I have been trying to put together a page on DA Michael Ramos finances and other links to local politicians but it has proved to be a challenge. Here's what I have came up with so far off of google.
Ramos, began his second four-year term as San Bernardino County district attorney, was elected to the office in 2002; he was re-elected in 2006 after running unopposed.
A couple of older newspaper stories,
Attorney's job to be restored -Man fired by Ramos wins in court
12/23/2006 San Bernardino Sun
San Bernardino County has agreed to pay nearly $300,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by a prosecutor who claimed District Attorney Michael A. Ramos wrongly fired him. Grover D. Merritt will also get back his old job as head of the district attorney's appellate unit, per the settlement approved this week. "I'm happy it's over," Merritt said. "I'm happy it's settled. I hope we can get back to normal."
Ramos fired Merritt in October 2004, ostensibly over allegations Merritt leaked confidential details of two high-profile cases to a newspaper reporter. This came despite the reporter having filed a sworn declaration stating Merritt was not his source. Merritt also denied the allegations, claiming he was axed because he had been critical of Ramos' administration and because Ramos feared Merritt would run against him in the 2006 election for district attorney.
Merritt further claimed Ramos had previously tried to dissuade him from running for district attorney by offering to help him become a judge. An arbitrator ruled in July 2005 that Ramos did not have evidence to support firing Merritt.
Ramos rehired the veteran prosecutor shortly afterward, but did not return him to his old job as head of the appellate unit. In October 2005, Merritt sued the county, Ramos, and Assistant District Attorney Mike Risley in federal court alleging civil-rights violations, wrongful termination, defamation and infliction of emotional distress.
The case was headed toward trial before the settlement.
Per the settlement, details of which were made public on Thursday, Merritt will receive $297,500 from the county, in addition to the back pay he has already received for the time he was out of work. He will also return to his old job as lead appellate attorney for the District Attorney's Office. The county, Ramos and Risley admitted no wrongdoing.
Ramos' spokeswoman, Susan Mickey, said Ramos would not comment on the settlement, but she did offer a brief comment on behalf of the district attorney. "We're anxious to put this behind us and move forward," Mickey said.
Merritt has worked as a prosecutor for 18 years. He was named prosecutor of the year in 2002 and is widely admired by colleagues for his legal acumen and work ethic. He has previously served on the board of directors of the California District Attorneys Association. Merritt gained widespread publicity for his work on an appeals case that resulted in the the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the state's three-strikes law.
Reinstated prosecutor sues DA, alleges politics fueled firing
COUNTY: The suit accuses Michael Ramos of firing a likely rival he earlier suggested a judgeship to.
Friday, October 14, 2005
By JOHN F. BERRY / The Press-Enterprise
San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos dangled a judgeship to dissuade Grover Merritt from running for his job in 2006, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court this week.
"Ramos intimated that if (Merritt) applied for the judgeship, he would receive it," court papers show. "This unusual discussion appeared to be a thinly veiled offer ... if (Merritt) would not consider running against Ramos."
The district attorney's office, through spokeswoman Susan Mickey, declined to comment Thursday about the lawsuit, which alleges that Ramos conspired to fire Merritt. Merritt is suing Ramos as well as Assistant District Attorney Michael Risley and San Bernardino County for undetermined damages.
Grounds cited for the suit include defamation and emotional distress plus violations of labor and civil-rights laws. Geoffrey Hopper, the Redlands lawyer representing Ramos, Risley and the county, could not be reached for comment Thursday.
The lawsuit alleges that the conversation between Ramos and Merritt occurred in early July 2004, three months before Ramos, who has ties to Gov. Schwarzenegger, fired Merritt ostensibly for leaking sensitive information to the media in two high-profile cases. Merritt, although interested in the judiciary, rejected Ramos' offer, believing it was based on the assumption that Merritt planned to run for district attorney, court papers said.
"Ramos decided he would neutralize (Merritt) as a potential opponent," the suit said.
Merritt was placed on administrative leave in August 2004 and fired that October.
He filed a claim in excess of $1 million against the county in April, claiming injury to his reputation and emotional distress. The county rejected the claim, clearing the path for the lawsuit, filed last week in federal court in Riverside.
A county Civil Service Commission officer ruled in July that the district attorney's office had failed to substantiate its allegations and that Merritt must be given his old job back.
Merritt returned to work in August but not to the same job.
Memo probe a priority, DA says
COLONIES: An investigation into who leaked the information is expected to end soon.
June 19, 2005, The Press-Enterprise
By the Fourth of July, prosecutors expect to complete an inquiry into who illegally leaked information about multi-million-dollar settlement talks with real estate developers, District Attorney Mike Ramos said Saturday. "I've asked my staff to make this a priority so we can get to the bottom of this as soon as possible," Ramos said by phone.
Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Postmus requested the probe last week, Ramos said. Postmus' chief of staff, Brad Mitzelfelt, confirmed that Postmus asked for the investigation. But the request did not name anyone as the suspected culprit, Mitzelfelt said. The investigation is being conducted by a prosecutor who specializes in cases involving public office holders.
In this case, the issue involves the disclosure of San Bernardino County's effort to settle a long-running lawsuit over a flood-control basin for the Colonies, a 434-acre commercial and residential development in Upland. According to a confidential memo obtained by The Press-Enterprise, Supervisors Postmus and Paul Biane personally tried to negotiate a settlement with the principals of the project on March 25, after both sides sent their lawyers out of the room.About an hour later, they struck a tentative agreement that would have had the county pay the Colonies more than $77 million, the memo said. A formal settlement has not been reached.
Two issues are under investigation, said Ramos. The threshold question is whether any confidential information was wrongfully leaked. If so, the final question is whether the action amounted to a crime, or simply a personnel/policy issue for the Board of Supervisors and the county administrative office.
"It sounds to me like it would be in the area of our governments code section that talks about releasing private documents by a public official," Ramos said. "It could be anywhere from a misdemeanor to a felony."
Supervisor Dennis Hansberger said he's careful never to reveal information that, by law, is confidential.
"If there's any member of the board who doesn't leak stuff, it's me," he said. "And I don't carry on conversations outside closed sessions (except) ... with members of the board, staff or someone who's pertinent to the (closed-session) conversation."
He acknowledged that he and Postmus disagree about how the Colonies matter should be handled. So Hansberger said he was careful to meet with county counsel to learn exactly what he can and can't say publicly.
"I can give my ... opinion on the subject," he said. "What I can't talk about is things I have (learned) from confidential attorney-client information.
"And that would include such things as whether we'd made an offer to settle."
But Hansberger said he's within his rights to publicly object to what he said is Biane's practice of meeting with developers on issues that involve pending litigation.
That's the role of lawyers, said Hansberger. Biane could not be reached Saturday for his opinion.
As for the Colonies negotiations, Hansberger emphasized that the board had authorized Postmus and Biane -- along with the county's lawyers -- to meet with the developers. But after the meeting began, Hansberger said, attorneys for both sides were dismissed from the room, leaving the negotiations to be conducted by the two board members and two developers.
The only other person in the room, he said, was former state Sen. Jim Brulte.
San Bernardino Sun Voice of the People
February 9th 2005
Ineffective DA
Murders are soaring. The crime rate has significantly increased in San Bernardino. Yet District Attorney Michael A. Ramos is more worried about pleasing his political backers than protecting the public.
Ramos told the audience of a January 19th 2005, Sunrise Rotarians meeting in Redlands that he had been pressed to go easy on retired Sheriff Floyd Tidwell. Then Ramos said he didn't say it. We know he said it, because we heard him say it. The result of Tidwell's prosecution also corroborates that Ramos folded to political pressure. He has a history of preferential prosecution.
For example, the District Attorney's office spent an astonishing sum of almost $3 million to prosecute Jane Un, who got to plead guilty to "disturbing the peace," an insignificant misdemeanor, and she gets to keep her developers license. Take the case of Jaime Alvarez, accused of ripping of HUD for thousands of dollars of public monies, for which the District Attorney's Office spent tens of thousands in public money to prosecute, only to have the case swept under the rug. Take the cases of bail bondsmen (sons of Floyd Tidwell) who have been charged with several felonies for fraud and conspiracy, only to plead guilty to insignificant misdemeanors.
It is clear that if you made contributions to Ramos' campaign, you can get away with ripping off the public without fear of prosecution. I did not vote for Ramos, because I knew he lacked the experience, nor did I trust him. Now, I know I was right.
He took on more than what he could handle and is lacking integrity. As a consequence, justice has taken a beating. Ramos is the worst DA this county has ever seen.
Hector Sarabia
San Bernardino
Rotarians: DA says pressure exerted in case of ex-sheriff
January 25th 2005
By GEORGE WATSON, San Bernardino sun Staff Writer
Did politically powerful players pressure District Attorney Michael A. Ramos to back off on his prosecution of retired Sheriff Floyd Tidwell? During a 30-minute speech Jan. 19 in Redlands to the Sunrise Rotarians, Ramos told the approximately 40 attendees that he had been pressed to go easy in the case or his political future would be sunk, said several audience members, including a councilwoman and a business owner."Internally, he didn't disclose exactly what happened or who was involved,' said Redlands Councilwoman Pat Gilbreath, a Sunrise member. "From what I can understand, there was some pressure put on him. I think he created a lot of animosity.'
In an intriguing twist, Ramos denies making the comments.
Audience members misinterpreted his words, said the 47-year-old former Redlands school board member, because they overly support him as a former Sunrise member. If anyone had pressured him, Ramos said, he would have prosecuted the person. "Believe me, it would be easier to say I said it,' Ramos said. "It would make me look better. But I'm just telling you the truth. They just took it wrong.'
The ex-sheriff's sentencing in the case involving the theft of 523 guns valued at thousands of dollars from the sheriff's evidence room has drawn heavy criticism for its leniency. There was no jail time. Ramos has said it was a difficult case and that the plea agreement took into account Tidwell's 30 years of service to San Bernardino County. He served as sheriff from 1983 to 1991.
Tidwell, known as a tobacco-spittin' rattlesnake-tough leader fond of wearing cowboy hats, was placed on three years' probation and fined $10,000. Other county employees have gone to prison for stealing a single item.
At the same time, it appears authorities have no interest in starting an internal investigation into the Sheriff's Department to ferret out who leaked word of the original search warrant to Tidwell.
"We need to move on,' Ramos said. "We need to move forward.'
A retired detective who supervised the Tidwell case believes the leak, which is a felony and calls for up to one year in county jail or state prison, occurred at a senior administrative level.
Dark clouds of corruption have long hovered over San Bernardino County, a place known for backroom deals and other forms of malfeasance for profit in a land ripe for development and growth.
When Ramos ran for his post in 2002, one of his key campaign platforms centered on bringing integrity and credibility to the job. He defeated the incumbent, Dennis Stout, who came under criticism for his role in a corruption investigation in 2001 that brought down a supervisor and other county officials.
Some consider Ramos as a potential replacement for Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Redlands, who like Ramos is a Redlands native.
Gilbreath said she wasn't surprised Ramos encountered some flak because elected leaders frequently run afoul of politically powerful people. Others said Ramos' comments made them proud. "I left feeling that he's got a lot of guts to go in there, no matter what it did to his career,' said Cheryl Evans, a Sunrise member and owner of a Redlands beauty salon. "I left feeling so good.'
Like many of the Sunrise Rotarians, Evans has had an affinity for Ramos and contributed to his campaign. Ramos' remarks made her reconsider the amounts she has given, she said. "I said to myself, 'I'm not giving this guy enough money,' ' Evans said.
Not everyone shared such positive feelings.
The District Attorney's Office, along with the Sheriff's Department and Superior Court Judge J. Michael Welch, who heard the case, have been looked at more skeptically since the Tidwell case.
Mike Cardwell, a former deputy chief in the Sheriff's Department who retired last year, has criticized Sheriff Gary Penrod and "administrators in the DA's office' for what he perceived as having little interest in prosecuting Tidwell.
Cardwell has been particularly galled by the lack of an investigation into who leaked the search warrant to Tidwell. He suggested convening a grand jury, granting Tidwell immunity and ordering him to tell who tipped him off or face another criminal charge.
Deputy District Attorney Cheryl Kersey, praised by Cardwell for her tenacity in the case, said it hasn't happened because "quite frankly, I don't think (Tidwell will) ever tell us.' Tidwell would only face a contempt charge, a misdemeanor, and would unlikely face prison time, she said.
It's necessary to investigate, Cardwell argued, because alerting Tidwell to the search warrant eliminated investigators' chances to surprise the ex-sheriff, giving Tidwell ample time to take pre-emptive action. "The case might have been able to take a whole different turn,' Cardwell said. "There's no telling what we could have found.' Cardwell believes the leak was made at a senior administrative level because few people knew detectives planned to serve Tidwell with the search warrant.
Detectives were still writing their affidavit, the precursor to the warrant, when they informed their supervisor of their intentions, he said. The supervisor then informed someone on a senior level, he said, because getting a search warrant on the former sheriff's residence could be touchy. "We don't think it took long for whoever tipped off Floyd,' Cardwell said.
While interviewing Penrod, Cardwell asked the sheriff if he knew who had leaked the search warrant. Penrod answered no, Cardwell said.
Penrod was not available for comment Tuesday, said Robin Haynal, a sheriff's spokeswoman who declined to discuss the search warrant leak issue. "I don't even know anything about that,' she said tersely.
Cardwell has two potential suspects in mind but says he cannot prove who leaked the information.
"Certainly, I would be willing to talk to the DA's office,' he said. "And so would the investigators.'
An expert on authorities policing themselves said she was not surprised by the results because they often fail to adequately conduct internal investigations. "It's absolutely important because when it's not, it's just a continuation of the code of silence,' said Carol Watson, a retired civil rights attorney and former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Lawyers Guild.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.