DIMS' Constitutionality Still a Question -- Its Unfairness is Not

Last week Judge Montalvo issued a ruling on the Bittakis case and Judge Cardone issued rulings on the Tellez and Terrell cases. In all three cases the Plaintiffs had asked the courts to issue a ruling on the constitutionality of DIMS (an arrest system set up by Jaime Esparza whereby he decides who goes to jail and who does not, i.e. Joe Wardy at airport with a gun does not. Mark Bittakis at the airport with laundry soap does.) The point of that request was so that if the court had said DIMS was unconstitutional then the defendants, i.e. Esparza, could take the ruling up on appeal, maybe all the way up to the Supreme Court. What happened is that both judges refused to rule on the program's constitutionality. They said the plaintiffs had not properly put the issues before the courts and therefore they were not ruling on it. It was reported by the press that contrary to the Courts saying that they were not ruling on the constitutionality of DIMS, Jaime Esparza said that the courts had ruled on DIMS and declared it constitutional, or if those were not his exact words, he had left the reporters with the impression that that was what the courts had ruled. If the press properly reported the above, then Esparza has once again put his credibility at serious, serious issue. I often ask myself why Esparza does not just tell the truth. Politicians who lie to the public do not deserve to hold office. If we had a strong legal bar it would move to impeach prosecutors who lie to the public and who lie to the courts. What IS well-settled is that DIMS, "constitutional" or not, is a very bad system (keep in mind that slavery was taken up to the Supreme Court and upheld. It took a civil war to make it unconstitutional). Under DIMS, Jaime Esparza had made himself the gatekeeper of who goes to jail and who does not. There is no wonder why Esparza clings to this power as if he were holding a newborn in a storm. DIMS dictates that the police just make their arrests. Esparza has castrated the police. The Joe-Wardy at-the-airport-with-a-gun case is the clearest example of how bad DIMS is. That offense was committed in violation of state law in the presence of police. If Esparza had not gotten involved, Wardy would have been arrested by the police and taken to jail just like everyone else. But because the police need Esparza's permission before the can proceed under DIMS Wardy got a "Do Not Go to Jail" card issued by card dealer Esparza. Esparza has created two El Pasos: one for us and one for his friends. What Esparza has failed to understand each and every time is the while he is spinning his yarns on what the judge ruled or who is setting bonds or who didn't get raped by cops or why he pays his personal secretary, Amy Lujan, tens of thosusnads of dollars over her salary, or why he throws some people in jail and not others, the PEOPLE UNDERSTAND. The people know what the bottom of Esparza's boot feels like. Woe to Esparza for thinking he could try and get the People to believe that being ground into his heel is their natural condition. While he tell us, "let them eat cake" the people are getting their pitch forks ready.

P.S. I got yet another call on Friday from someone who had been polled. After she answered the question that she had an unfavorable opinion of Esparza she was rudely interrupted. What happened?