« The Rich are Different | Main | Drugs Did Danny »

Comments (8)

1. Alex Brant-Zawadzki says:
   September 27, 2006 18:09

   Oh merciful powers.
   1) Other media outlets and publications have written unflattering and negative things about the DA's office and Susan Schroeder because we're charged to print the truth.
   2) Susan has 'cooperated' and offered some quotes (offered the way crocodiles offer their teeth to be pulled) to other media outlets and publications BECAUSE THAT'S HER JOB.
   Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop huffing spraypaint.

2. Debby Bodkin says:
   September 27, 2006 19:09

   Congratulations to Steve Marble, the editor of the OC edition of the Times.... when an editor stands by investigative efforts, the freedoms of speech, press and opinion are here to stay. Maybe OC does have a chance to clean up the evil and self-serving philosophies that seem to govern some of the media in the OC.

   I am trying to understand why Ms. Schroeder seems to be "twisting" her professional responsibilities as a licensed attorney at law, who is paid by the citizens of OC, to act on behalf of the OC District Attorney's office, as a PAID public official.

   Attorneys take an oath to uphold the laws of the constitution -- they know the laws of the land -- no exceptions are allowed -- no twisting of the law should be tolerated -- no conflicts of interest can serve the public's interest.

   If Ms. Schroeder delays issuing a personal public apology to Ms. Hanley, lets hope that Mr. Rackauckas as her supervisor and DA of Orange County, will take immediate corrective action.

   There are already too many good, honest and hard working people in the OC who have had to endure the personal, family and career attacks of the rich and politically-connected -- let's hope someone will step up to the plate and stop the vicious cycle of abuses.

   Thanks again to the reporters in the OC who tell it like it is, free from political spin and self-serving agendas. We need you and you should never be bullied or retaliated against for doing your job in the interests of the public's right to be informed.

3. Steve Kane says:
   September 28, 2006 21:09

   If Hanley is, indeed, "telling it like it is," why does the Times assert that she should be immune from criticism rather than respond in detail to refute Schroeder's detailed claims of untruthful reporting and unethical conduct?

   Schroeder's charges are either true or they are false. If they are false, Schroeder should retract them and apologize. If they are true, Hanley should resign or be fired.

   So, Debby, in your simplistic world the "rich and politically connected" are always evil and the "investigative reporters" are always virtuous. It seems that you get your political perspective from a comic book.

   Reporters are not immune from criticism of their ethics and veracity just because they are conducting "investigations." Likewise, attorneys who work for a public agency have a right to expose journalistic misconduct. Maybe it is Hanley who should be investigated, not the OC officials.

   By the way, I live in San Diego and have no axe to grind here.

4. Debby Bodkin says:
   September 29, 2006 07:09

   Steve... you live in San Diego. Living in OC is a COMIC BOOK and no one truly believes how elected officials and the "rich and politically connected" have survived moral, financial and legal accountability for many years.

   Don't get me wrong, there are many "rich and politically connected" individuals who would like to do the right thing and speak out, but fear they would then be ostracized and forced to join the ranks of the non-politically connected. And when you are living in a COMIC BOOK, that is taboo!

   The journalists who provide OC citizens with investigative expertise in reporting potential government, religious or political corruptions are personally and professionally attacked when their findings expose or get close to the "rich and politically-connected" abuses of power in the OC COMIC BOOK.

   Ms. Hanley is just one of a few... if you can find an article written by Ms. Hanley that is a so called "lie", let us all know. The Times is not going to stand for an investigative reporter who "lies". They have a business to run and cannot afford to employ deceitful journalists that will expose it to lawsuits and monetary damages.

   As far as OC officials being investigated, if you can recommend a non-partisan government agency who would be willing to take the wrath for doing so, let us know. Until then, we here in the OC have to depend on investigative reporters from the Times and the Weekly to continue the public's right to be fully informed about POTENTIAL government influences and/or misconduct.

   Unfortunately, we are in another election year so the POLITICAL HACKS and the COMIC BOOK mentality here in the OC are in rare form!!! The OC is a great place to visit but if you believe in freedoms of speech, press and opinion, with accountability from public officials, find another place to set up permanent residence.

   It will be interesting to see what follows this posting.... as my family and I have been experiencing many oddities since we began exercising guaranteed freedoms as Americans.

5. Steve Kane says:
   September 29, 2006 17:09

   What "oddities" are you talking about? Do you think someone is poisoning your milk? I guess the OC establishment is trembling in fear at your accusations, although other than generalties about "religious or political corruptions," you haven't stated any.

   Many do not share your faith in the integrity and competence of the mainstream media. If they are big like the Times, they must be honest, right?

   But, I digress. You have not answered the question of why the Times has not given a detailed response to the specific claims of dishonesty and unethical conduct made by Schroeder. How about some facts among the anger and vitriol? If Hanley acted properly, why doesn't the Times give an explicit rebuttal?

   The OC officials may be clean or they may be dirty, but, either way there is no excuse for journalistic misconduct.

   By the way, in case you haven't noticed, we have had a few problems with public officials here in San Diego lately.

6. Roy Fleming says:
   September 30, 2006 13:09

   Steve, you say the LAT should "respond in detail to refute Schroeder's detailed claims of untruthful reporting and unethical conduct." But Schroeder's allegations are actually quite vague and unsubstantiated, so there is very little to refute.

   In her first charge, Schroeder says Hanley was granted an interview with the DA after she "promised that she would be the only person involved in the story and she would be fair and balanced. … She broke both ground rules." It's not clear what Schroeder means by this. Is she suggesting that Hanley promised that no one else at the LAT would touch the story before it was printed? I find it hard to believe that any reporter would make such a promise, because it's absurd. Editors get involved in every story, and a "public affairs counsel" should know that. But we don't know really what Schroeder means because she doesn't say how Hanley supposedly broke the ground rules. She also doesn't offer any evidence that the story was not "fair and balanced." There's nothing to refute here.

   Schroeder then says Hanley "wrote a story comparing 'four Orange County prosecutors' to gang members when there were no such facts supporting the article. … The deputy district attorneys in the story had done nothing wrong."

   Here's the full text of the story Schroeder is talking about:

   *****
   O.C. Officer Faces Probe in Firing of Gun

   Santa Ana policeman and prosecutors were returning from a Staples Center concert when he allegedly discharged the weapon from their SUV.

   BYLINE: H.G. Reza and Christine Hanley, Times Staff Writers

   A Santa Ana police officer is under criminal and internal investigation for allegedly firing his gun on the freeway while returning from a concert at Staples Center with a group of Orange County prosecutors.

   Officer Derrick Watkins, a gang investigator, is suspected of firing a handgun from a vehicle on the Gardena Freeway near Acacia Avenue in Compton. Santa Ana Police Capt. Bruce Carlson said the May 21 incident occurred at 12:30 a.m., and one witness said it followed a night of drinking at a concert featuring the bands Journey, Styx and REO Speedwagon.
   
   Watkins was in a sport utility vehicle carrying four Orange County prosecutors, a second Santa Ana officer, a criminal defense attorney and the wife of a prosecutor.
   
   It is not clear who reported the shooting. Carlson would say only that "the incident was brought to our attention and then to the Los Angeles County sheriff."

   The sheriff is handling the criminal investigation and Santa Ana police internal affairs officers are investigating possible misconduct. Carlson said the other Santa Ana officer in the SUV is not under investigation.

   In California, it is illegal to discharge a firearm in a grossly negligent manner that could result in injury or death, and for the driver of a car to allow a passenger to discharge a weapon. Both crimes can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or felony, each carrying a penalty of up to three years in prison.

   In the Orange County public defender's office, word of the investigation spread rapidly Friday. Several defense lawyers said they thought it was ironic because gang prosecutors often file charges against gang members simply because they were in a car when another person fired a gun.

   "What this whole situation shows is what we know from our own practice: Sometimes people can get drunk and do stupid things," said Orange County Deputy Public Defender Denise Gragg.

   "Sometimes people are in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it doesn't mean that they're bad people and it doesn't mean that their lives should be destroyed."

   Times staff writer Stuart Pfeifer contributed to this report.

   *****

   The story doesn't compare the OC prosecutors to gang members. (It doesn't even name them, though it could have.) It merely points out what some defense lawyers found ironic about the incident.

   In her third charge, Schroeder says Hanley "wrote a story accusing our office of obstruction of justice and prosecutorial misconduct." Schroeder says the story contained factual errors, but she doesn't say what they were. With no specifics, there is nothing to refute.

   Next, Schroeder says Hanley "harasses people and their families if she decides she does not like them," but she doesn't say what form this harassment takes. Does Hanley make phone calls? That's what reporters do. Schroeder adds, ominously, that Hanley "even went as far as contacting and harassing my family members." But what does that mean? Did Hanley try to call Schroeder at home and get a family member instead? If so, I don't see the problem. Reporters frequently call public officials at home. Maybe there's more to it than that, but Schroeder doesn't say. Instead, she relies on vague implications.

   Schroeder says Hanley "harasses our office and the County requesting nonexistent documents," but, again, gives no examples.

   In her fifth allegation, Schroeder says Hanley "threatens you with legal retaliation if she does not like what you are doing. ... In May 2006, she emailed the LATimes attorney and County Counsel alleging that I was 'spending awful lot of county time …' responding to her articles." Well, Schroeder does seem to spend a lot of time complaining about Hanley's articles. Maybe Schroeder thinks she's just doing her job and setting the record straight. If so, she's not doing it very well.

7. kim P says:
   October 21, 2006 14:10

   Hopefully Hanley is investigating how Susan manages to spend so much time on "vacation" with her "husband". Is it really possible that with her full time taxpayer funded job she gets MONTHS and MONTHS of vacation every year?

   Where are the feds when you need them.

8. P Mensing says:
   February 24, 2007 21:02

   The Orange County District Attorney's Office is a very well organised department. They stick to ethical legal formulas and make their decisions with factual basis ONLY. I state my claim in posting a totally unbiased entry whereby if Ms. Schroeder has allegations directed toward the actions of a reporter, each and every allegation is already backed with a factual basis. Specific examples were given. If anyone in The District Attorney's Office wished for further details, as she did note, she would be happy to provide them to the requestee. The Orange County DA's office is a dirt free streamlined operation. They operate with understanding, are merciful, and when the law allows, will always give first time offenders benefit of any doubt regarding their suggestions in sentancings.
   A reporters function is to sometimes dig up dirt. In this case the reporter was unable to find any, so she made some of her own. The spokesperson for the department objected to this manufactured claim. That is part of the criteria of her job function, to make sure the information the people get is accurate. The spokesperson is having difficulty with a reporter that is printing false information, repeatedly, and makes no success at retraction or correction. If Ms. Schroeder can prove with a factual basis of Ms. Hanley inaccuracies, but Ms. Hanley is unable to back up any of her alegations regarding this department with factual basis, it is pretty simple to see who has done wrong and is just failing, or her newspaper she is employed by is refusing to admit wrongdoing and correct the matter. This by the way WITH FACTUAL BASIS is no new practice by the LATimes and have gotten themselves in trouble many times before. Businesses are run by people, people hire people in the likeness of themselves, and among some of those people, they never seem to even wish to learn the right way to do things.

   The LATimes was much better off before they began
   The Orange County Edition. Back then they only got into trouble by their inaccuracies within LA County.
   I will not say that The Orange County Register is a fantastic newspaper, but at least they are truthfull, and ALWAYS print corrections as need be.
   In my unbiased opinion, The LATimes in general, and especially the Orange County Edition is a lousy newspaper for lack of a better word. Forgive my humor as I see it to be no wonder that they dont print all of their corrections, as they would have to have a separate section to fit them all. I would imagine that there are ways the paper can be useful to everyone. It will surely make a good base for the kitty litter and of course if you have a fireplace, I am certain you would enjoy its value as kindling in the winter.