Attorney General calls DA’s arguments unheard of
Blog note: this article references a grand jury report.
MARTINEZ — In a decision she indicated was not a close call, a Contra Costa County judge denied motions that would have allowed the District Attorney’s office to remove itself from handling a misconduct case against County Assessor Gus Kramer.
The ruling by Judge Theresa Canepa came after a Tuesday afternoon hearing that put the district attorney’s office in the seemingly untenable position of arguing against its own ability to prosecute Kramer for alleged civil misconduct, while simultaneously asserting that its attorneys were fully prepared to do so.
Canepa denied motions by both the district attorney and Kramer’s attorney, Michael Rains, to remove Contra Costa County prosecutors from the case and pass it over to the state Attorney General’s office.
Two representatives from the Attorney General’s office were present in court Tuesday, too. Deputy Attorney General Geoff Lauter argued on behalf of the office, and said he was befuddled by the district attorney’s arguments.
“My mind is boggled because in the entire history of my career, I’ve never seen a district attorney’s office move to disqualify itself,” Lauter said. “I’m not sure it’s proper.”
A grand jury report filed in court in June accuses Kramer of having made sexual comments to female employees in his department multiple times from December 2013 through 2018 and of uttering a racial slur to an employee. It is a civil case, but Kramer, the county assessor since 1994, faces removal from office if the charges are sustained.
One reason the district attorney’s recusal was warranted, prosecutors argued, is that the facts of the case would invariably make the board of supervisors’ office look bad, which could create a conflict of interest because supervisors approve salaries for district attorney staff. The board had an “inadequate” system for dealing with employee sexual harassment complaints, prosecutors added.
Rains, meanwhile, took aim at District Attorney Diana Becton, arguing that she “enjoys the support” of the board of supervisors and might feel gratitude because the board appointed her nearly two years ago, implying the board was the influence behind the grand jury accusation.
“The board of supervisors isn’t the least bit interested in (Kramer) receiving a fair trial of any sort,” Rains argued before Canepa on Tuesday, pointing out earlier that Kramer recently sued the board, alleging political retaliation for censuring him over sexual harassment allegations.He said the board wants the district attorney to “take a hard shot” at Kramer and said there was a “potential it could influence the DA’s budget.”
Lauter accused both Rains and Deputy District Attorney Steve Bolen of building their arguments on “hearsay and speculation,” pointing out that Becton was elected in 2018, and is no longer an appointed official.
“It can’t be proved with mere speculation. … They have to prove — with competent, admissible evidence — a likelihood of unfairness,” Lauter said.
Canepa agreed, noting that in a written motion the district attorney “already acknowledges it will prosecute this case to the end,” and that the legal standard for recusal was a “reasonable possibility of less than impartial treatment,” not “unseemliness alone.”
The legal basis for recusal is established in state Penal Code 1424, and there are historical examples of when it is appropriate. In the mid-1990s, then-Orange County tax collector Robert Citron was hit with misconduct charges after he managed to bankrupt the entire county through irresponsible investment strategies. That county’s district attorney, which had lost millions from its budget because of Citron, successfully recused itself from a misconduct case against the auditor-controller, Steven Lewis, connected to the bankruptcy.
Bolen argued Lewis’ case was “even more unique” than the Kramer case. But Canepa said that because the Orange County District Attorney was directly affected by the bankruptcy, the potential for a conflict of interest was more clearcut.
Ironically, moments after denying Rains and the district attorney’s motions, Canepa herself said she was bowing out of the case because of time constraints. Her schedule needs to be clear because a highly anticipated jury trial — over the killing of a popular Richmond-area rapper — will soon begin in her courtroom and is expected to last four months.
That means Judge Charles “Ben” Burch will handle further proceedings involving Kramer. His courtroom is located in Department 23 of the A.F. Bray Courthouse in Martinez. Kramer’s next hearing is set for 9 a.m. Aug. 30, where Burch will review a motion to dismiss filed by Rains.
July 31, 2019
East Bay Times
By Nate Gartrell
No comments:
Post a Comment