What follows are questions that the El Paso Times has submitted to me to answer for a story they say they are doing. Because I have been misquoted and vilified by the Times in the past and because Dionicio Flores, the editor, wrote in an editorial in November 2007, just three months ago, that my campaign would be "grist" for future editorials, I only deal with the Times in writing if I deal with them at all.
Here are the questions posed to me and my answers.
1) A year ago you told me if elected to office you would put an end to the "illegal system of DIMS." Is that still your plan and why do you think DIMS is illegal?
Answer: Doing away with DIMS will be my first act in office for the citizens of El Paso County. DIMS is illegal because the District Attorney has put himself in the place of the judge; my opponent sets bonds and makes arrest approval decisions. Setting bonds and making arrest approval determinations are the function of a judge and not the DA. Fifth graders know this. Under DIMS a person is jailed without seeing a judge and the DA sets the bond. DIMS is also illegal because it has created two legal systems in El Paso. According to my opponent's DIMS manual which he wrote himself the following persons are exempt from DIMS. I quote from the manual, "Non DIMS CASES: Cases involving employees of the District Attorney's Office. Cases that involve a public official." The public needs to know this. In this country there is one law and it is supposed to apply equally to everyone. My opponent treats people in power specially.
2) Campaign Contribution reports indicate your opponent has raised more money than you have. Do you think you are getting the financial support you need to run an effective campaign?
Answer: I have raised thousands of dollars which combined with my own resources have enabled me to get my message out through direct mailouts, a billboard, signs, cards, website and newspaper ads. I have spent my contributors' money honestly and wisely in getting my message out. My opponent has used his money to contribute to other politicians' campaigns (some of them targets of the FBI investigation) and to pay for $320 meals at fancy restaurants in Mexico City. It's all about how you spend your money. The fact that people know my name, that I am running for District Attorney and that I want to clean up this town shows me that I have been very effective. I have also used my own shoe leather to walk El Paso precincts all over town. I have many supporters who help me every day to get my message out. The debate I did on KVIA resulted in more people calling me to offer their support and help.
3) How do you think your campaign is going so far? What is your campaign platform?
Answer: My campaign is going very well and gaining more support every day. My campaign platform is to:
a) Restore the rule of law to the District Attorney's Office: One law for everyone. Get rid of DIMS.
b) Set up a special mental health unit to properly evaluate cases involving the mentally ill.
c) Set up a special financial crimes unit with accountants and lawyers with financial forensic expertise to investigate local public corruption at the taxing entities and entities like the Housing Authority.
d) Reform the corrupted grand jury process. House them in a neutral place, properly train grand juries and discontinue my opponent's policy of using the grand jury as a weapon and restricting the public's access to the grand jury.
e)Take citizen complaints directly from the public: Encourage citizen whistle-blowers to come forward and report corruption and crime.
f) Make it unneccessary for the federal government to have to step into local politics by investigating and prosecuting corruption myself as your next District Attorney.
g) Give the accused a fair trial and be even handed with the power vested in me by the public.
h)Convene a grand jury to investigate public corruption.
4)What do you think are the top three issues in this race?
Answer:
-DIMS and the erosion of the constitution and our checks and balances in the arrest process that my opponent has created and nurtured for years.
-Public corruption going unaddressed for years by my opponent.
-A properly trained DA staff to investigate and prosecute the crimes facing this community and destroying this community, i.e. public corruption and the fleecing of the taxpayers. The public needs to understand that public corruption simply means that our politicians are stealing our money by selling their votes to engorge their friends' pockets (voting to pass bonds and certificates of obligation on the public). This increases our already crushing tax burden which in turn is driving people out of El Paso and out of their homes.
Theresa Caballero
Questions from the El Paso Times
January 29, 2008, 5:49 pmKVIA-7 Debate
January 29, 2008, 6:59 am
Last night on Channel 7-KVIA, Theresa Caballero won the first television debate against Esparza. If you missed it, don't despair as you can still view it on line in its entirety at KVIA.com. She not only looked more "prosecutorial" than he did but she also spoke better, told the truth and proved herself to be the much better candidate by far. It was obvious that Esparza has been in office way too long. His canned responses were laughable.
Esparza got caught not telling the truth to us about what the Federal courts said about DIMS. When Theresa pulled out the actual court opinion and read from the Federal court's Terrell opinion on live TV Esparza was shown to be not telling the truth on that point. He looked real bad when he kept saying look at page 10, look at page 10. After all, Theresa was reading the actual holding of the court in that case. He looked like he did not know what he was talking about. In comparison, Theresa looked well prepared and had the documentation with her to support her position like she always does. That is what you want in a lawyer and a District Attorney!
Gary Warner did an excellent job. His questions were knowledge-based and probing on the issues. Theresa did a great job as well. Her demeanor was very Madam District Attorney-like. She spoke well, knew all the issues, was never stumped for an answer like Esparza was. Esparza was choppy, defensive and evasive. He could not and did not answer Theresa's question about how in the world he could be cooperating with the Feds on the public corruption investigation (as he stated that he was at a forum last week) when he is both accepting and giving money to the major targets of that investigation within the last 14 month. Go read his campaign finance reports from the last few years. They are very telling as to who gives him money and who he gives his campaign money to and go a long way in explaining why HE did not do anything about public corruption in this county.
Esparza floundered around on why he did not know of or investigate the public corruption himself; he had excuse after excuse (none plausible) as to why he didn't. Theresa then pointed out that he must be either incompetent or people are afraid to report corruption to him because of his history of arresting whistle-blowers. She cited as only two examples former number two El Paso Police Officer George DeAngelis and Nancy Hollebeke, two people who reported corruption to him and who he then turned around and had arrested, indicted and prosecuted. The City ended up having to pay Mr. DeAngelis a nice, hefty sum of our taxpayer money to compensate him for what Esparza did to him. In the case of Ms. Hollebeke the last word in that case was Esparza's own attorney, The El Paso County Attorney's Office, admitting in a court document in the expunction case that Esparza set her up from the very beginning and that she should never have been arrested or charged in the first place.
Esparza claims to be proud of his 16 years in office. Experience only counts, however, if it works well for the community. After 16 years one would think Esparza would know how to try a case, get a conviction and make it stick. But, alas, that, too, is not the case because interestingly enough, and also on KVIA-7 last night at 10:00 p.m. was a story about the Capital Murder case of David Renteria. Gary Warner told us on the air, how the Court of Appeals threw out Renteria's conviction because Esparza himself (yes, he tried the case himself; he was the trial attorney) misled the jury and left them with a false impression. Shame on him. He should know better after 16 years! But he doesn't. Because of his misconduct the case has to be re-tried. This will cost the County of El Paso untold thousands of dollars in costs to re-try it and will cause the Flores family additional unecessary anguish as the issue is still unresolved. Also interestingly enough, Esparza is not even fixing his own mistake and re-trying the case himself but sending someone else in to re-try it for him. Theresa is an experienced former prosecutor and trial attorney, She knows how to try a case and make it stick. 16 years is more than enough of Esparza. It is high time for a change. He has fooled the people for 16 years and imposed this bad, terrible system of DIMS on us for years. Do not be fooled any longer.
Theresa also pointed out how under Esparza's DIMS system it delays the police getting back out on the street after they arrest someone as now, because of Esparza, they have to make two stops (one to Esparza's office and one to the judge) instead of only one to the judge as is true in every other county in Texas and how he has created two El Pasos. One El Paso is for his friends and connected people and one El Paso is for the rest of us. She pointed out how there are exceptions to DIMS by Esparza's very own written policies on it: Esparza and all members of his office and all public officials are NOT subject to DIMS (THEY get to go before a judge like the law mandates). Only the rest of us are subject to DIMS.
Theresa will make a wonderful District Attorney for this community. She will clean up this town. She will do away with DIMS as her first act in office. This will result in a cost saving of hundreds of thousands of dollars to the taxpayers of this community who are bleeding and will result in the re-imposition of a fair justice system in this County where all people are treated fairly and according to the law and the U.S. Constitution and not just Esparza, all his employees and public officials! That is why I am proud to support her. Please join me in voting for her on March 4, 2008!
Esparza got caught not telling the truth to us about what the Federal courts said about DIMS. When Theresa pulled out the actual court opinion and read from the Federal court's Terrell opinion on live TV Esparza was shown to be not telling the truth on that point. He looked real bad when he kept saying look at page 10, look at page 10. After all, Theresa was reading the actual holding of the court in that case. He looked like he did not know what he was talking about. In comparison, Theresa looked well prepared and had the documentation with her to support her position like she always does. That is what you want in a lawyer and a District Attorney!
Gary Warner did an excellent job. His questions were knowledge-based and probing on the issues. Theresa did a great job as well. Her demeanor was very Madam District Attorney-like. She spoke well, knew all the issues, was never stumped for an answer like Esparza was. Esparza was choppy, defensive and evasive. He could not and did not answer Theresa's question about how in the world he could be cooperating with the Feds on the public corruption investigation (as he stated that he was at a forum last week) when he is both accepting and giving money to the major targets of that investigation within the last 14 month. Go read his campaign finance reports from the last few years. They are very telling as to who gives him money and who he gives his campaign money to and go a long way in explaining why HE did not do anything about public corruption in this county.
Esparza floundered around on why he did not know of or investigate the public corruption himself; he had excuse after excuse (none plausible) as to why he didn't. Theresa then pointed out that he must be either incompetent or people are afraid to report corruption to him because of his history of arresting whistle-blowers. She cited as only two examples former number two El Paso Police Officer George DeAngelis and Nancy Hollebeke, two people who reported corruption to him and who he then turned around and had arrested, indicted and prosecuted. The City ended up having to pay Mr. DeAngelis a nice, hefty sum of our taxpayer money to compensate him for what Esparza did to him. In the case of Ms. Hollebeke the last word in that case was Esparza's own attorney, The El Paso County Attorney's Office, admitting in a court document in the expunction case that Esparza set her up from the very beginning and that she should never have been arrested or charged in the first place.
Esparza claims to be proud of his 16 years in office. Experience only counts, however, if it works well for the community. After 16 years one would think Esparza would know how to try a case, get a conviction and make it stick. But, alas, that, too, is not the case because interestingly enough, and also on KVIA-7 last night at 10:00 p.m. was a story about the Capital Murder case of David Renteria. Gary Warner told us on the air, how the Court of Appeals threw out Renteria's conviction because Esparza himself (yes, he tried the case himself; he was the trial attorney) misled the jury and left them with a false impression. Shame on him. He should know better after 16 years! But he doesn't. Because of his misconduct the case has to be re-tried. This will cost the County of El Paso untold thousands of dollars in costs to re-try it and will cause the Flores family additional unecessary anguish as the issue is still unresolved. Also interestingly enough, Esparza is not even fixing his own mistake and re-trying the case himself but sending someone else in to re-try it for him. Theresa is an experienced former prosecutor and trial attorney, She knows how to try a case and make it stick. 16 years is more than enough of Esparza. It is high time for a change. He has fooled the people for 16 years and imposed this bad, terrible system of DIMS on us for years. Do not be fooled any longer.
Theresa also pointed out how under Esparza's DIMS system it delays the police getting back out on the street after they arrest someone as now, because of Esparza, they have to make two stops (one to Esparza's office and one to the judge) instead of only one to the judge as is true in every other county in Texas and how he has created two El Pasos. One El Paso is for his friends and connected people and one El Paso is for the rest of us. She pointed out how there are exceptions to DIMS by Esparza's very own written policies on it: Esparza and all members of his office and all public officials are NOT subject to DIMS (THEY get to go before a judge like the law mandates). Only the rest of us are subject to DIMS.
Theresa will make a wonderful District Attorney for this community. She will clean up this town. She will do away with DIMS as her first act in office. This will result in a cost saving of hundreds of thousands of dollars to the taxpayers of this community who are bleeding and will result in the re-imposition of a fair justice system in this County where all people are treated fairly and according to the law and the U.S. Constitution and not just Esparza, all his employees and public officials! That is why I am proud to support her. Please join me in voting for her on March 4, 2008!
Page :
1