LV attorney ordered to turn over names
Attorney Michael Pekin was delivered a blow last week when the
lawyer for the so-called Los Valientes was ordered back in court
July 12 with direction to answer in full all questions from the
District Attorney’s office
– including the names of the LVs and information on financial
transactions.
Or maybe not.
By DENNIS TAYLOR
and BILL KUTZ
Pinnacle Staff Writers
Attorney Michael Pekin was delivered a blow last week when the lawyer for the so-called Los Valientes was ordered back in court July 12 with direction to answer in full all questions from the District Attorney’s office – including the names of the LVs and information on financial transactions.
Or maybe not. Like many times in this two-year-old convoluted legal saga, things are not always as they seem by the time the gavel hits the oak.
On Wednesday, during a court proceeding scheduled to hear Pekin argue for a reconsideration on a past ruling by Superior Court Judge Harry Tobias, county special prosecutor Nancy Battel made reference to an order made by a discovery referee that requires Pekin to answer questions in a deposition requested much earlier in the civil case.
A visiting judge – Tobias was on vacation – refused to grant reconsideration and instead ordered Pekin back in court on July 12 when Tobias is again on the bench. Pekin said he also filed a motion to recuse Sarsfield’s office from the case, but the visiting judge declined to hear arguments, and instead set a July 26 date for that motion.
Los Valientes is a somewhat anonymous group accused by the D.A. of extortion in its efforts to drive out county employees and elected officials members deemed corrupt political adversaries. The group targeted people who publicly opposed strong pro-growth initiatives.
In an interview following this week’s hearing, Pekin said he will argue on July 12 that the referee’s order should be dismissed because the district attorney is engaged in “invidious discrimination,” or discriminatory prosecution of Pekin and Los Valientes.
He will cite California’s Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) law that essentially prohibits using the courts to stifle social reform efforts. It is a special motion to strike a complaint that arises from conduct that falls within the rights to petition and of free speech. In an example offered by Pekin, law enforcement officials were handing out citations to striking grape workers in the 1960s for petty offenses such as trespassing or driving without a license, with the intent being to stifle the grape workers’ right to assemble.
In Pekin’s theory, District Attorney John Sarsfield is using his prosecutorial powers to stifle the Los Valientes effort to stem corruption in the county.
After court Wednesday, Sarsfield was confident he would prevail at the July 12 hearing.
“[Pekin] will make his case to Tobias, where he will lose, and then he will appeal, where he will lose again,” Sarsfield said.
Another scenario, however, is looming. If Pekin is successful in drawing out the case until the end of the year, when Sarsfield leaves office, newly elected District Attorney Candice Hopper told The Pinnacle in a preelection interview that she would not pursue the case, and instead would refer it to the county counsel’s office. If that office declines to take on the suit, it could just go away and collect dust without a resolution.
But in one sense, Sarsfield has garnered a small victory by releasing the names of several Los Valientes “associates,” including Dennis Madigan, a former planning commissioner, appointed by Supervisor Reb Monaco, whom the previous Board of Supervisors fired after they discovered he was inappropriately using county letterhead in ads he placed in the local newspapers soliciting complaints against the planning department when former planning director Rob Mendiola was still at its helm.
Others named by the D.A. and the state as Los Valientes associates are Richard Place, who lost his June bid for the District 3 Supervisor seat, rockery owner Dave Grimsely, Supervisor Jaime De La Cruz, local restaurateur and 28th Assembly Republican candidate Ignacio Velazquez, contractor Vince Pryor, and Pekin himself.
All the named parties either declined to comment or strongly denied belonging to Los Valientes.
Los Valientes had been an anonymous group that started suing the county in 2003 under claims of “mass corruption.” In court documents in the state’s civil case, Los Valientes is accused of extortion and civil rights violations for the methods it used to go after political adversaries.
Investigations by both the state Attorney General’s office and a criminal Grand Jury found no alleged corruption.
One of the targets of the alleged extortion is former County Supervisor Richard Scagliotti, who has said he feels Los Valientes should pay back the taxpayers for the nearly $1 million from the county’s General Fund, money the county has had to spend to defend against the group’s lawsuits.
“Under the guise of fighting corruption, these people apparently perpetrated the most corrupt act I’ve ever witnessed in politics,” said former Pinnacle publisher Tracie Cone in an interview in March. “If they’re guilty, they should be ashamed of what they did to this community. These are all people who should have known better.”
