I received an awful email this Saturday morning, at 1:30 am, from Dan Avery, the unhinged blogger in Mission Viejo who has been stalking me since this blog helped to recall his buddy, Lance MacLean, from the Mission Viejo City Council.
Here is Dan’s email, which I had to censor due to his proclivity for using curse words:
Let’s see if you actually have some balls and give a sh*t, Art.
Gilbert’s little friend Francis just intentionally ran his car into planning commission Rick Sandzimier and Commissioner Sandzimier is pressing charges. You and Gilbert run with a really f**king class bunch.
I saw that note on Saturday morning, but had to teach a class so I did not follow up on it right away. I did call my blogger Larry Gilbert later in the day, and asked him who was Francis and what the heck this was all about.
Gilbert then explained that Dan likes to refer to Mission Viejo activist Joe Holtzman by his given name of “Francis.” Then Gilbert told me that apparently Mission Viejo Council candidate Rick Sandzimier got caught putting up signs on private property, without permission, and he ended up running into Holtzman’s car.
Today I spoke to Mr. Holtzman about the incident. Holtzman, said he was out on Saturday morning, at 12:16 am. He was leaving a Mission Viejo football game. He then saw Rick Sandzimier’s SUV, pulling into an HOA on Los Aliso and Marguerite, called Pine Crest.
CORRECTION: After spotting a discrepancy in the above referenced timing Joe Holtzman called me. If our two MV attorney’s Willis and Woodward had spent a few minutes in discovery they would have noticed the error. I received an email from Mr. Holtman describing the incident with Sandzimier at 12:16:47 a.m. Therefore I know for a fact that Joe was home at that time. The Sheriff’s blotter should have been checked by W & W. The Blotter clearly reports dispatch receiving a call at 10:51:57 on Friday evening. Therefore Joe did not leave the foo0tball game on Saturday morning unless he returned to an empty parking lot to meditate. Larry Gilbert
Followed Rick, he turned right on Los Alisos. Joe honked his horn.
Holtzman saw Sandzimier pounding in the sign, into private propoerty, and so Holtzman pulled over to have a look.
Sandzimier pulled out his phone, then ran up to Holtzman’s car, swiped at the headlight, then tumbled onto the parked car, hitting it with his hip.
Joe then got out and asked what are you doing? Sandzimier then swiped at Joe, who dodged, then they both called the cops.
A neary resident named John said he heard Rick yelling, but he did not see the incident. There were no other witnesses.
The cops showed up and took reports.
Both Sandzimier and Holtzman declined to arrest each other.
I waited to see if the O.C. Register was going to cover this story, before tackling it myself. They finally posted it a couple of hours ago.
The Register reported that Sandzimier is “taking this seriously.” They failed to report that there were no witnesses. Apparently he has a bruise, but good luck proving it wasn’t self-inflicted. Click here to read their article.
As one might expect, the Voice of OC pitched in with a post too, and yes it was one-sided. In the post Sandzimier whines about another incident where Holtzman supposedly approached Sandzimier and his kids to talk about a Sandzimier sign in a tree. But Holtzman says it was Sandzimier who approached him. And Holtzman did take a picture of the sign, and the tree, in question, which is atop this post.
Who is Rick Sandzimier? Well, he was appointed to the Mission Viejo Planning Commission by…none other than Lance MacLean. It looks like Sandzimier is continuing in MacLean’s tradition of being a hothead.
To make matters worse, Sandzimier is an urban planner and there have been allegations of conflict of interest with regard to his work on the M.V. Planning Commission.
Why Sandzimier thinks signs will get him elected is a very good question. But the one question we all need an answer to is why is this candidate trespassing on private property and putting up his signs without permission to do so? Neither the Register nor the Voice of OC asked him that question. The quality of OC’s reporters isn’t what it used to be…
Art, as you are aware, this story is seriously at odds with the one published in the Register today – I am happy that you posted the link to the other story. There are a few obvious holes in Mr. Holtzman’s story that raise questions about his credibility.
First, he was “leaving” a Mission Viejo High School Football game at 12:16 a.m. when the game was over at 10:06 – that was either a great post game tail gate party or Mr. Holtzman was out and about for other reasons.
Second, the police report show that Mr. Sandzimier called the police and there is nothing in the report that indicates that Mr. Holtzman ever called the police. In fact, as documented in the OC Register story, Mr. Sandzimier actually called the police while he was being followed by Mr. Holtzman’s SUV and BEFORE Mr. Sandzimier was even aware that the driver of the car was Mr. Holtzman.
Third, there is nothing in the report supporting Mr. Holtzman’s claim that Mr. Sandzimier “fell onto” Mr. Holtzman’s car. Frankly, between Mr. Holtzman nudging Mr. Sandzimier with his bumper and Mr. Sandzimier impaling himself on Mr. Holtzman’s car I think that one scenario is inherently more credible than the other, but you can draw your own conclusion and time will bring out the truth.
Finally, the post above gives no basis to support the supposition that Mr. Sandzimier was in fact trespassing. The signs in question were on private property and could legally be posted with the owner’s permission. Mr. Holtzman is either lying about being on the way home from the football game, or he had no way of knowing whether Mr. Sandzimier was in fact trespassing at the time Mr. Holtzman “fell on his car like a drunk” and yelled out about the alleged trespass.
The post above also fails to note that Mr. Holtzman has no position with the City of Mission Viejo, official or otherwise, and had no legal basis to be following Mr. Sandzimier. If Mr. Holtzman was really concerned about Mr. Sandzimier’s alleged trespass onto the property of some third person, then Mr. Holtzman should have called the police instead of trying to take the law into his own hands.
Obviously what this is really about is Mr. Holtzman’s political opposition to Mr. Sandzimier and his unwillingness to follow the rule of law. Mr. Holtzman has a long history of attempting to direct local code enforcement efforts and evidently has now become delusional enough to think that he is the law.
I hope that the blogs do a little better job of “reporting” than the one-sided white washing that we have seen so far. More importantly, I hope that the “naysayers” led by Mr. Holtzman can control themselves before anyone winds up in the hospital again because of their over zealousness of that group.
Geoff. You are so quick to point fingers I question how you became a successful attorney.
Your comment that Joe was leaving the game at 12:16 a.m. shows how sloppy and blinded you can become.
The police incident report was at 10:57:51. Are you saying that Joe went back to the empty stadium to meditate?
Very careless on your part. Not sure if I would retain your services if the need arises.
Just a warning Larry, slander of profession is libel per se and does not require proof of malice.
Geoff. What is the reported time on the Police Blotter? Did you bother to question the discrepancy?
Most of my day yesterday was dedicated to a candidate interview and posting it on the Juice.
Further, to avoid allegations of favoritism by my coverage, Art reported the story about this “he said, he said” incident in our city.
This reminds me of Wag the Dog. It must be a slow news week for the blogs.
Art,
So the Register and Voice’s articles are one-sided and they failed to present Mr. Holtzman’s side? Oh, wait, you must have missed this from the Register article that you linked to: “Holtzman, who was reached by phone at his home Monday morning, declined to comment Monday on the matter, stating he would be available Wednesday for comment.” And this part of the Voice article must have just slipped your review, “Holtzman was evasive when interviewed Sunday by a reporter about the alleged incident. He would not confirm or deny specific details, except to say that Sandzimier’s accusations were ‘nonsense.'” But YOUR post does only present one side, and fails to mention whether you even attempted to contact Mr. Sandzimier for his side of things, or even to address Mr. Holtzman’s allegations.
By the way, did you even bother to ask Mr. Holtzman why he was leaving at 12:16 a.m. (pretty exact time) from a Mission Viejo football game that started at 7:30 p.m. and didn’t go into overtime? Did you ask him how he just “happened” to see Mr. Sandzimier pulling into an HOA that was only 4 miles from the stadium? Did you press him at all on the highly unlikely scenario that Mr. Holtzman was driving home from a football game that ended at least an hour-and-a-half to two hours earlier, that he traveled only 4 miles during that time, that he randomly happened upon Mr. Sandzimier pulling into an HOA and that it was only then that he began following Mr. Sandzimier? Don’t worry, these are rhetorical questions. Did you even put any thought into making the title of the blog even remotely close to the real topic of the blog? Mr. Holtzman alleges that Mr. Sandzimier was trespassing (with no facts from you in the blog to support that allegation), but that has nothing to do with whether Mr. Holtzman assaulted Mr. Sandzimier – you have no facts at all as to whether Mr. Holtzman made a trespassing complaint against Mr. Sandzimier.
Oh, and you know where you claim that the Register article, “failed to report that there were no witnesses”? Well, I guess you missed the part in the article you link to above (buried way in the second sentence) where it says, “Sheriff officials said THERE WERE NO WITNESSES to the alleged assault.” (emphasis mine.)
So, you hastily put together a shoddy piece of work that: (1) incorrectly maligns the Register and Voice for not presenting Mr. Holtzman’s siden even though both attempted to get his side (which apparently is available to you today, but not to the Register until Wednesday – nice scoop); (2) demonstrates that you didn’t even read the very articles you claim are biased; and (3) maligns Mr. Sandzimier on an issue that has nothing to do with the purported assault – his alleged conflict of interest while serving on the Planning Commission (oh, and without a shred of evidence to support the claim other than the convenient and self-serving cloak of “allegations.”)
Wow Art, let me know if I have missed anything.
Newbie.
Joe contacted me to point out an error in the post that you should have caught. He was at the scene at around 11 p.m. as reported on the police blotter. He sent me an e-mail of the run in with Rick at 12:16:47 p.m. You are welcome to come to my home and I will show it to you on this computer or show you a copy at our local coffee shop.
He was leaving at 12:16 does not match up with the police report. Leaving from where at that time?
Larry,
I’m fine with your representation – Art’s story does say, “Holtzman, said he was out on Saturday morning, at 12:16 am. He was leaving a Mission Viejo football game.” The timing was just one of the many errors in Art’s story that I and others were pointing out.
he with the most signs loses
deadwhitemale.
Based on the 460s I guess Rick becomes a loser
The title of this article should be: Joe Holtzman assaults man with vehicle. What an out-of-control bunch of nut-jobs these watchdogs are. So full of anger that they end up hitting people with their cars after stalking them in the dark. Very scary stuff.
Paul. Were you a witness to this “he said, he said” episode? If not, you are irrelevant to the truth of the altercation.
One more interesting inconsistency. The sign in the picture above looks to be in the trees on the hill behind the North Mission Viejo Little League Fields – an unlikely place for a late night encounter with a car.
Geoff.
Once again you disappoint me, especially as you live on the other side of Bagels and Brew from our house and could have seen the banner facing Alicia Parkway just off Olympiad.
Joe and I were having our weekly coffee there and spotted the Sandzimier sign on a tree that was in front of the wall on MVEA association property. I have no idea how anyone climbed the tree to hang the banner but I went home, got my camera and took several photos which were sent to the HOA landscaper who removed the illegally placed banner the next morning.
You are so quick to point fingers without any topic knowledge.
If called upon I will gladly testify to the truth of this statement. Would you in regards to your wild assertion?
The photo in the post was from my camera. Would you like to see the camera?
Larry, you make me laugh. What you fail to tell anybody is that you and Joe Holtzman took that picture because the sign was prominently displayed and was effectively getting attention; very similar to the 4-times larger banner that was hung by your candidate Brian Skalsky only 500 feet away on a similar tree canopy extending into the public sidewalk. You don’t mention how Rhonda your other candidate has been posting signs in the MVEA parkways. You also don’t mention anything about Joe yelling at me in the middle of Bagels and Brew that he had a picture of me up in the tree hanging the SANDZIMIER sign but when I said I would love to see that photo nothing has been produced. You and I know that photo does not exist; for all we know Joe climbed on your shoulders and into that tree himself, just so you could take alarmist photos for more of your theatrical blogs. Happy posting, and for me I plan to keep on laughing, maybe all the way to the bank.
(in case you choose not to post this, I have made a copy and will post elsewhere as appropriate)
Poor Rick.
I just don’t understand your angst.
You trespassed on MVEA property to hang your illegally dispayed banner. I took several photos for the association files.
Brian Skalsky’s banner, displayed around the corner from your house, was inside the property line of the homeowner. I guess you wish to overlook that minor factoid and was jealous as your house backs up to Alicia but is blocked by the association trees.
Somehow it was stolen overnight but Brian has not filed a police report or contacted me to cry about it.
We’re shaking in our boots that you will post your comment elsewhere. Give it to Dan Avery.
As you are so unahppy with me why are you wasting time when you should be out working to finish fourth with three open seats.
You surely have another 1,000 campaign signs to put out on city property or unauthorized HOA land that will be useless in three weeks.
Wait a minute. You can try again in 2012. Save them.
You need to talk to our city manager who on ocassion will remind me to do my homework when writing. Truth be told he knows I do my research and retain city records that he legally shreds every year.
I did not mention your meeting with Joe while you had your family with you at Bagels and Brew as I wasn’t there. Therefore unless you can produce an audio tape for me I have no way of confirming what was discussed by either of you.
Did you file a police report on that meeting?
And to tell you the truth I have no interest in following your career after witnessing your lying about not being employed by a city vendor at the Casta Forum attended by 200 residents last Sunday.
“I talk to the trees….but the trees don’t listen to me…..I talk to them all……this way!”
Bud Dashell recorded that in 1960.
Anyway, what a creative weirdo……someone probably told him to go “Climb a Rock!” and
he couldn’t find one handy!
How is it possible that Dr. Joe was in the right place at the wrong time – to get the photo?
Funny!
R & A.
Joe did not take a photo of this event. The photo which I took was a week or so back when we spotted a Sandzimier banner illegally up a tree on association property. Joe H is a MVEA HOA delegate and previously served on their landscape committee when the tree in question was planted.
grow up all of you! snide remarks about Lance are not really necessary are they?
Colin.
And its OK to write stories attacking Joe Holtzman when none of the people adding comments except Rick were there.
Get over it. Stop wasting everyones time reintroducing the Murder on the Orient Express. Candidates have 21 days left to make their case.
And to give the impression that the sky is falling reminds me of a man who could make that argument. Winston Churchill who endured the 1940,41 London Blitz yet cried less than most of those adding comments about this drummed up for sympathy major MV story of the day. “He said, he said.” And to repeat. There were no witnesses.
While we track the number of Juice stories, comments and hits some of these comments are a total waste of time and should be sent to the trash can.
“Sent to the trash can”…. Right
And Joe tells everyone he can’t comment until Wednesday on the story. He is in hot water and you and your team know it.
Man attacks car, that is a hoot……….
MV Watcher,
I seem to recall that Rick’s mentor, Lance MacLean, once attacked someone too…
MV Watcher. Why don’t you send your remarks about this episode to the Register? Oh. They won’t publish your comments but you seem to feel that we owe you a soapbox?
Don’t SPAM my posts.
If you have something to add that addresses the topic make your point but refrain from becoming a broken record and expect us to jump through hoops to respond every time you wish to vent. Don’t test me and expect future comments to appear on my stories.
I’ve said it before and will repeat it for you now. I will not be your personal pinanta.
Hey Larry………..I was not attacking Rick………….AND BEFORE YOU QUOTE CHURCHILL GET SOME INFORMATION ON HIM FIRST.!
Colin. Once again. If you continue to beat the drum with the same comments I will have to consider your comments as SPAM and delete them accordingly.
Like I delete yours?
Vern. Don’t let this Juice commentor get behind the wheel tonight. He’s had one too many
This is such old news. I read it on Avery’s site Saturday morning. The same story, except Art, he got the details correct, as did the Register and the Voice of OC. You folks are pathetically tossing gas on the burning fire that’s Holtzman. You should just shut up because this thing has gone viral and you look foolish.
LBM.
Got the details correct? LBM is Dan Avery or his shadow trying to get some hits on his lame web site.
There are only two people who know the truth. Dan Avery and LBN are biased and were not at the scene. As such we have a credibility factor to contend with.
Art spoke directly to Joe Holtzman and posted that exchange.
It was only a matter of time before the guerilla tactics used by Mr. Holtzman and the other Naysayers came back to haunt them. This post was a feeble attempt to get ahead of the story and its accuracy has been attacked in these responses by a member of the Naysayers group, Mr. Gilbert. As time moves forward, more and more inaccuracies come to light exposing this post as the white washing that it is. The “man attacks car” angle is about as believable as Jim Carey attacking himself in the bathroom in Liar LIar. Come to think of it, that would be a great new headline for this post – Liar Liar.
Geoff.
Inaccuracies? Feel free to join the debate as this has become one of our lead stories.
Amazing that you are now an expert on something that happened a few miles from our homes. Therefore, not being there, you could neither see nor hear any of what transpired. How does that play out in the courtroom?
You are an expert witness from your crystal ball?
Larry,
In reference to your correction to the story above, rather than putting the onus on Geoff and I to get the facts, you should be addressing your comments to Art as it was he who put the erroneous fact in the story, and not us. You have stated in a related post that you believe the Juice is a news outlet. If that is the case, it should be held to the high standards of reporting, including insuring the accuracy of the reporting.
Newbie. My comments to Art?
Joe spoke to Art who wrote this post, not myself.
Let me also point out that the Juice contains both news and commentary just as found in the Register.
One department is charged with covering the news without bias. That was not the case with the past Register reporter. On a different floor in Santa Ana is the editorial board who adds opinion and commentary. The Juice provides both. There is no question about where I stand on issues as confirmed by my opposition to CA HSR which followed my opposition to Center Line. The same is true for property rights. I do have and share my opinion in many of my posts.
Accuracy is easy to spell but at times is difficult to determine. I am starting to sound like a broken record on the episode betwen Joe and Rick. How many times do I have to repeat that I am unable to determine the facts due to the “he said, he said” nature of what we do know. They were each at the same place at the same time. That is factual
Larry,
I was referencing the italics in the post above which appears to have been placed by you. In any event, while you may sound like a broken record, I appreciate the Juice for providing a forum to discuss this matter, regardless of what opinion you offer. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same for the Mission Viejo Dispatch which has yet to publish a single story (or even my comment about the lack of a story) on the event. Ironic coming from the self-proclaimed – “The most complete news for America’s permier planned community.” I wonder how many stories would have been published on the Dispatch had Mr. Holtzman been the alleged victim. Well, I really don’t have to wonder that hard to know the answer.
Newbie.
There is a major difference between the Dispatch editor and myself. He has a real job that pays to provide for his family. Being retired affords me a larger timeframe to respond to comments as well as to cover and later report on countywide events.
As I see your comments on both blogs you surely see Brad’s coverage of everyday activities in the city such as high school football games while the Juice’s Mission Statement is to cover political activities. We have different agenda’s.
Our city manager is very tuned in to Brad’s investigative reporting on the Dispatch as confirmed by Dennis’s immediate damage control responses to those posts.
In fact, knowing how many readers Brad has in Mission Viejo our city manager has thanked Brad for some of those “happy” reports.
One thing that sets the Dispatch apart from the SV News is that it is not a satellite of the city manager as our recent Register reporter with his city furnished stories. Brad holds our city government accountable. That never existed before we had the Internet. So again, I tip my hat to Al Gore.
Larry,
I do appreciate Brad’s stories on local happenings as they are a refreshing break from the partisan politics that happen all over the blogosphere (and I’m saying that as a fan of the partisan politics). My point was that (1) it was interesting that the Dispatch did not have a single story that is of such interest to Mission Viejo politicos (juding by the response to the 2 stories on here and from what I’ve heard from other residents) – I’m fairly certain Brad is aware of the story and its nuances; and (2) I have no doubt that there would have been multiple stories on the Dispatch had it been Mr. Holtzman alleging the assauly against Mr. Sandzimier. I don’t mind Brad going after the sitting Council majority and their allies. I just don’t like him trying to sell the Dispatch as a neutral site. He’s biased (as we all are), just don’t call yourself the most complete news site for the City when you purposely ignore a significant story because it cuts against one in your “camp.”
newbie.
The only reason for Joe and Art to discuss the incident with Rick S was a follow up to the “victim’s” attempts to give Joe a black eye starting with Dan Avery’s and Red Clownty’s one sided reports.
Even mayor Trish Kelley put out an email stating as factual that “Rick was intentionally hit by a car driven by Joe Holtzman on Friday night.”
Let’s have coffee and I will show you a copy of her email.
If I were Joe I would sue her for that email blast to trash his reputation when she was not there and, as repeated over and over again, there were no witnesses. That’s the problem the OCSD has with this “major” MV crime scene.
At Monday’s council meeting Wendy B made the same type Public Comment statement to tarnish Joe’s reputation while he is not now, nor at any time in the past, been a candidate for elected public office. From what I have been told he wasn’t even there when this Public Comment took place that is now on the Internet for anyone to reference in the future. As such he is not fair game as a political figure. She too is skating on thin ice.
Joe was reacting to a non story. Repeat it often enough and some people will eventually believe it. Failure to respond paints a picture of being guilty which triggered Joe’s discussion of this incident with someone he trusts. Art Pedroza.
What we have here is a group effort to engage in Alinsky’s tactical rules for radicals.
I.e. Saul Alinsky’s rule for radicals #11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”