November 18, 2011

Ms. Stephanie Strolle

State Bar of Texas

San Antonio, TX

RE: Grievances against El Paso City Attorney Charlie McNabb, Assistant City Attorney Kenneth Krohn, El Paso District Attorney Jaime Esparza

Dear Ms. Strolle:

We are formally filing with you grievances against attorneys Charlie McNabb, Kenneth Krohn and Jaime Esparza for violating the Texas Code of Professional Conduct.

We have recently learned that the City of El Paso, by and through its Police Department, with the knowledge of the above named attorneys has been stopping, ticketing and arresting people on the streets of El Paso pursuant to a quota system.  Quota systems or predetermined measures are illegal and specifically proscribed by Texas Transportation Code Sec. 720.002 which states in pertinent part:

“A political subdivision or an agency of this state may not establish or maintain formally or informally, a plan to evaluate, promote, compensate, or discipline …. a peace officer according to the officer’s issuance of a predetermined or specified number of any type or combination of types of traffic citations…”

We came by this information in the course of representing several former El Paso police officers who notified us of the practice.  Not one of the above named prosecutors notified us of this illegal practice and policy.

We have an e-mail retired El Paso Police Sgt. Jack Matthews sent to officers under his supervision that says in short that those officers who do not comply with the requisite ticket requirements should not work the grant shifts.  He is referring to the STEP grants that he supervised.  Officers working those grants earn extra shift hours, and therefore extra money.  Matthews e-mails states in pertinent part:

“October 7, 2011…In looking over the log sheets…, I am seeing officers working the full five hours AND WRITING ONLY 3 OR 4 SEATBELT VIOLATIONS…..The performance standard set forth in the grant is a minimum of 3 seat belt violations per work hour per officer.  If you think you can not meet this goal… then DO NOT work the grant.  This will allow for other officers to be scheduled that have no problem being able to do what is required…those that do not produce what is required will not be considered to work any traffic related grants in the future.”

We have reason to believe that there are many other similar e-mails and documentation which prove that a quota system has been in place for years at the Police Department regarding DWI arrests, speeding, seatbelt violations, etc.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of people have been hunted down and arrested in the streets of El Paso based on this illegal system. City Attorney Charlie McNabb and Kenneth Krohn know about the e–mails and other documentation proving the illegal system and have not disclosed the documents and the scheme– a violation of Brady V. Maryland and not in compliance with their obligations  pursuant to TX Code of Professional Responsibility 3.09 (d) which states in pertinent part that:

“Prosecutors shall make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence and information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense.”

On Wednesday, November 16, 2011, in the State of Texas v. Daniel Torres, County Court at Law number seven, we subpoenaed Jack Matthews to trial.  The State subpoenaed officers as well.  Assistant City Attorney Kenneth Krohn filed and argued a motion to quash only our  subpoena of Jack Matthews and not the district attorney’s subpoenas of other cops.  When the judge denied Krohn’s motion, he threatened the judge with mandamus.  In fact he told Matthews not to come to Court. Instead of giving information as Brady material, Krohn actually tried to suppress it.  The DWI arrest in question in the Torres case was made under a STEP grant, under the supervision of Jack Matthews and pursuant to the requirement that the officer working the DWI grant make at least one DWI arrest per shift.  Out client was the victim that day.

We filed a lawsuit against the City which is pending asking a court to stop this illegal practice.  In our lawsuit seeking an injunction against the City, we provided excerpts from the contract and not the whole contract.  We put in the pertinent parts.  The City is free to put in the parts they want to highlight. The City is now alleging TO THE PRESS that because we only submitted the pertinent parts of the contract that we have done something wrong.  McNabb and Krohn see nothing wrong with their illegal quota scheme, their efforts to cover it up and not disclose information beneficial to the defense to the defense and information to the court that the court needs to consider. We referred the Court to the voluminous contract in our lawsuit and submitted the portions we felt pertinent to our case. The City cannot win on the evidence because it is damning and its attorneys are therefore distorting information and spoon feeding it to dishonest reporters.

Today we received a call from El Paso Times reporter Marty Schladen who said the City Attorney’s Office, Kenneth Krohn, would be seeking disciplinary action with the State Bar of Texas against us for “omitting” a portion of the contract referred to in our lawsuit against them and what was our comment about that.

This action on the part of Charlie McNabb who is the City Attorney and who supervises all employs of that office, including Kenneth Krohn, violates Texas Code of Professional Conduct Rule 3.07 Trial Publicity.  This rule states in pertinent part:

“In the course of representing a client, lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicatory proceeding. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to make such a statement.”

Kenneth Krohn has been very worried about our injunction and has raised it in various court hearings, i.e. John Cook v. Tom Brown Ministries et.al. and State of Texas v. Daniel Torres.

Kenneth Krohn is also angry because we subpoenaed him yesterday to appear today in a pre-trial matter in the State of Texas v. Eric Barrajas.

Charlie McNabb and Kenneth Krohn and Jaime Esparza have a duty as prosecutors to disclose the quota scheme referred to in Matthew’s e-mail.  They have a duty to see that Justice is done and not just be advocates for their client.  The City Attorney’s office also prosecutes all PD  traffic citations.  They are not disclosing the scheme and e-mail to defendants in traffic court.  Jaime Esparza is not doing it in the DWI Step grant cases he prosecutes.

We have several former PD officers you must interview in your investigation, starting with former Sgt. Luis Ortiz.

Sincerely,

Theresa Caballero

Stuart L. Leeds

STUART L. LEEDS AND THERESA CABALLERO
September 30, 2011
To: Clara Hernandez
Public Defender of El Paso County, Texas
Hand-delivered
Re: Medical Examiner Issues
Dear Ms. Hernandez:

Across the state of Texas, i.e. Houston, Laredo, El Paso, Galveston, the press has reported that lawyers are attacking medical examiners in their respective counties for failing to have constitutionally required paperwork on file authorizing them to perform the duties of a medical examiner. An article came out in the Sept. 16, 2011 Houston Chronicle and there have been others in Laredo newspapers. One medical examiner’s office has actually been shut down. According to your employee who you sent to monitor our hearing of Sept. 28, 2011, you were unaware of the issue until Ms. Caballero’s recent blog on the matter.

As the El Paso County Public Defender, you handle approximately 50% of indigent cases in El Paso County. Approximately 70% of all criminal cases are indigent. Therefore, you are the attorney who handles and is responsible for the lion’s share of criminal cases in El Paso County. El Pasoans have also paid for you to a have dedicated capital murder unit. You represent people facing charges that if convicted, could go to prison for the rest of their natural lives or be killed by the state. The medical examiner is a crucial witness for the state in death cases. He/she opines on the cause of death. Attacking a medical examiner’s rulings, credentials, standing to issue an autopsy, credibility, and competence is not only fair game, but required of a defense attorney.

In 2006 El Paso County “hired” Dr. Paul Shrode to be the medical examiner. It did not “appoint” him as per statute. Were you aware of this? Did your capital murder unit investigate this? In 2007, we (Theresa Caballero) determined through cross-examination, that Dr. Shrode had lied on his resume claiming credentials he did not have; He did not have a law degree; He was not a member of the State Bar of TX; He was not board certified in forensic pathology.

Later, the El Paso Times reported that neither you nor anyone in your office has ever used Dr. Shrode’s false resumes against him at trial. There is much speculation that you have become complacent and do not want to rock the political boat. Is it to your client’s benefit to have a lawyer who does not want to rock the boat?

Shrode has since been fired due to our many efforts and the many efforts of lay members of the El Paso public and out-of- state attorneys. In fact, in one Ohio case, a death sentence was commuted to life partly because of Shrode’s lack of credibility.  An Ohio Federal Public Defender contacted us and subsequently used Shrode’s false resumes and testimony from El Paso to discredit Shrode in his client’s plea for commutation (Shrode had been a deputy medical examiner in Ohio).   No one, not one single attorney, from your office ever appeared before commissioner’s court demanding that Shrode be replaced.

We understand from your employee that you are not sure the medical examiner issues are “winning” issues and therefore are not sure that you want to “get involved.”  Is “winning” the criterion you employ in defense of your clients?  Are you not concerned about making an attempt to throw out an autopsy?  Making your appellate record?  Are you waiting for someone else to fight and win?  Fight and lose so you could say “Good thing we didn’t raise the issue”?  Is there not strength in numbers?  Should you not, as the single most powerful defense attorney with the most resources and clients at stake, be leading the charge, doing the research (you have an appellate division.  We don’t)?

You have a client on death row, David Renteria.  Dr. Juan Contin was the ME.  We attended Renteria’s first trial and witnessed your attorney, Jaime Gandara, when D.A. Esparza passed the witness to him, say the following: “We are well aware of Dr. Contin’s credentials. We have no questions.” Was Mr. Gandara really aware of Dr. Contin’s credentials? Mr. Gandara made no mention of Dr. Contin’s firing as the ME, of his being placed on probation by the Texas Medical Board for “engaging in activities likely to defraud and deceive the public” etc.  If your attorney was aware of these credibility issues, why did he not raise them in a death penalty, capital murder case?

We have requested Dr. Contin’s oaths of office from the ‘90s, (the time frame at issue in the Renteria case) and have been furnished with none.  The County did supply us with one from 2010.  So it seems these oaths of office are important and the County is now making sure that Contin has one on file.  But it’s too late.  Should you not raise this for Mr. Renteria while he waits to be killed?

At our Sept. 22, 2011 hearing, ADA Penny Hamilton asked the court for extra time to respond to our motion to suppress the autopsy and the ME issues, stating, “This is the most important issue facing the state today.”  We, for the first time ever, agree with Ms. Hamilton.

Ms. Hernandez, you represent many people whose lives (at least one on death row) would be greatly affected if there were a judicial determination that autopsies need to be thrown out because of faulty procedures employed by the ME’s office and the County.  If you are earnest about educating yourself on the issue and raising the issue on behalf of your client’s, and since your employees are subject to getting your approval before raising the issue, you personally are invited to contact us at sleeds1@msn.com. We have no time to go through intermediaries.  You are aware we are up against deadlines.  Attorneys across the state are fighting in their individual jurisdictions and all hands on deck are needed on deck as soon as possible to stymie weak and reluctant judges from ruling against the defense, case by case.

We earnestly hope on behalf of El Paso and your clients that you involve yourself in this matter.  The District Attorney is 100% involved to fight the ME issue.  One would think that would behoove you, the Public Defender, to get in on the other side. However, this would mean you will have to fight the very establishment that has appointed you for almost 18 years.  But isn’t fighting what the role of a true defense attorney is, win or lose?

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Stuart L. Leeds/Theresa Caballero

Ramon Bracamontes

Editor, El Paso Times

Melissa

Re: Reporter Marty Schladen’s innacurate reporting and unprofessional conduct/display outside court room

Dear Melissa and Ramon,

This is to follow up on my call to you this morning regarding reporter Marty Schladen’s bizarre behavior and to bring to your attention innacuracies in the brief he filed this morning.

During a break in this morning’s hearing on Mayor John Cook’s pleadings (the judge had ordered the parties to go to the jury room to see if they could agree on certain points), Cook’s lawyers and I went to the back room and Stuart Leeds went outside to give a brief statement to the press.  He advised them that four ethics complaints had been filed with the City Ethics Committee against Mayor John Cook this morning.   Stuart did not file them.  As Stuart was talking to the press, Marty Schladen kept interrupting him, yelling, “What proof do you have? What proof do you have?”  Stuart had to tell him to stop interrupting. Stuart thought he was acting like Cook’s P.R. person.

Another salient point is, Stuart does not have to have proof. He did not file the complaints. Stuart was merely passing on to the press what he had learned and that was that four citizens had filed ethics complaints.  Why does Schladen think Stuart has to have proof?  Why was Schladen so upset about those ethics complaints?  He was almost hysterical.

SCHLADEN’S BIZARRO WORLD:

When I asked Schladen what proof he asked of DA Jaime Esparza regarding Esparza opening up a criminal investiation against Pastor Tom Brown, Schladen could not answer me.  And that is because Schladen didn’t ask for any.  He just let DA Esparza do “a dog and pony show.”  Schladen didn’t ask Esparza the most basic, fundamental question and that is, “who sent the Texas AG the complaint?”  In Schalden’s world, he just assumes that the Texas AG, who sits 630 miles from El Paso, woke up one fine morning and said to himself, “By God, I think I am going to file a complaint against that Pastor Tom Brown in El Paso and I think it’s SO important that I won’t even investigate it myself.”  If the AG referred a complaint to DA Esparza it is because SOMEONE sent the AG a complaint one.  Who sent it?

SCHLADEN’S INNACURACIES IN TODAY’S BRIEF:

In Schalden’s brief filed this morning, he incorrectly reported:”…Theresa Caballero is accusing the mayor of taking improper gifts.  Cook said he will be obligated to pay his own legal fees if he loses, but Caballero and Stuart Leeds trumpeted four complaints to the Ethics Commission.  They did not, however, furnish any evidence that what the mayor said was not true.”

NEITHER STUART OR I EVER SAID THE MAYOR TOOK IMPROPER GIFTS. What we said was:

-Stuart read one of the complaints verbatim.

-I said if Cook is receiving free legal work, the City Ethics code prohibits gifts over a certain dollar amount and if he is receiving campaign donations and using them to pay his legal fees, we need to see if that’s proper. In any scenario, I would bet my house that Cook is NOT financing his own legal fees and that I believe that individuals who have a lot of money and who find it important to keep Cook in office are financing Cook’s legal fees.  And that even if it were legal for someone else to pay for Cook’s legal fees, the public has the right to know who is doing it.  I said if someone like Woody Hunt or Bob Hoy was financing the mayor the people need to know.

That was what was said! Please issue a correction!

-Another possible inaccuracy:  Did Cook say he will only be obligated to pay his own legal fees if he loses? Or did Schladen get it wrong again?  Who is wrong, Cook or Schalden? If Cook has a contract with a law firm, like he’s said he does, he has to pay regardless. If Cook had an agreement with the law firm that says he does not have to pay them if he loses then he will have received free legal services. If Cook wins the judge can order the losing party to reimburse. Therefore, is Schladen saying Cook’s attorneys are working for free and only expect to be paid if Cook wins AND the judge orders Brown et al to pay Cook’s attorneys AND Brown et. a actually do?

Schalden wrote “…Alvarez on Monday denied… Cook’s request to extend parts of a temporary restraining order…”

Are we to believe that there are parts that were extended?

Schladen’s too emotionally involved which would account for his spectacle in the hallway and his gross inaccuracies in what should be a simple story.

Sincerely,

Theresa Caballero

September 18, 2011

Re: Hondo, Texas Ret. District Court Judge, Tom Lee’s  refusal to allow litigants to communicate with his court and by virtue of this he has run up the tab for El Paso County Taxpayers.

Dear Judge Ables, Judge Patrick Garcia and the Council of Judges:

Please do not appoint Judge Tom Lee  from Hondo, Texas to preside over any more El Paso cases.  He refuses to maintain modern forms of communication thereby preventing litigants from reaching him/the court in an efficient manner.  He steadfastly refuses to maintain a fax machine, e-mail address or furnish a telephone number to parties.  He also expects El Paso litigants to accommodate him and carry out their business using Central Time Zone hours and when they are unable to comply, he throws a fit.  El Paso is one hour behind Hondo, Texas.

When Judge Lee presided over the State of Texas v. Regina Arditti case, before he was replaced, Stuart Leeds and I were absolutely unable to quickly file with the court or get anything remotely resembling an emergency hearing with judge Lee because we had no way of reaching him outside of the mail service. The problem of not being able to reach the court became so severe that we actually filed a formal motion asking the taxpayers of El Paso to provide and pay for a fax machine and fax line for Judge Lee in his home during the pendency of the case.  We explained that the taxpayers of El Paso had beautifully outfitted every single court room in the El Paso County Court house with phones, answering machines, fax machines, computers, e-mail accounts, judges’ chambers, secretaries, etc., so that litigants could have access to their courts/judges.

Judge Arditti was at a severe disadvantage in reaching the court as Judge Lee lives out of town and had:

-No telephone number

-No fax machine

-No secretary

-No judges’ chambers

-No email address.

Judge Lee told us to use the mail service if we wanted to reach him.  After we filed the motion for fax machine, which he denied, he gave us the fax number to the Hondo District Clerk’s Office and told us to send our faxes there and the Hondo clerk would call him. As he lives two blocks away, he would walk over and retrieve the fax.  How quaint.

Stuart Leeds and I were recently hired on a case over which Judge Lee was presiding.  We were hired at 3:30 p.m. on a Friday.  We prepared and filed our motion to Recuse Judge Lee and in 47 minutes faxed it to the Hondo Clerk’s office.  It arrived on the Clerk’s machine-and therefore with the Court itself- at 4:17 p.m. El Paso time, 5:17 p.m. Hondo time, seventeen minutes after the close of business in Hondo.

Because Judge Lee refuses to maintain modern means of communication that are now standard in Texas Courts, he did not get the fax and on Monday morning he flew to El Paso, oblivious that a motion to recuse him had been filed three days before.

When I went to court and handed Judge Lee the recusal, this is how he conducted himself:

Immediately out of his mouth and BEFORE reading the motion he said: “I’m going to deny this.”

I said, “You may want to read it first.”

He said, “Oh I know Ms. Ms. Ms. Caballero, you, you know all the laws.”

I said, “Well, for sure I know you should read pleadings before you rule on them.”

I told him that if he had had a fax machine or a phone number, his trip to El Paso could have been avoided.  I reminded him that we had begged and pleaded with him to get a fax machine in the Arditti case but no, he wasn’t going to do that. He was very angry about being reminded of that and interrupted me saying “I know! I know!”

Of course, once Judge Lee calmed down and actually read the pleadings, he saw that he had no choice but to voluntarily recuse himself and since then Judge Paxson has been assigned to the matter.  Judge Paxson can be found almost all day long in the court house corridors helping courts with overflow.  Judge Paxson is very accessible and does not resent litigants petitioning him for his time.

I have since learned that Judge Lee actually charged El Paso taxpayers almost a THOUSAND dollars in airfare and hotels for his useless and avoidable trip.  This happened because Lee is an anachronism.

It should also be noted that Judge Lee accepts and insinuates himself into El Paso cases paid by El Paso taxpayers but expects El Pasoans to conform to his time zone and not the other way around.  Lee is arrogant and inconsiderate.

Judge Lee also does not want to maintain 21^st century means of communication which now include tools such as e-mail, androids, macbooks, air-pads, i-pads, i-phones, twitter, facebook, fax by computer, fax machine (technology invented in the 1930′s in connection with FM research) and telephone (technology that farmers in remote corners had in the early part of the 20th century-they were so determined to be connected to the world that many of them walked their ranches and farms stringing the wires themselves). But Judge Lee has intentionally chosen to live in dinosaur times.  Why? Because Lee doesn’t want to be bothered by the people who have the bad luck of falling into his court.  El Pasoans deserve so much more.

We are not only making you aware of the problem that is Judge Lee but we are asking that you send him a bill for the travel expenses he charged El Pasoans for because he intentionally failed to receive documents filed directly with him.  Why should El Pasoans pay for Lee’s nonsense?

If I were a Hondo taxpayer I would want to know why Judge Lee expects Hondo taxpayers to pay for a fax machine in their district clerk’s office for Judge Lee to earn extra money off of El Paso cases.  That just does not seem honest now does it?  Maybe the El Paso District Clerk’s office will maintain a fax machine, paper, electricity, space, ink, staffing and a phone line for me so I don’t have to pay.  Even if the Clerk were willing to do that for me, I would not accept because that would be an act of dishonesty toward the citizens of El Paso.  County facilities are not for my private use.

Sincerely,

Theresa Caballero

Editor’s note:  What follows is an article from the Friday, September 16, 2011 edition of the Houston Chronicle.  By law, medical examiners are supposed to file an “Oath of Office” when they take office.  Apparently, across the state, inlcuding El Paso, they have not been doing so.  The Oath requires that the offical swear that he has not been bribed to get the job.  Now that a few attorneys across the state (note the defeaning silence from the El Paso public Defender Clara Hernandez) are challening the vailidity of autposies done by a an ME who had not filed the Oath, County Attorneys, who should have made sure that the MEs had an Oath on file, are coming out saying that really the Oaths are not required. NO big deal.  The moral of the story is that dishonest government will change the rules if it suits them.

Defense lawyers challenge medical examiners

By MIKE MORRIS, HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Updated 09:25 p.m., Friday, September 16, 2011

Comments (0)	0 Share
Larger | Smaller
Printable Version
Email This
Georgia (default) Font Verdana Times New Roman Arial

El Paso, Texas County Commissioner Annabell Perez objects to her being compared to a pig at the trough, for getting so fat at the public trough she has trouble walking through a doorway straight.  What did she do to dispel that comparison? On Monday, August 29, 2011, Perez voted to give herself a $3,000 raise making her salary $60,855.

Pig at the trough?

For those of you in the private sector, which entirely supports the public sector, did YOU get a raise?  Are your property taxes lower?  Are you able to easily borrow money? Are you up to schedule in your retirement account?  Is your health insurance affordable?  Do you have health insurance?  If you do, does it actually pay for anything short of emergency hospitalizations? Are your county government services better?  Did unemployment fall?  Is the stock market doing great?  Is your dollar strong?  Did the price of gold fall below history breaking levels, indicating the economy is doing better?  Did Greece pay its debt?  Did Ireland pay its debt?  Has Italy been pulled out of the jaws of the lion?  And therefore is Europe safely back from the brink of the cliff?  Is the specter of a world-wide depression off the horizon?  Is your job secure?  Do your children’s futures look brighter than they did last year at this time?  Did El Paso get new businesses in the private sector?

If the answer is no to the above questions, what do YOU call El Paso Commissioner Annabell Perez?

August 30, 2011

Mr. Jaime Esparza

District Attorney

500 E. San Antonio St.

El Paso, TX 79901

Sheriff Richard Wiles

500 E. San Antonio. St.

El Paso, TX 79901

Mayor John Cook

2 Civic Center Plaza

El Paso, TX 79901

Re: Pastor Tom Brown and Open Records Request

Dear Sheriff Wiles and Mr. Esparza and Mayor Cook:

We represent Pastor Tom Brown.  We have been informed through the news media that you, Mr. Esparza, may be investigating Pastor Brown on criminal allegations.  We have also heard through reliable sources that you called on at least one investigating agency that told you it would not investigate Pastor Brown. Your response was that you would contact the Sheriff’s Office to conduct the criminal investigation. Are you now forum shopping for an investigator?

We saw footage on KTSM in which you referred to a letter from the Texas Attorney General (AG). The inference was that the AG had received a complaint regarding Pastor Brown. We would like a copy of any documents or communications you, Mr. Esparza, received from the AG and from any other individual or entity regarding Pastor Tom Brown.

From Mayor Cook, we are requesting any documents, communications, complaints, and e-mails that the City has in its possession regarding Pastor Tom Brown.  We have reason to believe that a city official and/or employee has misused his status to refer a complaint to the AG.  As you know Mr. Mayor, it would be a gross conflict of interest for you or any other city official or employee to use the City’s direct channel to the AG in order to invoke the power of the Texas AG in this particular matter.  Please make the requested documents available ASAP.

The Sheriff’s Office also has a conflict of interest in actually investigating Pastor Brown as Daniel Rollings and lawyer Bill Ellis and Sheriff Wiles have personally worked against Pastor Brown.  Sheriff Wiles gave interviews to the media opposing Pastor Brown.  Someone who does not deny being Daniel Rollings has been making threatening and harassing phone calls to the Browns.  That case is under investigation by the EPPD.

I would also emphasize that any criminal investigation into Pastor Tom Brown is nothing more than a political witch-hunt against the Browns for their political and social views.

Pastor Tom Brown has committed no criminal offenses in his participation in the recall effort.  He has made no political contributions or political expenditures within the meaning of Texas Election Code Sec. 253.094 (a) or (b).  Additionally, Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion No. 489, issued on April 21, 2010, states in pertinent part:

“…the Texas Ethics Commission cannot enforce sections 253.094 or 253.002 of the Election Code to prohibit a corporation or labor organization from making a direct campaign expenditure.  In addition, the Texas Ethics Commission cannot enforce section 253.002 of the Election Code to prohibit a person from making a direct campaign expenditure.”

Furthermore, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-205 (U.S. Jan 21, 2010), the United States Supreme Court found that 2 U.S.C. Sec. 441 (b)’s prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions was invalid on First Amendment grounds.  A fair reading of the decision supports the proposition that any attempt by D.A Esparza or, Mayor Cook, or Sheriff Wiles, or any other official to prosecute Pastor Brown under Sec. 253.094 for any campaign expenditures or campaign contributions he purportedly made, whether as part of a recall election or otherwise, would violate Pastor Brown’s rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.  The decision even suggests that local District Attorney Jaime Esparza may have already committed a civil right’s violation against Pastor Brown by creating a chilling effect on Pastor Brown’s rights to exercise free speech.  This point is made for the purpose of emphasizing the great breadth of the decision and the hostility the Supreme Court has indicated it will demonstrate toward any government law that inhibits free speech in our society.

Please tender the requested documents. Do not contact or attempt to speak to our client. Specifically, Mr. Esparza and Sheriff Wiles, please do not embarrass yourselves again like you did when you wrongfully targeted and prosecuted Judge Regina Arditti.  That didn’t turn out too well for you did it?

Sincerely,

Theresa Caballero and Stuart Leeds

300 E. Main St., Suite 1136 1715 Wyoming

El Paso, TX El Paso, TX

Editor’s Note:  This is an e-mail I sent to Blanche Darley of the El Paso Tejano Democrats.  Ms. Darley had received a nasty gram from Mayor John Cook who was angry with her for not being against the recall.  Cook is angry that people are calling him on the carpet for OVERTURNING an election.

Blanche,

John Cook has always been a dishonest, smug, son-of-a-bitch.  He supported the stealing of private property (eminent domain) to give to his friends in the Thomason area and when it looked like the homeowners, whom he had discarded as throwaways, were in fact going to win the issue of the day, he did an about face to save himself.  Cook raised taxes by 11.89% b/c Mayor Caballero told him so.  They both said in their hateful, arrogant, inimical fashion, it was “just the price of a hamburger.”  Never did Cook look back at all the people who were going to have to choose between paying taxes or the water bill, taxes or medicine, taxes or food.  Then the two of them go about making plans to renovate their offices to the tune of a million dollars.  Year after year Cook uses city money to give to DA Esparza for Esparza’s illegal DIMS program wherein Esparza alone decides who goes to jail and who doesn’t and if so, what the bond should be.  The judge has been cut out of the arrest process. Thousands of El Pasoans have had their lives ruined because they have been wrongfully incarcerated since there is no neutral and detached magistrate to oversee these arrests.  Last winter, when people were freezing to death and without basic utilities, Cook was off galavanting around Austin and then dared to be angry that his constituents expected him to be here on the ground taking care of business. Cook’s response was, “I’m not a plumber.”

What Cook is is a big, dangerous, zero that we need to get rid of.

Yeah, Cook, he’s been a real stand up guy for the Constitution and the welfare of the most vulnerable in our society.

Have you signed the petition?  We will be at the court house in front of jury hall tomorrow, Wednesday, at 7:30- to 9:00 a.m.

TCaballero

PRESS CONFERENCE

WHEN: AUGUST 20, 2011

WHERE: MEMORIAL PARK, BY THE FLAG

TIME: 1:00 P.M.

RE: Attorney’s Stuart Leeds and Theresa Caballero represent Pastor Brown in his fight for democracy.

Dear Press:

On August 20, at 1:00 p.m., at Memorial Park by the flag, attorneys Stuart Leeds and Theresa Caballero will hold a press conference regarding the recent intimidation tactics of District Attorney Jaime Esparza as well as his friends and allies and financial benefactors Mayor John Cook and City Rep. Susie Byrd and City Rep. Steve Ortega. Jaime Esparza has a long well documented history of misusing his power to hurt his enemies and help his friends.  Esparza’s investigation into Pastor Brown is another example of Esparza’s political prosecutions.

Instead of upholding the most basic tenet of DEMOCRACY, the will of the PEOPLE by vote, he’s using his power to intimidate and threaten Pastor Brown.

Attorney Leeds, a New York-born Jew, and Theresa Caballero an El Paso Roman Catholic, in no way associated with Pastor Brown’s church, are outraged and offended on Esparza’s open attack on freedom of speech, freedom  of religion and freedom to petition one’s government and  WILL NOT STAND FOR IT.

Attorneys licensed by Texas are subject to the Texas Code of Professional Conduct.  Every month the State Bar of Texas puts out a journal wherein attorneys who have been censured or disbarred are listed.   The only attorneys who seem to be punished are those in private practice with no connections to anyone in government.  One never sees prosecutors or their friends listed.  That’s because prosecutors and their friends never get into trouble no matter how egregiously unethical and illegal their conduct.

In May 2011, Stuart Leeds and I successfully defended Judge Regina Arditti on trumped up charges of Bribery and Abuse of Official Capacity and Nepotism.  The State’s “star” witness was attorney David Biagas who while on the stand, amongst other things, admitted to:

1) lying to federal agents conducting a federal investigation;

2) splitting fees with a sitting judge;

3) asking a female client to meet him at a hotel for a lap dance.

I sent  Judge Manuel Barraza’s federal indictment to the Bar.  Judge Barraza was convicted of Bribery.  The indictment repeatedly alludes to David Biagas as the trusted ”attorney” with whom Judge Barraza acted.  I also sent the transcript of Biagas’ testimony wherein Biagas testified to having helped Barraza do unethical if not criminal activity.

Attorney EMILY MILLER at the STATE BAR OF TEXAS WROTE A Letter to Stuart Leeds and me SAYING THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS FOUND THERE WAS NO UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR to have been committed by government witness attorney David Biagas.

The State Bar of Texas publicly reprimands attorneys for not returning phone calls but they dismiss a grievance against a government witness who under oath admits to unethical behavior.

I find the whole bunch of them (the State Bar attorneys) sickening and strongly believe the State Bar of Texas Grievance office needs to be disbanded.  Why continue the sham? Ms. Miller should be ashamed for penning that letter.  I think I will send her letter and our well documented grievance to a law school ethics professor to be shown to students to teach them what the reality of it all really is.