator [Tom] Conklin,” Spitzer said.

“Tucker was a dirty cop. Thank goodness he will never wear the badge ever again,” he added.

“We look forward to [Tucker’s attorneys] arguing that he could investigate his buddy’s opponent in an election, during the election, when the [state Attorney General’s Office] specifically conflicted the OCDA off the case for exactly that reason.”

Spitzer declined to release the report that allegedly exonerated him, saying investigation reports are confidential and legal analysis would be needed to decide whether they can be released. Voice of OC followed up with a Public Records Act request for the document.

The internal DA report, which the Register wrote about in July 2017, apparently cleared Spitzer of public corruption and campaign finance violations.

But there was a big problem, according to Tucker.

The report showed the investigation failed to gather obvious evidence of potential crimes – and improperly cleared Spitzer, Tucker says in his claim.

“After extensive review of all the reports and documents, as well as listening to all the audio recordings of interviews,” Tucker says he discovered that the 11-page investigation report “was inaccurate and misleading when it concluded Spitzer had done nothing wrong and was exonerated of misconduct.”

“It appeared [the investigator] failed to investigate or follow up on multiple logical investigative leads,” the claim adds.

Among those leads were complaints by Christine Richters, who worked for Spitzer when he was a county supervisor – before the two had a public falling out when he fired her.

Richters filed a lawsuit in 2017 alleging Spitzer ran his office through “fear and aggression,” forced his staff to be on-call at all hours of the night, and required them to work shifts of up to 24 hours at a time.

While Spitzer publicly disputed her claims, the county ultimately paid $150,000 to settle them.

DA investigators “missed a logical lead where bank records existed that potentially bore evidence involving Spitzer laundering money,” Tucker wrote in his claim, saying he reached that conclusion from reviewing the investigation files.

Tucker says he then briefed multiple high-level DA supervisors on his findings, including that the investigation files “revealed significant misrepresentation, corruption, suspected criminal conduct and fraud” by Spitzer and the investigator.

But after winning the Nov. 2018 DA election, Spitzer then worked to “bury” investigations into himself and the leak of the report that improperly cleared him, Tucker says in his claim.

Several officials “indicated the 11-page report leak may have been orchestrated [by the suspected leaker] in order to help Spitzer get elected and covered up by Spitzer’s team after he had been elected,” the claim states.

The DA investigator suspected of leaking the report was under internal investigation under Rackauckas, but after the election Spitzer’s administration let him retire without any findings of misconduct, according to Tucker’s claim.

By never finishing the leak investigation, the claim states, the files were then not subject to a new police transparency law – known as SB 1421 – that required public disclosure of investigation records when a law enforcement officer is found to have been dishonest.

Tucker says his leak investigation was focused on dishonesty – and if it had been sustained, “then the details of Spitzer’s suspected criminal conduct would be available to the public.”

The investigator assigned to investigate the suspected leaker told Tucker he had found at least 32 policy violations but faced pushback from a Spitzer appointee, according to the claim.

A few weeks after Spitzer took office, Tucker claims he was improperly ordered to help a major donor who had given $6,000 to Spitzer’s election campaigns – by illegally and unethically accessing police records about a person who was suing the donor.

It wasn’t the only pattern of helping political donors, according to Tucker.

“Several defense attorneys who donated to Spitzer political campaigns appeared to be receiving preferential treatment in the disposition of their cases once Spitzer came into office,” the claim states.

Spitzer “was monetizing and corrupting the OCDA office in a ‘pay to play’ scheme” like what Spitzer himself was investigated for in 2017, the claim states.

Tucker says he was placed under internal investigation in June 2020 for seeking to preserve evidence against Spitzer by calling the Orange Police Department about a complaint Richters had called in about Spitzer.

Then, in December, Tucker was officially fired, according to his claim.

“There is no question [Tucker] was retaliated against and ultimately discharged for reporting and disclosing violations of law, corruption, and abuse of authority of public officials, including Todd Spitzer, to his superiors,” according to Tucker’s claim.

Under state law, Tucker can file a lawsuit against Spitzer and the county if his claim is not settled within the next few weeks.

Spitzer says it’s all a smear campaign to come after him, by a close ally of the former DA administration.

“The motivation for all this behavior is clear as is the pervasive attitude among the prior administration to misuse the Orange County District Attorney’s Office for personal benefit,” Spitzer said in his statement.

“I will not tolerate anyone using taxpayer resources to carry out their own personal agendas under the color of authority. It is unacceptable and the taxpayers of Orange County deserve far better. We will fight this case all the way to trial if I have my say with County Risk Management,” he added.

“This is exactly the behavior I pledged to clean up in the District Attorney’s Office – and I am doing just that.”

Nick Gerda covers county government for Voice of OC. You can contact him at ngerda@voiceofoc.org.

cited from https://voiceofoc.org/2021/03/was-ocs-top-prosecutor-improperly-cleared-of-corruption-or-not-a-secret-report-could-shed-light/

A wave of lawsuits from Orange County prosecutors against their own boss over his handling of workplace harassment issues continues to mount.

This week, three more prosecutors stepped forward, with one adding fuel to previous claims by another prosecutor that DA Todd Spitzer used racially-charged language that complicates criminal prosecutions.

To date, eight lawsuits have been filed by DA prosecutors – represented by two different attorneys, one of whom is a former prosecutor himself – alleging Spitzer enabled his friend Gary LoGalbo to harass female subordinates at the DA’s Office.

Two separate prosecutors allege in those lawsuits that Spitzer made racially inappropriate remarks.

Spitzer has denied the allegations, saying his racial comments were appropriate and that he acted immediately to protect LoGalbo’s victims.

Yet prosecutors told county HR investigators that Spitzer initially tried to retaliate against a victim who had come forward, and the HR investigator found Spitzer to be “not credible” in his denial.

This week, three more of LoGalbo’s alleged victims filed lawsuits saying Spitzer promoted LoGalbo – who had been the best man at Spitzer’s wedding – into powerful DA positions three times in one year despite warnings from his executives.

In one of those suits, a high-ranking 20-year DA prosecutor says LoGalbo and Spitzer both made “racially harassing” comments when handling cases.

“Mr. LoGalbo made statements to Plaintiff that cases should be assigned based on the race of the defense attorney, prosecutor, and defendant,” states the lawsuit by the prosecutor, who is identified as “Jane Roe Three” and served as a high-ranking leader on the DA’s Special Prosecutions Unit.

“Mr. Spitzer also accused Plaintiff of being afraid to prosecute a defendant simply because of the defendant’s race,” the new lawsuit adds.

[Click here to read the three new lawsuits: Jane Roe One, Jane Roe Two, Jane Roe Three.]

In response, Spitzer’s office provided a statement defending his handling of the LoGalbo harassment allegations, but not addressing the new racial comment claim.

“The allegations of harassment were sustained against Gary LoGalbo,” said the statement from Spitzer’s spokeswoman, Kimberly Edds.

“The allegations that District Attorney Spitzer protected LoGalbo in any way or retaliated against anyone who reported harassment was completely unfounded by the outside investigator,” she added.

“In fact he did everything he could do to not only support the victims of LoGalbo and encourage any and all victims of harassment to come forward.”

The outside investigator, however, did not clear Spitzer of attempting to retaliate against one of LoGalbo’s harassment victims, noting testimony from DA staff who said they refused to go along with Spitzer’s wishes.

The allegations add to a string of allegations of racial bias by Spitzer – including remarks he made during in a death penalty meeting that drew red flags from proscutors in the room.

In mid-February, documents emerged showing Spitzer ignited a firestorm of concern from prosecutors and a lead detective after he made racial remarks about Black men dating White women when deciding whether to seek the death penalty against a Black defendant.

Voice of OC was the first news agency to report on the concerns and the memos at the center of it.

Spitzer ultiamtely acknowledged that at the Oct. 1 death penalty meeting, he asked prosecutors about the race of the defendant’s former girlfriends and said he had “seen Black men date White women in certain circles in order to have others around them be more accepting.”

In a scathing letter to the judge, the lead detective in the Buggs case wrote Spitzer ruined the death penalty case by making the racial remarks and then trying to cover them up by removing all the existing prosecutors from the case and dropping the death penalty effort.

Newport Beach Detective Court Depweg wrote to the judge that he had been told by multiple current and former DA officials that Spitzer “made an unsolicited, derogatory, and racist comment about Black men/persons” at the Oct. 1 meeting.

As for LoGalbo’s alleged harassment, a county HR investigation confirmed he preyed on multiple female subordinates at the DA’s office.

That county probe found Spitzer was “not credible” when denying he had attempted to retaliate against the first female prosecutor who had come forward about LoGalbo.

The ongoing storm of lawsuits allege Spitzer’s actions enabled sexual harassment by promoting the best man from his wedding into a senior position overseeing the DA’s branch court staff, despite knowing LoGalbo was a “pervert” in his personal life.

Spitzer has called those statements “untrue” in a text message to Voice of OC, but wouldn’t elaborate in response to further questions.

The new lawsuits note a second county HR investigation found Spitzer violated workplace policies by sending the original harassment investigation – which contained details that can identify the victims – to every employee in his office, and by trashing one of the victims in an interview with Voice of OC.

“The investigator concluded that Mr. Spitzer ‘flagrantly’ violated County [equal employment opportunity] and Abusive Conduct policies and acted with ‘malice’ towards Plaintiff and the other victims of Mr. LoGalbo, which created a hostile and offensive work environment, and ‘caused unjustified embarrassment and indignity to [Plaintiff],’ ” states the new lawsuits.

“Mr. Spitzer, himself, admitted the release of the report will create a ‘chilling effect’ on future victims of harassment within the OCDA,” the suits adds.

While the county’s independent investigator confirmed in two separate probes that women were subjected to harassment by men at the top of the DA’s office, the county Board of Supervisors has failed to take action, the lawsuit states.

“The Board has not taken a single corrective or preventative action towards Mr. Spitzer, their former colleague,” states the new lawsuits.

“The Board’s inaction has sent a clear message to Plaintiff, to County employees, and to all citizens of Orange County that harassment, discrimination, and retaliation when engaged in by politically well-connected men will be tolerated by the current members of the Board of Supervisors,” they continue.

“The Board’s inaction also has real work consequences to the employees in the OCDA. Some managers within OCDA, who now believe there are no consequences for their workplace behavior, have felt emboldened to publicly accuse Mr. LoGalbo’s victims of lying about their experiences, despite the clear findings of a third-party investigator.”

The five county supervisors either declined to comment or did not respond – citing the pending litigation – while Supervisor Katrina Foley added that she is “deeply concerned” about the new allegations.

Spitzer has touted his influence with county supervisors when talking with DA staff, according to the new lawsuits.

“He recently told OCDA employees that because of his prior tenure on the Board, he has a close personal relationship with, and ‘access’ to, all current Board members, intimating he can influence how they vote and how they govern,” the new lawsuits state.

Days before Spitzer was elected DA in 2018, one of his supervisor colleagues publicly warned him that they have a host of disparaging information about each other they could use against each other if they wanted.

Pointing to what he alleged was an effort by Spitzer to extort a county contractor for campaign money, Supervisor Andrew Do cautioned Spitzer that more of that type of information could come to light if he upsets his colleagues again.

“Now, I knew that information. I could have called out the maybe alleged hypocrisy, if not extortionary tactics performed on the dais right here. But I didn’t,” Do said at an October 2018 supervisors’ meeting, after expressing frustration at Spitzer for distributing a memo to reporters that upset Do.

“I just wanted to make sure that people don’t think that just because we don’t say things up here, that we don’t have information that we can use every day, in every meeting, to smear each other. Okay?” Do added.

The new lawsuits by DA prosecutors also allege Spitzer’s No. 2 executive at the DA’s office Shawn Nelson – who is running for judge – minimized LoGalbo’s harassment in order to protect Spitzer.

“Shawn Nelson, Mr. Spitzer’s second-in-command, declared to managers, in front of Mr. Spitzer, that ‘Gary doesn’t have any real victims,’ ” states one of the new lawsuits.

“Mr. Nelson also referred to Mr. LoGalbo’s female victims as ‘chicken’ for not coming forward earlier, even though everyone knew of Mr. Spitzer’s close relationship with Mr. LoGalbo.”

Nelson, who was a supervisor with Spitzer and Do until he was termed out in 2018, is considered the frontrunner in the judge seat he’s running for in the June election, having raised over $200,000 for the race and running with a “Chief Assistant District Attorney” job title on the ballot.

Nelson didn’t respond to a message for comment.

He is the only judicial candidate endorsed so far by the Orange County Republican Party.

Nick Gerda covers county government for Voice of OC. You can contact him at ngerda@voiceofoc.org.

BY NICK GERDA source

During Orange County’s infamous jailhouse-informant scandal, Todd Spitzer—a county supervisor eyeing the top prosecutor job—occasionally visited the courthouse when District Attorney Tony Rackauckas held press conferences. A natty, decades-younger Spitzer would stand behind the gaggle of print, radio and television reporters and watch an aging Rackauckas mumble semi-coherent answers or outright lies to questions. The supervisor’s presence unnerved the DA, who couldn’t compete with him rhetorically. Instead, he shot dead-eye expressions at his lurking, fellow Republican nemesis.

At one of these events in 2015, Bethany Webb, who’d lost her sister Laura in Orange County’s worse mass shooting, displayed disgust that Rackauckas defended once-secret law-enforcement corruption in hopes of securing the death penalty for the shooter. Those tainted government actions, which we’ve previously outlined, stalled the case for years and only prolonged trauma for Webb and other victims who wanted their criminal-justice-system nightmare over. But she was also not happy with Spitzer’s appearance.

“What is he doing here?” Webb asked Paul Wilson in what sounded more like a statement than a question. Wilson, who’d lost his wife Christy in the same 2011 mass killing, smiled awkwardly and shrugged his shoulders. At the time, he and Spitzer, who had spent years promoting himself as one of California’s leading victims’-rights advocates, were in the midst of forming a bond. He believed Spitzer sincerely felt Rackauckas had botched the case, though others disagreed.

“Most of the families [of the victims] hated Todd,” Wilson recently recalled. “They thought he was only around for the politics and said he was a bozo. I genuinely liked the guy. I thought if I helped put him in place at the DA’s office, he would right the wrongs.”

But the relationship has unraveled in anger for Wilson and frustration for Spitzer. There’s no mystery about the timing: It was in the wake of Spitzer’s impressive underdog November victory over Rackauckas, who’d been in office for two decades. Or the cause of their friction: Lingering issues from the government’s informant cheating as well as Wilson’s view he was used, then backstabbed by the incoming DA.

“He just became a different guy after he won,” said Wilson.

The rift underscores how swiftly relationships change in politics. Until the election, Wilson was a significant face and voice of Spitzer’s campaign. The two often chatted on the phone and attended events together. The challenger even convinced Wilson to use his weighty status in the victims’-rights community to do an anti-Rackauckas television commercial months before the election. Then, on the eve of the contest, Spitzer asked him to record a mass-produced robo-call ad.

“My name is Paul Wilson, and my wife and seven others were murdered in cold blood at the Seal Beach salon massacre here in Orange County,” Wilson read from a script written by the campaign. “The current DA, Tony Rackauckas, told me to my face that he would have my back during the trial. Instead, he cheated on the case and got caught. The judge kicked him off the case. Rackauckas betrayed us, and he is a complete failure in every regard. Crime is off the charts. We are not safe. We must elect Todd Spitzer as our new and vibrant DA. Todd Spitzer is a tireless victims’-rights advocate and has handled thousands of criminal cases as a veteran prosecutor. . . . Join me in fighting to restore justice in Orange County. I’m urging you to vote for Todd Spitzer on Nov. 6.”

At an election-night rally, Spitzer invited Wilson onto the stage. “He’s been through so much,” Wilson remembered Spitzer saying.

Within weeks of the election, however, Spitzer made a series of moves that alarmed his buddy. He kept longtime Rackauckas loyalist Ebrahim Baytieh—an accomplished homicide prosecutor but a Machiavellian bureaucrat who helped run taxpayer-funded publicity downplaying informant-scandal cheating—in a top management position.

“I know the protection that guy gave Tony,” Wilson explained. “Baytieh stood side by side with him. He delivered a more articulate version of Susan Kang Schroeder’s usual nonsense media spin. Keeping him in the new administration was a bad choice.”

(Schroeder served as Rackauckas’ reality-adverse, hot-headed media flack.)

Tensions grew worse when word leaked that Spitzer was also protecting Dan Wagner, who’d worked as the lead prosecutor of Scott Dekraai, the killer in the salon massacre. For several years, Wilson believed every word out of Wagner’s mouth, especially that he cared about the victims’ families. But over time, he became convinced the prosecutor was remorseless about his role in the informant scandal. Wagner had even self-demoted as head of the homicide unit into a lower-ranking post with greater civil-service protections from firing if Rackauckas lost. Spitzer then surprised everybody by promoting Wagner to run DA operations at North Court in Fullerton.

“There’s a major guy in the snitch scandal, and he’s able to teach all of his bad habits to the young people in the office,” Wilson said. “Wagner lied to us. He caused me and the families pain and suffering. Him getting promoted by Todd was a slap in the face. Remember, he told me that Wagner and the other DAs involved in the scandal were guilty and that it wouldn’t have happened under his watch.”

A chronic court watcher nowadays as he works to expose dirty law-enforcement officials, Wilson believes Spitzer is continuing Rackauckas’ efforts to block public accountability for the snitch controversy. On numerous occasions since the new DA’s swearing-in ceremony, Wilson has witnessed deputy DAs pretend the scandal (which wrecked at least 20 felony cases) didn’t happen. He’s also watched them work to keep embarrassing records secret from defense lawyers such as Scott Sanders, the assistant public defender who revealed the systemic snitch-related cheating after intensive investigations.

Unwilling to ignore what he sees as flip-flops, Wilson confronted Spitzer in text messages and phone calls. Emotional sentiments flew back and forth. He says the DA dismissed Rackauckas’ snitch-scandal woes, and thus him, as a reason for his victory. “It got pretty bad,” Wilson said. “I’m just blown away that he could so quickly turn on me. He told me that I needed to be more trusting of him now that he’s in the politics game.”

Those conversations heightened distrust. “There are more important things than politics, like making sure we have an honest criminal-justice system,” Wilson said.

For his part, the DA feels saddened by the feud, believes he is truly an agent for reform, and says he’s blocked from fully airing his side.

“I’ve spoken to Paul directly, but I’m not in a position to talk about anything at this time while I’m in the middle of the Department of Justice [DOJ] inquiry [into informant-scandal cheating],” Spitzer said. “So, you’re just going to have to print whatever you have to print with a clear understanding that while this is pending, I’m not able to say anything.”

In February, Spitzer—a former state assemblyman, school-board member and reserve Los Angeles cop—was willing to talk extensively with the Orange County Register where he complained about the DOJ probe. He said it was too time-consuming for his rookie administration, wanted federal officials to stop demanding access to records, and called on them to quickly issue findings before moving on elsewhere. That announcement caused Wilson to chuckle.

“He just doesn’t want to give up any more documents because it’s going to hurt,” he said. “The funny thing is I still think Todd is better than Rackauckas. But I’m not fooling myself. It’s business as usual inside that DA’s office. There’s no real sign of change. I thought this guy was a friend, and now I feel manipulated.”

On March 25, fate put Spitzer, his armed security entourage and Wilson in the same cramped Santa Ana courthouse elevator. The DA shook Wilson’s hand, hugged him and tried small talk. But this victim—a life-long law-enforcement champion before seeing criminal-justice-system warts up close—wasn’t in the mood for pleasantries. And he still has the same question: How can Spitzer employ prosecutorial scoundrels while declaring his agency cleansed?

R. SCOTT MOXLEY

CNN-featured investigative reporter R. Scott Moxley has won Journalist of the Year honors at the Los Angeles Press Club; been named Distinguished Journalist of the Year by the LA Society of Professional Journalists; obtained one of the last exclusive prison interviews with Charles Manson disciple Susan Atkins; won inclusion in Jeffrey Toobin’s The Best American Crime Reporting for his coverage of a white supremacist’s senseless murder of a beloved Vietnamese refugee; launched multi-year probes that resulted in the FBI arrests and convictions of the top three ranking members of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department; and gained praise from New York Times Magazine writers for his “herculean job” exposing entrenched Southern California law enforcement corruption.

cited from https://www.ocweekly.com/todd-spitzer-paul-wilson-murder/

Fired OC district attorney’s investigator who accused Todd Spitzer of bribery gets job back in arbitration

The county also was ordered to pay more than a year in back pay to former supervising investigator Damon Tucker

By TONY SAAVEDRA | tsaavedra@scng.com | Orange County Register

A fired Orange County District Attorney’s Office investigator who accused District Attorney Todd Spitzer of “pay-to-play” schemes has won back his job in arbitration.

Former supervising investigator Damon Tucker must be reinstated, according to arbitrator Michael Leb, who concluded the firing process “was tainted. The charges were not proven, and the termination of Tucker was not for reasonable cause.”

Tucker will be paid more than a year in back pay. Transparent California, a public pay database, lists his salary and benefits in 2020 at $329,489.

“He is fully exonerated,” said attorney Neda Roshanian, who represented Tucker with lawyer Keith Bruno. Tucker’s wrongful termination lawsuit against the county will continue to proceed.

Veteran of 30 years

Tucker, a veteran of nearly 30 years, was fired in December 2020 amid allegations that he unilaterally began investigating his suspicions that Spitzer was giving preferential treatment to donors. Tucker also accused Spitzer — then newly elected — with colluding with investigation bureau chief Paul Walters to bury Tucker’s findings.

The arbitration ruling concluded that Walters, Spitzer and his top adviser, Shawn Nelson, decided to fire Tucker during in an “impromptu” meeting outside of the regular procedures of termination, Roshanian said. Spitzer has argued that the decision was made by the county’s human resources office and not himself.

The saga began in 2016 with the assignment of investigator Tom Conklin to look into the dealings of then-District Attorney Tony Rackauckas’ political rival, Spitzer. Conklin later authored an 11-page report, obtained by the Orange County Register, which said he could find no wrongdoing by Spitzer. Spitzer won the election and was seated in January 2019.

Conklin was placed on administrative leave under suspicion that he had leaked the Spitzer investigation. The arbitration says Tucker was assigned before Spitzer took office to pick up Conklin’s investigation. Spitzer’s office said Tucker assigned himself.

Tucker believed Conklin had tanked his report to exonerate Spitzer, alleging the investigation was incomplete, unprofessional and unethical. For instance, Conklin missed bank records that showed Spitzer potentially laundered money, Tucker said in his ongoing lawsuit against the county.

County discarded own rules

After Spitzer’s election, Tucker assigned himself to continue his investigation into the new district attorney, say officials from the prosecutor’s office. The arbitrator, however, stressed the county did not play by its own rules.

“In its brief, the County justifies the termination by pointing to alleged bias, conflict, ethical and policy violations, and general overreaching by Tucker in pursuit of some sort of vendetta against Spitzer,” says the ruling. “The County gives not so much as a passing nod, however, to the conflicts of interest, inconsistencies, and departures from procedure on the part of the decision-makers which permeate this entire matter.”

The arbitrator went on to say Tucker never should have been assigned the investigation.

“This entire case would have been avoided if the Bureau had simply recused itself from any further investigation involving Spitzer in any way after July 10, 2017, when Spitzer announced he was running for Orange County District Attorney,” the ruling said. “Having decided not to recuse itself, the Bureau should have been especially sensitive to avoid anything that would remotely call into question anyone’s capacity to be impartial.”

Spitzer’s office released a statement alleging that Tucker’s investigation was political in nature.

“This was nothing more than political espionage immediately after Rackauckas’ dismal showing in the primary,” said Kimberly Edds, Spitzer’s spokesperson. “In the wake of Rackauckas’ dismal performance … Tucker engaged in unauthorized and self-directed activities in a desperate attempt to dig up dirt on Spitzer before the general election in November and prevent Rackauckas from being unseated.”

What job on return?

The next step is for Tucker and the county to negotiate his return.

Roshanian said the county is offering Tucker a less prestigious post than the one he had.

“He’s entitled to be where he was. He’s earned it,” she said. “The arbitrator said he did what any reasonable person would do by preserving the evidence of Spitzer’s suspected criminal conduct.”