|
|
|
Gas tank critic names state, county officials in damage claimThis article was originally published in the the Amador Ledger Dispatch on April 28, 1999, and is reproduced here with its permission. By Diane Smith JACKSON—A claim has been filed by "gastankgate" critic Rick Paul against state and local public officials who he believes are involved in his harassment and the reactivation of an arrest warrant which resulted in his Feb. 16 arrest. The warrant was later dropped, with an apology. The claim is being made against the State of California, Russell Moore and the California Highway Patrol, the County of Amador, Special Prosecutor David Irey, Amador District Attorney (D.A.) Todd Riebe, Amador D. A investigator Ron Hall, Tuolumne County D. A. Nina Deane, and Tuolumne Special Investigator Jim Walshaw. There is provision for 100 (John) Does to be named as necessary in hearing the case. Jurisdiction over the claim will rest with Amador Superior Court since general and special damages will exceed $25,000. Pine Grove Resident Paul was arrested in February and taken in handcuffs from the Amador County Administration Building, where he ad just attended a Board of Supervisors' meeting. The $5,000 bail necessary to get him out of the Amador County Jail was not immediately available so he spent the night in the county jail. At the time of his arrest, he was not made aware of the charge, other than told it was a bench warrant from Tuolumne County. He was released upon posting bail the next day. However, he was still unable to obtain the bail report justifying the arrest. Days went by and paperwork which would explain the arrest was still missing. Still trying to obtain discovery information, he was facing a march arraignment not knowing why a $500 bail warrant, which had been dropped, was reactivated as a $5,000 arrest warrant. Never having actually been served, the 1992 charge was expunged from the files in 1995. Department of Motor Vehicle printouts also support this. Rick Paul requested Amador D.A. Riebe to release information relating to Paul's arrest. The affidavit ordering his arrest was missing pages which should have identified the details of the reissued, revised warrant. When Paul posted bail, the bail report was also missing the usual information on the applicable charges. As to who ordered Paul's arrest, D. A. Riebe told the Ledger Dispatch at that time that his office was not involved. However, Riebe later appeared on a local radio show claiming it was a matter of interpretation. False and with maliceThe claim cites "claimant's reputation was tarnished due to untrue and unsubstantiated comments voiced publicly on radio and television by Riebe . . . at a time when Riebe and others knew them to be false and were said with malice aforethought to damage claimant's character and to chill others from voicing their opinions regarding the actions of the local government." Within days of Paul's February arrest, Tuolumne County D. A. Deane called Paul, apologized to him, and told him the charges were being dropped. Paul has said he is certain the arrest warrant was a punitive measure against him and his position on "gastankgate," an ongoing case involving the alleged illegal removal of an underground gas tank. The case is being pursued by county and state officials against Mark Sherrill, David Mason and Robert Womack. The claim this week names special prosecutor Irey of Stockton who summoned Paul to appear at a special grand jury hearing because, according to Paul, he was a critic of "police state search and seizures." Paul did not answer questions at the hearing, invoking the Fifth Amendment. Other state and local names are cited in the claim because of their alleged harassment of Paul when he and others voiced complaints on what he calls "the abuse of power and First Amendment violations" evident in the Womack, Sherrill, Mason case. Paul is represented in his civil rights suit by Michael Kelly of the Sacramento firm of Mastagni, Holstedt and Chiurazzi. ProceduresClaims against the government are routinely rejected. Unless the government agency allows the validity of the charges, action is denied, leaving the door open to a civil action, which would be filed in Superior Court. There are two segments to the claim, one of which is a charge of abuse of power and not a tort (not a specific wrong). Civil rights don't require consent by the governmental agency. Specific acts do. If the agencies do reject the claim, court action will be at a rate much accelerated over the Womack case and could begin before the grand jury gas tank case is heard. It has been a year since Robert Womack removed the Jackson gas tank and station. Copyright © 1999 Amador Ledger Dispatch |
|
| Masthead |
E-mail, Postal, Phone and Fax Contact Information |
|
the
Bureaucracy