Spokane7
33°
July 21, 2010 in City
Sheriff’s ‘support’ falls in gray area
Candidates for prosecutor parse debate comment
A testament to the popularity of Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich may be the level to which candidates for Spokane County prosecutor are seeking his support.
The situation came to a head last week when incumbent Steve Tucker announced during a debate that he had the support of Knezovich. Asked to clarify that support, Tucker made it clear that the sheriff has not endorsed his candidacy.
But Tucker’s opponents – fellow Republicans Chris Bugbee and Dave Stevens, Democrat Frank Malone and unaffiliated candidate Jim Reierson – all said they believe the average voter may not know the difference between support and an official endorsement.
“I think that was inappropriate,” Bugbee said of Tucker’s debate comment. “It’s my understanding that Knezovich is not endorsing anyone. I don’t have his endorsement, but I believe I have support on the same level that Steve (Tucker) would.”
Knezovich did not return messages this week seeking comment.
Tucker said Knezovich approached him months ago when former sheriff Mark Sterk had announced intentions to run for his old office. Sterk later chose not to run.
“He goes, ‘I’m just wondering if you will support me if I support you,’ ” Tucker said of Knezovich’s comment. “I said, ‘I’m OK with that.’ So in the meantime we talked about him doing a radio spot.”
But at Tucker’s kickoff party, Knezovich didn’t sign Tucker’s endorsement sheet. Asked why not, Knezovich “said he was going to endorse all three (Republicans),” Tucker said.
Stevens, fired by Tucker for reportedly talking about which deputy prosecutors he would let go, said everybody assumes that support and endorsement are the same thing.
Knezovich “made it clear a long time ago that he is not picking sides,” Stevens said.
Tucker said he again approached Knezovich as the sheriff moderated a June 21 debate for the Republicans of Spokane County. Tucker said he asked Knezovich whether he could say that the sheriff “supports” his campaign. “He said that’s OK,” Tucker said.
But the sheriff never came through with the radio spot for Tucker’s campaign.
“I don’t want to sound like sour grapes … but he kind of backed off everything he talked to me about,” Tucker said. “I hate politics.”
Malone said the clamor over Knezovich’s favor shows how popular he is.
Knezovich “has done some good things there,” Malone said.
Malone met with Knezovich but not to seek an endorsement, he said.
“At that time, there were other Republicans in the race, and I didn’t expect his endorsement,” Malone said. “But we had a conversation in which I got some good insight about how the office works and what ought to be happening between the Sheriff’s Office and the prosecutor’s office.”
Reierson, a longtime deputy prosecutor in Kootenai County who is running without an official party affiliation, said he could understand how Tucker’s statement “may be construed as an endorsement. It’s kind of like splitting hairs. If (Tucker) was trying to infer that the sheriff was backing him and the sheriff is not, that’s obviously a concern.”
Killing suspect remains at large 
WSU Text-to-Win Contest 
Enter to win tickets to see Adam Carolla at the Knitting Factory 
EWU Text-to-Win Contest 
Ron_the_Cop on July 21 at 5:11 a.m.
For more information on this story read my blog post. I asked Sheriff Knezovich in an email about Steve Tucker’s statement at the League’s forum. Sheriff Knezovich replied in an email, “I have not endorsed anyone for any office.” Further Tucker is claiming Knezovich’s support in his printed campaign material and in his statement on the Secretary of State’s online voter information.
Read my blog for other information that Mr. Clouse probably didn’t have the space to cover:
BREAKING - Steve Tucker claims support of Sheriff Knezovich - Sheriff Knezovich emphatically says he didn’t endorse anyone
Steve Tucker is the incumbent Spokane County Prosecutor and is running for reelection. At a recent televised candidate’s forum held by the League of Women Voters, Tucker claimed the support of Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich. Sheriff Knezovich replied to an email saying has not endorsed anyone for any office. I’m alleging that Steve Tucker was directly and knowingly involved in the cover up of the homicide of Jo Ellen Savage in the RPS Parking Garage in April of 2006. Therefore he is not qualified to serve as County Prosecutor.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Riverside PD, CA
[From my email to Tucker seeking clarification of this support statement]
Mr. Tucker this should come of no surprise that I am actively campaigning against your reelection for your nonfeasance and malfeasance in office. Specifically you aided and abetted in the cover up of the death of Jo Ellen Savage in the RPS Parking Garage. Simply put this was a homicide - a First-Degree Manslaughter under WA State Law. This wasn’t a case of prosecutorial discretion. This was a deliberate cover up by your knowing inaction. I haven’t decided yet which of your opponents for the top law enforcement position in Spokane I will endorse and support.
Mr. Tucker you can’t claim ignorance and or incompetence in your decision not to file criminal charges in the homicide of Savage. Both former Sheriff Tony Bamonte and I have an extensive paper trail documenting multiple letters and emails to your office. We gave you constructive notice that any filing decision without having a complete and thorough criminal investigation to review would be flawed and disingenuous at best. David Savage (former husband of Jo Ellen Savage) also was willing to provide your office with the product of their civil case involving the death of his former wife, which you apparently refused. . .
Read more here:
http://tinyurl.com/2at6g2h
liarsinnews on July 21 at 5:57 a.m.
Detective Ron Wright, I agree with your findings and Sheriff Bamonte`s regarding Mr. Tucker. Its not the first time Tucker appears to be looking the other way and avoiding his responsibilities as the county prosecuting attorney. Wright and Bamonte are talking about a tragedy that may not have happened if the maintenance of the River Park Square parking garage had not been neglected and because of it was probably the reason Ms. Jo Savage was killed. Mr. Tucker, who are you protecting? As the producer of the former Mark Fhurman radio show said, you may be spending too much time at the 19th hole.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on July 21 at 6:57 a.m.
Mr Clouse, thank you as always for your fine reporting. This is a very very important race, and the citizens of Spokane County need to have all the information to make an informed choice for an effective replacement for Mr Tucker.
As the facts and truth around Mr Tucker’s time as our County Prosecutor continue to flow out of this campaign like the oil pouring out of the Gulf Oil Well, it becomes more and more apparent he needs to be removed from office. ANY of the candidates that are running against Steve Tucker will do a better job than he has done.
Mr Malone is a man of honor and service and caring for our community. He IS a Democrat, but in my “independents” view of this and some other office’s it should be Non Partisan. Crime and criminal justice reform and alternatives to building a new jail are an issue for ALL taxpayers.
Frank has 26 years of Air Force and Air Force reserve duty, retiring as a Lieutenant Colonel, with active duty in Viet Nam, and Desert Storm. He has a Masters Degree in business from Eastern Wash University, and has a varied and complex successful law practice. Most importantly he will use the office of prosecutor in a fair and balanced and “Common Sense” way, and will not curry favor for ANYONE who might choose to rise above the law.
Mr Tucker’s dissembling about Sheriff Ozzie’s “support” is pathognomonic of the problems in that most important elected county position. The tip of the iceberg is sharp and cold and but a harbinger of the problems that will be uncovered when Frank is hopefully elected. You will have a gold mine of investigative reporting available from that office.
I am confident Sheriff Ozzie will be able to work well with Mr Malone… both men are cut from the same cloth with regards their ethics and values. John Olsen Shalom Ministries Spokane
MrNatural on July 21 at 10:27 a.m.
Just a good ol’ boy,
Never meanin’ no harm,
Beats all you’ve ever saw, misinterpretin’ the law since the day he was born.
Puttin’ the greens.
While spinnin’ the rules,
Someday the judgments might get him, but the victims are fools.
With support from the Guild
The only way he knows how,
That’s just a little bit more than the law will allow.
CONCERNEDREADER on July 21 at 11:11 a.m.
Chris Bugbee is the natural, obvious and only choice for County Prosecutor -
spokanada on July 21 at 11:23 a.m.
Only choice? Did his opponents drop out of the election? I guess if it is obvious then Bugbee doesn’t need to put up lawn signs or do any campaigning.
Thanks for the post, you have convinced me to vote for Bugbee.
horse_feathers on July 21 at 11:56 a.m.
Frank Malone is the best qualified outsider in this race.
douglas9962 on July 21 at 12:26 p.m.
Bugbee defending a local double homicide perp kinda rubs me the wrong way. I understand everyone is entitled to a defense, but I can’t let it go. I’ll do more homework…maybe look into Malone.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on July 21 at 1:31 p.m.
Mr Bugbee has the full support and endorsement of the Police Guild….. so…… with all of our problems with slow/poor/inept prosecution of cases against a few of our officers… I’d think twice before I’d step right into line with him….. ( Sure would take him over Mr Tucker in any event though). John
CONCERNEDREADER on July 21 at 2:36 p.m.
Actually, the Bugbee signs are the only ones that I have seen around town, excepting a few scattered Tucker signs here and there…….
Ron_the_Cop on July 21 at 3:45 p.m.
OK folks I’ve just been “censored” again over at A Matter of Opinion for basically having an opinion:-)
I would only ask that all keep an open mind to all candidates with the exception of Tucker. I have some inclinations but I’m not ready to reveal them yet.
In an email reply to Ryan Pitts re S-R censorship in these threads my foremost criteria for a County Prosecutor are:
“There are secondary story lines in my letter to Tucker that so far no one in the local media has challenged him. Clouse had my letter in advance of his story. These stories were probably outside the scope of the current story. The biggest is the myth that a federal grand jury ever reviewed the evidence or heard testimony in the Savage homicide case. The second is the review by US Attorney’s Office and the WA AG’s Office of Tucker’s material (received from the feds) were comprehensive. The third is the apparent dissing by Rob McKenna of David Savage on the Mike Fitzsimmons Radio Show. The only person in the local media that came close was Erik Loney of KXLY that a least pressed Tucker on his decision not to file charges. The S-R has been silent on these stories. Why? Give me a logical argument why these stories would not be page one above the fold stories in a normal media environment.
For once give me some credit as a seasoned law enforcement insider that I do know something of what I speak. Tucker covered up a homicide - plain and simple with the willing acquiescence of the local law enforcement community. Tucker was the point person in this cover up and I will hold him accountable at the ballot box. I would expect my local paper of record to provide timely and informative articles to its readers so they too may informed and decide whether Tucker should be returned to office. Who got this story this first after all? I applaud Clouse for running with this story and covering as much as he did. Yes I annotated it with additional information that might enlightened voters to make an informed choice in this very important election County Prosecutor.
The S-R has been at the forefront on the Zehm case. Officer Thompson is being scapegoated for the sins of the police command staff and Tucker. He will have his day in federal court and a jury will decide his guilt or innocence. Jo Ellen Savage has not had her day in court. Tucker prevented that. An aggressive prosecutor willing to take on political conflict of interests cases and will not look the other way on police abuse cases would go a long way to remedy the current issues with SPD re police policy, procedure and training. Of course as Sheriff Bamonte suggests a competent police chief and command staff with a professional IA unit would be of great help too. Officer Thompson makes good copy. The S-R would have more credibility if it went to go the root of the problems with SPD. I attempt whenever possible to offer my learned opinion on these issues to further inform your readers however the S-R marginalizes me for doing so.”
Ron_the_Cop on July 21 at 5:02 p.m.
ChefGus,
I agree - all of the above with the exception of Tucker. Tucker of all people should know the importance of telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
As I outlined above and you essentially agree with we must fix our own problems as the state and the feds are disinclined to do so. The key position in doing so is that of the County Prosecutor. I too believe the County Prosecutor and the Sheriff should be nonpartisan offices. I’m looking for the one candidate that is aggressive, willing to rock the apple cart, not beholding to any special interests and or power elite. One who will uphold the law and always keeping in mind that NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
From my other posts in these threads I’ve tried to enlightened the readers that many of their elected and appointed officials are failing to abide by their sworn duties to WE THE PEOPLE. I for one will hold those accountable for their actions at the ballot box. I’m sorry whether the people in this community realize it or not but they are being criminally victimized and as taxpayers robbed by a cancerous criminal enterprise or as more commonly known as organized crime.
km on July 21 at 8:23 p.m.
The non-prosecution of the Savage homicide is pretty disturbing, but honestly I would state that the malfisence (sorry about the spelling) doesn’t hold a candle to lazy Stevens County Prosecutor Tim Rasmussen and his plea bargain on Carole Deleon. You will remember she starved her 7-year old adoptive kid to death - poor Tyler Deleon weighed 28 (twenty-eight) pounds when he died - AT AGE SEVEN. Some people have cats that weigh more. Lazy Tim Rasmussen let her plead to Child Neglect or something like that - not even a homicide!. She was given six years, served three, and got out last spring. How’s that for a miscarriage of justice? But then, lazy Tim used to work for Tucker. Maybe Tucker taught him well.
Ron_the_Cop on July 21 at 9:37 p.m.
KM,
That’s my point. Tucker does not lead by setting a good example. He’s an absentee boss. Good workers will do their job well no matter what and probably appreciate a boss that stays out of their way. On the other hand those on cruise mode have no incentive to perform better.
Whether Tucker was involved or not the prosecution of Jay Olsen, he subordinates could have presented a better case. I have no fault with the jury as the prosecution failed to meet its burden. I’m sure there are other example.
What’s glaring is Tucker has not taken a leading role to deal with the situation of in custody arrests not being arainged on time because the required paperwork is lacking. The result is the people are released and have to be rearrested later and recharged. A complete waste of limited resources.
We have many serious problems in Spokane requiring a leader that takes their job seriously.
Marie on July 21 at 10:01 p.m.
Ron,
As far as I know the Olsen jury has never discussed what their reasoning was when they arrived at a verdict. If you are telling me that in all your years of law enforcement experience you never saw a jury come to a wrong decision, or a decision that was based on sympathy for a defendant, I would be very surprised. There was a recent case in Seattle where a jailer assaulted a teen age girl. The first jury voted 11-1 to convict and the second 11-1 to acquit. My guess is that the prosecutor did a good job both times. Some times jurors just make the wrong call.
Ron_the_Cop on July 21 at 10:17 p.m.
In our system of justice the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. All the defense has to do is to plant that doubt. Of course there is jury nullification e.g., the OJ case.
I’m just saying in the Olsen case the prosecution obviously did not in the minds of the jurors convince them beyond a reasonable doubt. My question is whether the prosecution wanted to win this case or was just going through the motions. My first question is whether there were jurors that were allowed to sit that should have been excluded by the prosecution. The red flag in my mind was the missing dispatch tape from a critical incident. This should never happen. The prosecution called the dispatcher to testify re Pete’s call from the house to 911 re the issue of him admitting to have stolen the car. Why the prosecution didn’t recall the residents of the house to rebut the testimony of the dispatcher in my mind is what sowed the doubt in the minds of the jury.
brianrbreen on July 21 at 11:00 p.m.
Okay Ron,
Now that you have apparently accepted the fact that the State and the Feds aren’t going to touch your case I think it’s fair to assume that all of your investigative materials will be on the winning county prosecutors desk the day he takes office if it isn’t Mr. Tucker. In my learned opinion, here are some of the things you need to establish and consider before you have any hopes of having a prosecutor pursue the “Cowles Gang” for the only applicable state charge I can see based on your allegations, which is the “Criminal Profiteering Act”.
I’m sure you know that the three-year statue of limitations has run on any direct charges of Negligent Homicide in the Savage case. However, it could possibly be used as, one of the three (minimum) acts necessary to establish a pattern of criminal profiteering activity the last of which occurring within five years. The problem is you won’t be able to use the Savage act as the last in five years after May 2011. So, time is a flitting.
I’m sure you also know that should Stacey, Betsy, and whoever else were to be found guilty of “Leading Organized Crime” (RCW 9A.82.060) they could not be charged with the individual acts associated with the establishment of a pattern of criminal profiteering (Savage).
You should be able to use the RPS fiasco, as another one of the acts. Then you may want to consider going back to 1973 prior to Expo 74 and review the property transactions between various Cowles entities and Expo 74 Corporation. If I were you, I’d focus on the properties between Division and Post under the old railway trestles. Come to think of it, you might want to also look into the Cowles association with Emprise Corporation the concessionaire for Expo 74, which was linked to old Detroit Purple Gang and was convicted under federal RICO statues. It would of course be hard to tie Stacey and Betsy back to the 1974 era, but it’s all in the family right. Another problem with the EXPO 74 deal is that there isn’t a lot of people left around that know much about it. You might want to talk to Bill Morlin I know he wrote an article about it way back when he might be able to lead you to the guy that investigated it. Doubt if he would talk though without a subpoena.
Well anyway, I think you need to come up with as many acts the Cowles Gang perpetrated recently just to be safe with emphasis on the need for something within the five-year time frame if you want them convicted of Leading Organized Crime.
brianrbreen on July 21 at 11:01 p.m.
Continued:
Here is the way I look at it; you lay your stuff on the new guys desk January 1, 2011 and he thinks to himself how the heck do I investigate this mess. Well, here are two options you can offer him.
1. Empanel the seldom-used Washington State Grand Jury System.
I’m sure the new guy would know though that not only would you never get all the Spokane County Superior Court Judges to agree to empanel one for this case and the costs to the county tax payers would be huge for the grand jury alone. That’s why it is seldom used.
2. Use an Inquiry Judge.
Less costly than a grand jury, but whether option 1 or 2, as I see it, and as you know I have some experience in this area, the very minimum staffing level would have to be two specifically assigned prosecutors, four investigators, and an analytical/clerical ratio of two to one. That might sound a bit high to you but believe me the Feds would use a lot more people for the type of case, you allege. Realistically one would be looking at well over one hundred inquiry witnesses, who knows how many periphery witnesses, and a junk pot full of various experts. The document and financial analysis would be overwhelming. I think it would be impossible to meet the May 2011 statue run on Savage. Do you have anything after the Savage case you could use? Don’t forget the Cowles Gang has the resources to fight every inquiry subpoena whether it is for an individual or just for documents, so realistically you are looking at a five-year gig here. Since the prosecutor’s office doesn’t have any investigators, they would either have to hire the investigators and the analytical/clerical staff or borrow from Ozzie and Anne. Given the budget crunch, Ozzie and Anne may not be willing to devote any resources. I’m sure you know they can’t hire you for this gig because you have already made very public your bias. As for me, am not interested, and the county couldn’t afford me anyway. In essence, we are talking a pot full of taxpayer’s money here. I hope you have considered that, I’m sure the new guy will (if there is one).
I’m still waiting with baited breath for your endorsement for Spokane County Prosecutor. Be sure and let us all know! As for me, haven’t decided yet but I must say I do have a lot of respect for Chris Bugbee based of course on direct knowledge.
brianrbreen on July 21 at 11:36 p.m.
Ah shucks, I have to be honest Ron,
I just threw the EXPO 74 stuff in to peek your interest. You couldn’t use it because it was prior to July 1985. Although a sharp prosecutor might be able to get it in under court rule 404 (B)
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 5:48 a.m.
Seasoned,
Actually believe it or not I would not put anything on the new prosecutor’s desk. My efforts here are purely to hold Tucker accountable at the ballot box. Read my letters to AG McKenna and Gov Gregoire re using a special prosecutor and perhaps a state grand jury.
As for RICO the federal statute gives more leeway. The statue of limitations from the last overt act is ten years. If you consider the cover up of the Savage death as the last act, the clock starts ticking in April of 09. The federal act only requires two predicate acts to establish the pattern of required criminal activity. The Savage case can be one as an unindicted state offense. It’s virtually pot luck for the other since 2000.
And bare in mind the burden is by preponderance in a civil federal RICO. There would be no burned on the already victimized taxpayers. You bring in a hired gun or paladin - big law firm or firms with a deep bench and fat pocketbook. The motivation - triple damages plus fees/costs. The actual losses so far are $87.5 million dollars. And there are deep pockets at the table that have BILLIONS in assets.
Thanks BTW for the EXPO material. This is useful information to show the pattern of criminal activity through the years by this ongoing criminal enterprise. Here’s one from left field which is a stretch but could involve some of the same players is the arson/murder fire (Fire Captain Hanna was killed fighting this fire) at the old Zukor clothing store (Jamison Building) which later became the STA Transit Plaza. The property staging that went on before this property was sold to the STA is very interesting too.
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 5:58 a.m.
Seasoned,
BTW your former colleagues at the Northtown Mall say hi. Stop by some day around lunch.
In all seriousness yes I know this is an uphill battle but as a seasoned criminal investigator you should know you have to start somewhere. This goes beyond criminal prosecution. This is a political battle to restore a civil government that serves WE THE PEOPLE that empower it.
Ensuring Tucker is not returned to office would be a start. As I said up thread, an aggressive County Prosecutor that’s truly independent of the powers that be who would aggressively seek out political corruption to eliminate the political pawns of the criminal enterprise would put a dent in its activity.
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 6:35 a.m.
Sorry -
There would be no burned on the already victimized taxpayers
burned = burdened
And while were brainstorming on historical events how about the arson fire at the District 81 School Adm building in the year prior to the Zukor Building arson/murder fire in 1980? This property was purchased by the real estate arm of the Cowles Co at the fire sale. This building was where the new Nordstroms is now located at River Park Square.
Coincidental of course.
brianrbreen on July 22 at 8:54 a.m.
Ron,
Very familiar with Federal Civil RICO. You will need some luck finding a firm from around here that is willing to risk an upfront 4-5 million in litigation expense. I can’t think of any east coast firms that I’m associated with that would be willing to either.
You forgot the Tri-State Arson/Murder, might have been something I missed there when I did the dirt transaction analysis.
The Northtown folks will tell you I don’t do lunch, old habit I got into on the job, didn’t want to make a mess for the ME if I was gut shot. Don’t do coffee either strictly tea, better for you. Vegetarian for seven years…sounds liberal eh!
The very limited dealings I have had with Tucker as a prosecutor have been straight up so I have no complaints as far as direct dealings. He’s got a good staff too; I’ve only had problems with one. From my point of view, I’d like to see a prosecutor who has considerable experience on the defense side as well as the prosecution side. Someone who doesn’t take a police report or affidavit as gospel, is willing to tell the investigator to either go out and do more or I’m not signing it up. Someone with some credibility who isn’t afraid to tell Ozzie and Anne they need to correct some things. A little administrative talent would be helpful also.
Just to clarify, Didn’t find anything criminal in the EXPO 74 dirt transactions, as a matter of fact thought some of them were down right philanthropic. Didn’t find any link between the Cowles Gang and Emprise, or the old Detroit Purple Gang either. But maybe you, Tony and Dick et al can find something I missed. The only thing that bothered me was the lack of coverage in the local media about Emprise’s involvement (If I remember correctly Morlin’s was the only article.). It hit all the other papers in the nation and world for that matter, heavy. Emprise skimmed millions but the powers to be didn’t want any bad press for fear the folks wouldn’t show. There were more spooks in this town during that time than we had in Moscow and they had in DC. As far as details are concerned, though you’re going to have to wait for the book to come out (Just kidding no book). You guys might want to review some of the post EXPO litigation it will give you a little bit of insight but not the whole picture.
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 3:04 p.m.
Thx for the info. Actually I power walk at the mall. No coffee for me either. Green tea at Starbucks.
I see the prosecutors’ association has backed Tucker. Hmmm some folks apparently want to maintain the status quo.
Sorry not good enough for me. Tucker’s got to go. I will hold him accountable at the ballot box for his inaction on the Savage case. This is how folks can begin to bring real change to our little berg that needs this cancer growing within it destroyed.
4203 on July 22 at 4:02 p.m.
Seasoned and Ron: Excellent exchange.
Were I a prosecutor in Spokane, I would want to establish dialogue with those experienced Former LE individuals whose initial opinions were even different than mine. Why? The root for our community cancer re: RPS is Tucker’s enlarged/inflated ego. He sees himself as the law even when faced with overwhelming opposite facts repeatedly provided by Bamonte, Shook and Wright. Don’t ever confuse Tucker with the RSP investigated facts when his mind was already made up. It will be a community disgrace if he is re-elected. Tucker needs to retire and ponder those good decisions, those bad decisions, and the disastrous decision he made i.e. RSP while on his watch. And someday, my view, he will come to conclude that by not working with Bamonte and Wright — well it was a big mistake thate will haunt him professionally for many moons to come.
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 7:21 p.m.
[Sorry Ryan but I’m going off thread here for a bit]
Seasoned,
I don’t have the civil case prep experience that you do or the contacts within this segment of the legal community. Most assuredly this case needs to be done by a firm out of this area. Further a federal venue out of the Eastern District of WA would be good too. The wire fraud aspects of this case might be enough to shift it to a more favorable jurisdiction.
This civil RICO case is now ripe to bring as a class action suit on behalf of the defrauded Spokane taxpayers. The RPS Bond Fraud I case is very well developed and is in the can. The work was already done by Tim Connor and Larry Shook that was complied by Gary Ceriani the hired gun of the defrauded institutional bond investors in the civil bond fraud case that never went to trial. This is the case that was bought out by the City to settle the case with the defrauded bondholders of the first bonds.
Ceriani was retained by the City to go after the defendants at the table that had deep pockets. This is the case that was later tanked by Laurel Siddoway, Gavin Gooley and with the knowledge of certain City officials. This was at the core of RPS Bond Fraud II case with the issuance of the second set of bonds. The actual loss to the Spokane taxpayers of both bond frauds is at a minimum $87.5 million dollars. This case is very compelling and I’m willing to bet will be settled without even going to trial. Please feel free to shop this case among your legal contacts.
Marie on July 22 at 10:14 p.m.
Every candidate with the exception of Reierson has said good things about the hard work and dedication of the deputy prosecutors. According to Ron, their association has decided to endorse Tucker for another term. It seems as if that opinion should be given some consideration as a reason to keep Tucker in office.
Ron_the_Cop on July 22 at 10:38 p.m.
Marie,
I would be inclined to agree with you but in this case Tucker needs to go. The reason the union wants Tucker is they want to continue with the status quo. We need change at the top for other reasons beyond the day to day operations of the office and for the folks that like a absentee boss. The good people will continue to do their jobs but they do not set department policy and priorities.
The situation with felony arrests being released because the prosecutors office can’t file the paper work in time is unacceptable. Tucker rolled over on the budget cuts without putting up a fight. Tucker also gave a pass on the Otto Zehm case that the feds are now working. Tucker has problems with telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And finally he covered up a homicide. Time for new blood.
Read my email to Tucker I linked to in my blog post that I mentioned in the first post in this thread for further information.
Ron_the_Cop on July 23 at 10:02 a.m.
To All:
I just released this:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Spokane, WA
July 23, 2010
In view of Spokane Co Prosecutor Steve Tucker’s clarification of his statement of support by AG Rob McKenna and Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich in his bid for reelection, I thought it important to seek clarification of AG McKenna as well. Please see the attached email I just sent to the AG’ Office.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
http://tinyurl.com/2at6g2h
CONCERNEDREADER on July 23 at 3:48 p.m.
Marie “But Tucker, 59, won the support of the union that represents the deputy prosecutors – on a vote of 26-18, with zero going to both Stevens – who was recently fired as a deputy prosecutor – and Malone. Reierson did not attend the union debate. ”
18 of his association voted against keeping Tucker another term - I think that that fact should be given serious consideration as well……
ChefGus/ John Olsen on July 24 at 6:27 a.m.
@ ConcernedReader…. many many of us Have “seriously considered” Mr Tucker and his record and his daily meanderings and have come to the considered opinion, across party lines, and ideologies that it was a mistake to give him a second term… Many of us have been working behind the scenes to get mr Tucker out of office since the time that Mr Burns was interviewed and chosen…It is felt by us all that a third term will cripple our region beyond redemption. We need a prosecutor that Will prosecute effectively and professionally the outlaw uniformed service folks…. and it does not matter if it is Dave Stevens or Frank Malone…. both will do that job…. I just happen to prefer Mr Malone’s experience, balance, community minded heart, and educational background over Mr Stevens. Both of these men are stand up guys…. and either one will need full citizen support and involvement to effect the changes that will make the new ombudsman’s job a model for the nation. We want Justice, not Just Us…. si se puede juan
Ron_the_Cop on July 24 at 8:35 a.m.
Yes there is a consensus across party lines - ChefGus and Ron the Cop on some issues are at opposite ends of the political spectrum but on this one issue we are in complete agreement.
BTW Tucker has been in office for three terms. Tucker is now running for his fourth term.
CONCERNEDREADER on July 24 at 11:39 a.m.
Ron_the_Cop……I am honestly concerned about Frank Malone’s lack of experience … sorry - I have researched and researched all the candidiates and have done so since each candidiate announced- and I am voting and supporting Bugbee - if you would like to hear why or see my research, I’d be happy to email it to you ……
ChefGus/ John Olsen on July 24 at 12:17 p.m.
Mr Malone has a Masters In Business Administration from EWU and 26 years of military leadership retired LtCol and what this job needs is a decision maker that knows how to be an office and budget administrator…. watch the League of Women Voter’s forum and you will learn more….
Ron_the_Cop on August 02 at 2:24 p.m.
UPDATE - See my update on my website:
http://tinyurl.com/2at6g2h
BREAKING - Steve Tucker’s at it again claiming support of Sheriff Knezovich on Tucker’s new website:
Mr. Clouse,
Re: Followup - ur story
Sheriff’s ‘support’ falls in gray area
Steve Tucker just put up a reelection website. Under supporters he’s continuing to list the support of AG McKenna and Sheriff Knezovich. The manner in which this is laid out would support that McKenna/Knezovich is endorsing Tucker. As for McKenna I don’t know as he so far has not responded to my inquiry (See my email here). Some one from the press should follow up on my inquiry to McKenna. Of course you know what Sheriff Knezovich’s position is.
Either Tucker is being incompetent with his campaign or he’s again trying to mislead the voters. I think Tucker should be challenged on this and your readers again informed so they can make an informed choice in the primary election.
Here’s the link to the support tab on his website:
http://reelectstevetucker.com/Supporters.html
[…]
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)