Tomorrow, Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. in the 409th Distirct Court in front of the Honorable Judge Sam Medrano, Dean Kinder is scheduled for his arraignment. The 409th has very formal arraignments in that the Judge takes the bench, calls the defendant and his lawyer up, hands them a copy of the indictment, asks if they are waiving a reading, and then the lawyer or the defendant will enter a plea of not-guilty. Occasionally the judge will have the defendants fill out waivers at which point no one goes before the bench. In my years of practice in that court, my clients, whether they come from out of town or not, have always had to be present for the arraignment.
The press and the public should come to court tomorrow to make sure that Dean Kinder, like all of the other defendants in the 409th, shows up for his arraignment and is subjected to the same process as everyone else. It will take intense public scrutiny to make sure that the Dean Kinder case stays on course and no one is cutting anyone any back door deals.
Another question that the public should raise with Mayor Cook, City Manager Joyce Wilson and Police Chief Wiles is, why has Dean Kinder not been fired. Why would any City keep on a police officer who has been arrested for aggravated perjury, convicted or not? Do they think this inspires trust in the public? Do they think that we actually believe that any rank and file cop would be kept on under similar circumstances? Do they think that this doesn't reek of corruption?
Dean Kinder and the Legal Process
July 31, 2007, 5:49 amMore on the Dean Kinder case and Grand Juries
July 29, 2007, 8:53 pm
Under Texas law, an individual cannot be prosecuted for a felony unless a jury of his peers, in the form of a Grand Jury, has reviewed the case for probable cause. The Grand Jury is a powerful investigative body and is supposed to be independent, beholden to no one. A Grand Jury can find no probable cause on a case and return a "no bill" or it can find probable cause and return an indictment (a piece of paper with a formal charge) also called a "true bill." If a case is true billed, it is then assigned to a specific court and the prosecution moves forward.
Former vice-president of the police union, Dean Kinder, an officer still on the payroll of the city, was not only arrested for aggravated perjury and let out of jail on a $5,000 personal recognizance bond for the offense of perjury but he has now been formally indicted by a Texas Grand Jury. His case is now in the courts. Who took the Dean Kinder case to the Grand Jury? Not DA Jaime Esparza since he was the one who put Dean Kinder on the stand in the first place to give the very testimony that he is now facing prosecution for allegedly lying about.
This process of bringing Dean Kinder to justice has cost the taxpayers of El Paso County thousands and thousands of dollars and YEARS of time. Why? Because DA Jaime Esparza refused over and over again to do the right thing and drop the case in which Dean Kinder accused Tony Soto of felony assault.
Who took the case against Mr. Soto to the Grand Jury to secure an indictment? Jaime Esparza did. Who then continued with the viscious prosecution of Mr. Soto? Jaime Esparza did. Who lost the case against Mr. Soto? Jaime Esarza did.
El Pasoans had to beat down the doors of the court house to get a Special Prosecutor. This Special Prosecutor then took the case of Dean Kinder to the grand jury to reverse the harm done to Mr. Soto.
How did this abuse happen? It used to be that the Grand Jury convened in a space separate from the DA's office. Since Esparza took office 14 and a half years ago, the Grand Juries now convene INSIDE of Esparza's offices and have lost much of their independence. When they meet in the DA's office and see no one but assistant district attorneys they have, over the years, become nothing but a branch of the DA's office with their power subject to being greatly abused by this cozy set up. It is a well known fact in this county that when the DA wants someone indicted it happens faster than you can shake a stick at. It is also well known that when the DA's office does NOT want someone indicted but is too cowardly to outright decline the case, they take it into the Grand Jury usually in the person of Jaime Esparza's right hand man, ada Marcos Lizarraga. Whenever Lizarraga handles a case before the Grand Jury, you can bet money that it will not be indicted. When the case, usually a controversial one like a police shooting of a mentally ill person is not indicted, the DA's office comes out and says the Grand Jury has spoken as though they had nothing to do with the outcome.
When I become District Attorney, I will restore the Grand Jury to its rightful independence and move it out of the DA's offices. I also pledge never to play games with this powerful body like my opponent has now for years to the great detriment of our legal system and the lives of thousands of people.
Former vice-president of the police union, Dean Kinder, an officer still on the payroll of the city, was not only arrested for aggravated perjury and let out of jail on a $5,000 personal recognizance bond for the offense of perjury but he has now been formally indicted by a Texas Grand Jury. His case is now in the courts. Who took the Dean Kinder case to the Grand Jury? Not DA Jaime Esparza since he was the one who put Dean Kinder on the stand in the first place to give the very testimony that he is now facing prosecution for allegedly lying about.
This process of bringing Dean Kinder to justice has cost the taxpayers of El Paso County thousands and thousands of dollars and YEARS of time. Why? Because DA Jaime Esparza refused over and over again to do the right thing and drop the case in which Dean Kinder accused Tony Soto of felony assault.
Who took the case against Mr. Soto to the Grand Jury to secure an indictment? Jaime Esparza did. Who then continued with the viscious prosecution of Mr. Soto? Jaime Esparza did. Who lost the case against Mr. Soto? Jaime Esarza did.
El Pasoans had to beat down the doors of the court house to get a Special Prosecutor. This Special Prosecutor then took the case of Dean Kinder to the grand jury to reverse the harm done to Mr. Soto.
How did this abuse happen? It used to be that the Grand Jury convened in a space separate from the DA's office. Since Esparza took office 14 and a half years ago, the Grand Juries now convene INSIDE of Esparza's offices and have lost much of their independence. When they meet in the DA's office and see no one but assistant district attorneys they have, over the years, become nothing but a branch of the DA's office with their power subject to being greatly abused by this cozy set up. It is a well known fact in this county that when the DA wants someone indicted it happens faster than you can shake a stick at. It is also well known that when the DA's office does NOT want someone indicted but is too cowardly to outright decline the case, they take it into the Grand Jury usually in the person of Jaime Esparza's right hand man, ada Marcos Lizarraga. Whenever Lizarraga handles a case before the Grand Jury, you can bet money that it will not be indicted. When the case, usually a controversial one like a police shooting of a mentally ill person is not indicted, the DA's office comes out and says the Grand Jury has spoken as though they had nothing to do with the outcome.
When I become District Attorney, I will restore the Grand Jury to its rightful independence and move it out of the DA's offices. I also pledge never to play games with this powerful body like my opponent has now for years to the great detriment of our legal system and the lives of thousands of people.
Court of Inquiry vs. Local Corruption, The Dean Kinder Case
July 25, 2007, 1:38 pm
The People, not the District Attorney, not the County Attorney, not the El Paso Police Department, not the Mayor, not City Council, or the FBI, but the People have struck a blow against local corruption. Last week after almost two years after having been arrested, former El Paso Police Union VP, Dean Kinder, was formally indicted for Aggravated Perjury by an El Paso Grand Jury. Dean Kinder was indicted for alleged perjurious testimony he gave in a trial brought forward by DA Jaime Esparza. The wheels of justice are slow, especially when the Police Department and a Police Chief and a Mayor and City Council and a county attorney and the District Attorney, Jaime Esparza, buck that wheel every inch of the way to protect their own.
But so far the People have plod on. Dean and his officer wife Diane Kinder got into a disgraceful, public argument at a police party now over four years ago. Tony Soto (who works at the Electric Co) and his wife Ana Soto, a police officer, who were both at the party, offered to take Diane Kinder home. When they drove up to the Kinder's house, Dean Kinder approached the car and there ensued a struggle. In the end, Dean Kinder filed felony assault charges against Mr.Soto who was indicted, arrested and taken to trial by Jaime Esparza. Mr. Soto always maintained that it was he who was visciously attacked by Dean Kinder and apparently the jury believed Mr. Soto over Dean Kinder because they found Tony Soto not guilty of the offense.
The Sotos, who had been sorely treated by the police department and the District Attorney's office, then went to local attorneys Ed and Maria Hernandez. Ed Hernandez wrote up their complaint and presented it as a criminal complaint to a then District Court Judge who reviewed it and signed off finding that there was probable cause to initiate a Court of Inquiry.
Court of Inquiry:
A court of inquiry is fancy term for a court led investigation into government corruption usually police and/or District Attorney corruption. A court of inquiry into the alleged perjury of the Kinders against the Sotos and the collusion at the Police Department was conducted by Judge Manny Alvarez from Dallas, TX. For almost two weeks, Judge Alvarez held hearings into the matter where all parties were entitled to an attorney who was was welcome to participate in the hearings. It was a two week probable cause hearing and Dean and Diane Kinder were well represented and also testified. Jaime Esparza's office, in the form of an employee, testified in defense of Esparza's wrongful prosecution of Mr. Soto.
Landmark Decision:
At the end of the hearings, Judge Manny Alvarez made the historical decision to issue arrest warrants. Judge Alavarez found that there was Probable Cause to believe that Dean and Diane Kinder had committed aggravated perjury. Judge Alvarez also made the comment that "the unprofessionalism of the El Paso Police Department should not go unnoted."
Chief Wiles and Mayor Cook:
Chief Wiles testified on behalf of the Kinders. He and Mayor Cook did not fire the Kinders who continue to come to court to testify and accuse citizens of crimes and to make cases. Mayor Cook has no problems with the Kinders accusing his constituents of crimes.
Chief Wiles' matrix:
Chief Wiles has a matrix under which officers are punished according to a grid so that everything is "even-handed." Lying is punishable by termination. What does one have to do as the former head of the union to get fired for lying? Or is the matrix only for the small fry?
Jaime Esparza:
DA Esparza spends his time defending the Kinders and telling the public that his office did nothing wrong by taking the case and trying to felonize and take away the freedom of Mr. Soto for a crime he did not commit. Esparza also spends his time acting like he is surprised that now two public bodies (Judge Alvarez after an exhaustive investigation and a grand jury) have found Probabale Cause that Dean Kinder perjured himself. Why is he so "surprised?"
The Duty of a Prosecutor:
A prosecutor, a District Attorney, is NEVER, EVER supposed to suborn perjury. Esparza should never have accepted the prosecution of the Soto case and when it became obvious what the Kinders were doing, he should have dismissed the case.
There is nothing more dangerous than a lying cop and a dishonest, corrupt District Attorney.
The People, through the courage and sacrifice of Ed and Maria Hernandez and the tenacity of the Sotos and the wisdom of our forefathers who created a tool like the Court of Inquiry, won this round against a corrupt government.
But so far the People have plod on. Dean and his officer wife Diane Kinder got into a disgraceful, public argument at a police party now over four years ago. Tony Soto (who works at the Electric Co) and his wife Ana Soto, a police officer, who were both at the party, offered to take Diane Kinder home. When they drove up to the Kinder's house, Dean Kinder approached the car and there ensued a struggle. In the end, Dean Kinder filed felony assault charges against Mr.Soto who was indicted, arrested and taken to trial by Jaime Esparza. Mr. Soto always maintained that it was he who was visciously attacked by Dean Kinder and apparently the jury believed Mr. Soto over Dean Kinder because they found Tony Soto not guilty of the offense.
The Sotos, who had been sorely treated by the police department and the District Attorney's office, then went to local attorneys Ed and Maria Hernandez. Ed Hernandez wrote up their complaint and presented it as a criminal complaint to a then District Court Judge who reviewed it and signed off finding that there was probable cause to initiate a Court of Inquiry.
Court of Inquiry:
A court of inquiry is fancy term for a court led investigation into government corruption usually police and/or District Attorney corruption. A court of inquiry into the alleged perjury of the Kinders against the Sotos and the collusion at the Police Department was conducted by Judge Manny Alvarez from Dallas, TX. For almost two weeks, Judge Alvarez held hearings into the matter where all parties were entitled to an attorney who was was welcome to participate in the hearings. It was a two week probable cause hearing and Dean and Diane Kinder were well represented and also testified. Jaime Esparza's office, in the form of an employee, testified in defense of Esparza's wrongful prosecution of Mr. Soto.
Landmark Decision:
At the end of the hearings, Judge Manny Alvarez made the historical decision to issue arrest warrants. Judge Alavarez found that there was Probable Cause to believe that Dean and Diane Kinder had committed aggravated perjury. Judge Alvarez also made the comment that "the unprofessionalism of the El Paso Police Department should not go unnoted."
Chief Wiles and Mayor Cook:
Chief Wiles testified on behalf of the Kinders. He and Mayor Cook did not fire the Kinders who continue to come to court to testify and accuse citizens of crimes and to make cases. Mayor Cook has no problems with the Kinders accusing his constituents of crimes.
Chief Wiles' matrix:
Chief Wiles has a matrix under which officers are punished according to a grid so that everything is "even-handed." Lying is punishable by termination. What does one have to do as the former head of the union to get fired for lying? Or is the matrix only for the small fry?
Jaime Esparza:
DA Esparza spends his time defending the Kinders and telling the public that his office did nothing wrong by taking the case and trying to felonize and take away the freedom of Mr. Soto for a crime he did not commit. Esparza also spends his time acting like he is surprised that now two public bodies (Judge Alvarez after an exhaustive investigation and a grand jury) have found Probabale Cause that Dean Kinder perjured himself. Why is he so "surprised?"
The Duty of a Prosecutor:
A prosecutor, a District Attorney, is NEVER, EVER supposed to suborn perjury. Esparza should never have accepted the prosecution of the Soto case and when it became obvious what the Kinders were doing, he should have dismissed the case.
There is nothing more dangerous than a lying cop and a dishonest, corrupt District Attorney.
The People, through the courage and sacrifice of Ed and Maria Hernandez and the tenacity of the Sotos and the wisdom of our forefathers who created a tool like the Court of Inquiry, won this round against a corrupt government.
The Corruption in this Town
July 23, 2007, 5:46 pm
Last week I put up a new meassage on my billboard located on the South side of I-10 just east of the downtown exit. It says, "End Corruption Now." This of course was paid for by the many generous donations I have received from you, my supporters. Also due last week, was my campaign finance report which was filed with the State ethics committee. Things have in fact been busy around here.
For those of us who want to see a change in the District Attorney's Office and who specifically want the incumbent to leave, we have long known about the rampant corruption in this town and how it has not only been promoted but those who have spoken out against it have been tarred and feathered at best or arrested and prosecuted at worst. One of the resounding cries I am hearing with the recent FBI investigations is where is Jaime Esparza and why does it always take outsiders to scrutinize what is going on?
We have heard from County Attorney Jose Rodriguez and others but not a peep out of Jaime Esparza. Why the silence? People in his own office have come up to me asking where he has been on all of this and what he is currently doing about it? I have no answer other than Esparza owes the public his position on the matter and he has once again not been forthcoming on the topic.
Why hasn't the press probed the sitting DA of the last 14.5 years on the corruption supposedly going on under his nose? Where is their role as watchdog in election season?
But the People hear the silence. They know who is who and where they have been? And from what I can tell, El Paso is just plain sick of long time do nothing incumbents and corruption.
For those of us who want to see a change in the District Attorney's Office and who specifically want the incumbent to leave, we have long known about the rampant corruption in this town and how it has not only been promoted but those who have spoken out against it have been tarred and feathered at best or arrested and prosecuted at worst. One of the resounding cries I am hearing with the recent FBI investigations is where is Jaime Esparza and why does it always take outsiders to scrutinize what is going on?
We have heard from County Attorney Jose Rodriguez and others but not a peep out of Jaime Esparza. Why the silence? People in his own office have come up to me asking where he has been on all of this and what he is currently doing about it? I have no answer other than Esparza owes the public his position on the matter and he has once again not been forthcoming on the topic.
Why hasn't the press probed the sitting DA of the last 14.5 years on the corruption supposedly going on under his nose? Where is their role as watchdog in election season?
But the People hear the silence. They know who is who and where they have been? And from what I can tell, El Paso is just plain sick of long time do nothing incumbents and corruption.
Correcting the Record, the July 6, 2007 Border Observer
July 6, 2007, 10:39 am
Today, Friday, July 6, 2007, "The Border Observer" ran an article entitled, "Corruption Carrousel." In that article, I am quoted as saying, amongst other things that, "If illegal acitivity was going on at the county, the attorneys should be the first to be prosecuted. The prosecution should start with the County Attorney himself, Jose Rodriguez, in addition to the Assitant County Attorney assigned to oversee daily activities of the Court, Lee Shapleigh..." I want the record to be very clear in that I did not make this and some of the other comments attributed to me.
The only comments I have made on the FBI Investigation are to be found on this website in the blog I wrote on June 16, 2007 entitled, "Jaime Esparza and the FBI Investigation." Here is what I had to say in its entirety on the subject. Any other language imputed to me in the Border Observer outside of the following is not mine.
"First of all Jose Rodriguez represents the county and its officials in civil matters. He advises Commissioner's Court, reviews and enters into and signs contracts on behalf of the county and represents county entities as well as individuals when they are sued. For example, when Jaime Esparza is sued (which is often) it is Jose Rodriguez' attorneys (usually attorney Anabelle Perez) who represent Esparza in the suits. Jose Rodriguez is also a prosecutor on criminal matters. He prosecutes juvenile cases and all of the hot check cases and deceptive trade practices and illegal dumping cases. Rodriguez is now donning his prosecutor's hat in all of this FBI business and saying that he is going to investigate as well. Investigate what, I am not sure. Is he going to investigate himself? Is he going to investigate his own clients, i.e. County Judge Anthony Cobos, Commissioners Teran and Sarinana, District Clerk Gilbert Sanchez, or contracts that he himself reviewed and entered into on behalf of the county? If these contracts were illegal then why did Rodriguez sign them? One of Mr. Rodriguez' primary responsibilties and duties as an attorney is to advise Commissioner's Court in advance, prior to, that is, whether a contract is legal or not. Naturally that includes reading it, understanding it, the process to award it and conducting his own investigation into it prior to signing it. So if the contracts later on turn out to be illegal, who is at fault? What do we think of attorney's who later say, "I didn't know?" Should Rodriguez be conducting his own investigation since he did sign them? Should Rodriguez be involved at all since the FBI investigation supposedly regards Luther Jones who supported and backed the only opponent Rodriguez has ever had, Rick Porras, and to whom Rodriguez nearly lost. Is this reasonable behavior on the part of Rodriguez? "
I want the reocrd to be clear as to what I have said and most importantly I have not called for an investigation into Ms. Lee Shapleigh for whom I have great respect as an attorney. Ms. Shapleigh has a sterling reputation and I do not and have never attributed political machinations to the legal advice she has rendered to the Court. Lee Shapleigh is above reproach.
I have sent this to the Border Observer so that they may run a proper correction.
The only comments I have made on the FBI Investigation are to be found on this website in the blog I wrote on June 16, 2007 entitled, "Jaime Esparza and the FBI Investigation." Here is what I had to say in its entirety on the subject. Any other language imputed to me in the Border Observer outside of the following is not mine.
"First of all Jose Rodriguez represents the county and its officials in civil matters. He advises Commissioner's Court, reviews and enters into and signs contracts on behalf of the county and represents county entities as well as individuals when they are sued. For example, when Jaime Esparza is sued (which is often) it is Jose Rodriguez' attorneys (usually attorney Anabelle Perez) who represent Esparza in the suits. Jose Rodriguez is also a prosecutor on criminal matters. He prosecutes juvenile cases and all of the hot check cases and deceptive trade practices and illegal dumping cases. Rodriguez is now donning his prosecutor's hat in all of this FBI business and saying that he is going to investigate as well. Investigate what, I am not sure. Is he going to investigate himself? Is he going to investigate his own clients, i.e. County Judge Anthony Cobos, Commissioners Teran and Sarinana, District Clerk Gilbert Sanchez, or contracts that he himself reviewed and entered into on behalf of the county? If these contracts were illegal then why did Rodriguez sign them? One of Mr. Rodriguez' primary responsibilties and duties as an attorney is to advise Commissioner's Court in advance, prior to, that is, whether a contract is legal or not. Naturally that includes reading it, understanding it, the process to award it and conducting his own investigation into it prior to signing it. So if the contracts later on turn out to be illegal, who is at fault? What do we think of attorney's who later say, "I didn't know?" Should Rodriguez be conducting his own investigation since he did sign them? Should Rodriguez be involved at all since the FBI investigation supposedly regards Luther Jones who supported and backed the only opponent Rodriguez has ever had, Rick Porras, and to whom Rodriguez nearly lost. Is this reasonable behavior on the part of Rodriguez? "
I want the reocrd to be clear as to what I have said and most importantly I have not called for an investigation into Ms. Lee Shapleigh for whom I have great respect as an attorney. Ms. Shapleigh has a sterling reputation and I do not and have never attributed political machinations to the legal advice she has rendered to the Court. Lee Shapleigh is above reproach.
I have sent this to the Border Observer so that they may run a proper correction.
Page :
1