The Orange County Register reported yesterday that Senior Assistant District Attorney Ebrahim Baytieh was fired on Wednesday, not long after guest poster Love Cameron posted in these pages a screed against incumbent District Attorney Todd Spitzer for, among other things, not firing Baytieh right out of the gate.
Here’s three paragraphs of fair-use from the Orange Lady:
District Attorney Todd Spitzer said the withheld evidence forced him in August to request a new murder trial for a man convicted in 2010 of mutilating his victim in Sunset Beach and burning the body. Paul Gentile Smith had been serving a life term in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1988 slaying of his marijuana dealer, Robert Haugen.
Orange County sheriff’s deputies and prosecutors allegedly violated Smith’s constitutional rights by placing him in a jail cell where he was targeted by three jailhouse informants and then telling defense attorneys about only one.
“I immediately hired an independent law firm to investigate whether there was a failure by the prosecutor to properly turn over discovery and whether the prosecutor was truthful in all subsequent and related inquiries by the United States Department of Justice,” Spitzer said in a prepared statement.
The story adds that the firm’s investigation was not completed until … Feb. 8, exactly a week after the article critical of Spitzer emerged here.
So that puts to an end all criticism of Spitzer for not fulfilling his campaign promise to root out corruption in his office, particularly as related to the “snitch scandal.” So, in the spirit of moving on, here is a cute picture of a puppy.
Just kidding! On two counts, actually. First, the picture is not cute. Second, I don’t know that this means that we’re moving on: the timing of this revelation — like the fact that Baytieh has remained on active duty during this time, although admittedly not doing so would have been a tipoff — seems awfully weird.
First, I do sincerely congratulate Spitzer for rectifying (to some extent) the damage done by an early case in the ongoing snitch scandal, for offering a new trial and removing what seems to have been a bad actor from his office. But:
- It took more than 13 months?
- He’s the only one disciplined for having done this, when the problem was prevalent?
- Are what I presume are other existing investigations complete?
- Is it a mere coincidence that this is coming out just as Spitzer’s re-election campaign is heating up
- An election in which, the Register reports, Baytieh is running for a judgeship?
- Is the coincidental timing of this coming up so soon after Baytieh’s record graced our pages just some sort of cosmic joke? How many people knew that this was in the pipeline? How many knew that it was right near the end of it?
- Or was it right near the end? Was the report’s release hurried up to torpedo Baytieh’s campaign at a critical time?
- Same question, but substitute in “Pete Hardin’s?
- Or was this a contingency to be released only if he got a challenge from the right — as just happened when former prosecutor Michael Jacobs entered the race?
- And … way Baytieh close to (or even likely to endorse) Jacobs?
- How is this call-out from him prepared statement not “woke”?
“I made it unequivocally clear when I ran for Orange County District Attorney that I would not tolerate the ‘win at all costs’ mentality of the prior administration. My prosecutors will not violate the Constitution and the rights of defendants in order to get convictions.”
Nice statement! Seriously, this is good — this is an example of why I supported him four years ago! But is he willing to have all actions of his department judged by this entirely appropriate standard? Because sometimes victims may not care all that much about the rights of defendants — how does Spitzer square that conflict?
Anyway: we may be able to answer one of these questions based on this screenshot today from Spitzer’s campaign website, the cleverly chosen “I wonder what year Spitzer first reserved this URL” orangecountyda.org.
If this was planned out too far in advance, Spitzer didn’t tell his web team — for two whole days!
Does that sound like Spitzer to you?
We’ll look forward to hearing what either of the men pictured above — and perhaps others from the OCDA’s office — in the days and weeks and maybe a few months to come!
************
PS. Norberto has a lot more details and insights…
Interesting timing
But … it’s the right decision, right? So does he deserve credit for it, or not — or somewhere in between? If we presume that he had to wait for the investigation to be completed and that he did nothing either to prolong it until now or to curtail it so that it came out now — at the perfect time for him politically, which also makes it look suspicious and so possibly bad for him politically — then shouldn’t he be lauded for this move? If he isn’t, is that simply because people don’t think that this is a coincidence — which is either extremely unfair or precisely on the nose?
Check in with Love Cameron, please, and asks her what she thinks — and if she herself knew that the investigation was either (or both) in process and finishing up!
Have you bothered to look into Baytieh’s opponents? Or the fact that one of them is an LA DA that has supported recalling Gascon. And that by firing him, he cannot use “Senior Assistant Deputy District Attorney” as a ballot designation, but only “lawyer” (or something like that), whereas the Gascon recaller can call himself “Deputy District Attorney”?
So you’re saying shame, we lost a lesser evil?
Norberto has a lot more details and insights on this…
https://voiceofoc.org/2022/02/santana-did-oc-district-attorney-todd-spitzer-fire-a-top-prosecutor-to-protect-himself/
Great story. It’s hard to know who to root for here, except for Scott Sanders.
I haven’t even looked into the judicial races yet, as I’ve been preparing to write more about the legislative ones — but amazingly it looks like they may be far more interesting than usual. Thanks to Lee for the tip — though I suspect that what Baytieh is accused of doing will be of even greater consequence than endorsing the recall of LA’s DA Gascon (an act that I oppose.)
I’m saying that if you want to suss out the reasons and timing, look to the obvious places. Baytieh was clear from early on that he would run against Nelson if there was only one seat. Baytieh is not running against Nelson, but this seemed inevitable. Todd owes Nelson, and probably several others, and it’s an easy way to thank them, and try to look good in the process.
Be careful if you think that a DA from LA running a recall campaign against Gascon, and backed by Spitzer, is really what you want in a judge.
Who’s the LA DA involved in the Gascon recall? I’m happy to oppose him or her as well.
Fred Fascinelli of Buena Park, a friendly though conservative guy, is the only name I recognize so far. Let’s see what the OC Bar Association has to say, eh?
The timeline you suggest doesn’t make sense to me. Spitzer did have reason to investigate Baytieh — and a whole lot of other people (who may or may not have gotten the same treatment) — but why wouldn’t he wait and see if a second seat was going to open up before lowering the boom on Baytieh, once it was clear that both Baytieh and Nelson could stay out of each others’ way as candidates?
(Incidentally, I can think of worse things than Shawn Nelson on the bench. I’ve seen him be fair, as well as less so. Who knows what he’ll be like with job security? We got heaps of Rackauckas-endorsed judges on the Superior Court, and most of them are fine despite that history. Yes, he’s a Republican, but most politically ambitious attorneys in Orange County have been for the last several decades, and likely will be until the county’s demographics percolate up to the upper reaches of the county bar.)
In any event, there didn’t have to be only “one seat.” With good enough connections, one could run against a weaker incumbent or induce one to retire. (Not naming any names.)
I wouldn’t oppose Baytieh over his being a pioneer (which doesn’t make him an instigator) in the snitch scandal alone, given the large amount of company he has in culpability there. I’ll oppose him, if I do, for the rash of reasons that Vern mentioned before (which I think was in my previous post on this topic.) How is it good politics to support this guy in any event? Seems likely that it will alienate minorities in the county, doesn’t it?
By the way, to Vern and Lee: Didn’t Spitzer promise not to endorse judges? Do you know if he’s honoring that promise? Lee’s comment suggests otherwise.
It’s the other guy who’s the LA DA. I just looked up the filings and googled him.
I don’t know that the OCBA weighs in on elections. “The mission of the Judiciary Committee is to evaluate candidates for appointment to the Orange County Court.”
As for the timing, it makes sense if he wanted to do maximum damage Baytieh (and thus advantage whomever his preferred candidate). Strip his ballot designation and put out bad press as close to the election as possible.
I (fortunately) do not have insight into the mind of Todd Spitzer–I’m just looking at the obvious immediate impacts. If Spitzer had wanted to take a position against the snitch scandal, he could have taken action in January 2019.
As for Nelson, I would prefer he not be elected. Sure, there are ambitious Republicans who have been appointed and elected to the Bench. But it’s not that Nelson is a Republican with an ambition to be judge; it’s that Nelson is a politically ambitious Republican whose next stop is the Superior Court. He supposedly was going to run for Judge in 2018, but instead threw his hat in for Congress. He may be fair; he may prove to be a great judge. And I don’t mind Republicans who are ambitious to become a judge; I do mind a judge whose ambition is to become a Republican member of Congress.
I have no idea if Todd has “kept” his promise and declined to formally endorse any candidate for judge. That formal promise does not matter much.
There are several candidates for that seat. Was just wondering which one was the LA DA; I guess I can do my own research.
OCBA will rate candidate qualifications to serve. It will be interesting to see how they rate Baytieh at this point. Of course, the OCDA story posted since then to some extent supersedes this one, putting Baytieh in a good light.
I don’t know that Spitzer has a dog he wants to win in this race, though it sure looks like he has a dog he wants to lose.
Zenger is the resident expert in all things Shawn Nelson. All I can say is that Nelson told me years ago that his only ultimate political ambition was to become a judge.
My recollection is that at least the spirit of Spitzer’s position was somewhat stronger than his simply ruling out formal endorsements while retaining “wink-and-nod” endorsements — though even eliminating those alone would have been progress.
P.S. Do you plan to run for Assembly? We’re in the same district; I’d support you!