Did anyone else raise an eyebrow over yesterday's article in The Garden Island about Judge Randal Valenciano doubling the sentence of a man who made an attempt at humor by saying "give me liberty or give me death" in his written plea to avoid jail time?
“This is not fun and games here,” Valenciano said. “You bought yourself more time” with the “disrespectful” display, said Valenciano, adding that by putting pen to paper Kodama dug himself a deeper hole.
The written statement was Kodama’s chance to impress Valenciano, and Kodama told jokes, Valenciano said. “We’re in court.”
So a judge can just invent a new crime -- "saying something stupid that triggers the judge" – then find the defendant guilty, with no trial, and summarily impose a 90-day sentence? Hmmm.
Far less troubling, but still annoying, is reporter Paul Curtis’ persistence in editorializing his stories:
When given the right to remain silent, sometimes accused people should exercise that right.
Speaking of editorializing, I thought The Garden Island’s recent opinion piece on the possible departure of Police Chief Darryl Perry was right on the mark.
Like the paper, I’m also disheartened to hear Perry has applied for the chief’s spot at the Honolulu Police Department. Running KPD is one of the least coveted jobs in the state, and the likelihood of us getting another chief of Perry's caliber is slim. As the editorial noted, Perry has made some significant contributions to KPD in the time he's been here.
Of course, nothing gets Rabid Reporter Andy Parx slathering more than seeing a bone tossed to the chief, and yesterday he used his blog to launch yet another attack on Perry. This time he also called out the newspaper for failing to promote his own doggedly revisionist view that a revenge-driven Perry worked behind the scenes to dethrone former Chief K.C. Lum. Mmmm hmmm. Yeah, right.
Andy seems to take Perry’s application to HPD as a personal affront to the people of Kauai, and has repeatedly claimed that Perry made like he was gonna be here forever. Apparently Andy's forgotten, or perhaps he never knew, that the Police Commission only gave Perry a three-year employment contract, which began Oct. 1, 2007. Who in their right mind would pledge to keep that thankless job indefinitely?
Let’s be realistic about the situation. Perry has two choices. He can stay here and continue his efforts to rehab a rinky-dink department burdened with decades of baggage, buffoonery and backstabbing as a snarling dog snaps at his heels. Or, he can take a shot at earning more money as the top cop in the state, leading a bigger, far more professional department that he personally helped build. Which would you choose?
Getting back to the topic of editorializing, I noticed this on the Star-Bulletin’s home page:
No state fought harder than Hawaii to become a full-fledged member of the United States, and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin beat the drum for the movement from the beginning.
Kinda makes you wonder how fair and objective the paper was in reporting the statehood vote when it was going down, and how fair and objective it's been in covering the ongoing opposition to the fake state.
Finally, a very progressive friend got an email from the GOP asking for a contribution to “help protect us from universal health care” that provoked this response:
Let me see if I got this right. You want me to help you prevent people from getting routine access to medical care? But that would make me complicit in your plan. Then I would be as evil as you are. Why don’t I give you money to help keep the gas prices high, too?”
Seems his brother got a similar email, which he described as “a real WTF moment.”
Come to think of it, there's a lot of that going around.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
seems that sentence range was w/in the discretion of the court, given the pleas and crime
"Kinda makes you wonder how fair and objective the paper was"
-- "fair and objective"...yes, it would be nice to see more of that
"ongoing opposition" on the part of a relative few (if we are going to be fair and objective about it)
dwps
Toying with a judge sentencing you with humor, let alone the lame comment he made, qualifies you for at least an Darwin Award prize of more jail time.
He obviously wasn't trying to impress the judge with his fine upstanding qualities meriting a lower, or no, jail sentence.
He got what he deserved. And, yes, judges can act any damn way they want within their discretionary authority.
He could have flipped a coin or told the defendant to pick a number between 1 and 10, or play rock-paper-scissors. Now, those actions may have earned him a "raised eyebrows" attitude, but NOT what he actually did.
He could have imposed a "contempt of court" citation to run consecutively with the other thing, but why? He made his point.
I'll bet that loser defendant isn't laughing now.
You don't spit into the wind, pull on Superman's cape, or purposely piss-off a judge sentencing you.
Idiot!
Unlike Honolulu which has a standard five year contract chiefs on Kaua`i have never had a set term contract for their chiefs. But because of the illegal termination of KC Lum’s contract the commission set a new standard of a three year contract and specifically stated in public session that it had nothing to do with the new chief but was rather in order to set a standard since it had been a problem with two prior chefs when the administration butted in and pressured the commission to remove the chiefs... but you would have to actually watch the police commission meetings to know that I suppose and not just take the chief’s word for things... same with the concerted campaign to place him in the chiefs chair.
I'm far too much of a novice to remark on the political history of the Kaua'i police department, but as an anti-authoritarian, I do feel qualified to express my particular disgust with the way Chief Perry has responded to citizens who criticize him .
I once wrote about it in greater detail here:
http://towardfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/11/constructive-criticism-at-gunpoint.html
In my opinion, the last people we should stop criticizing and questioning are the ones with the guns. All coercive authority should be questioned incessantly, and if found illegitimate, removed.
Here is a WTF flashback for those with short memories.
On June 15, 2006 members of the Kauai County Council abused their power by calling for a politically motivated investigation of what they claimed was the intentional alteration of a government document for the purposes of conspiring to make the Kauai County Council "look bad".
The target of the conspiracy was King (KC) Lum Kauai’s former Police Chief and a candidate for Kauai County Council.
On the eve of the primary county election in which former police chief King (K.C.) Lum was running for a seat on the Kaua'i County Council, seven investigators with the state Attorney General’s office seized computer equipment from Lum’s home.
The charge against Lum of intentionally altering a government document and the AG’s decision to raid Lum's home on the eve of the primary election received extensive media coverage and undermined Lum’s bid for a seat on the council.
Lum running on a platform of open and transparent government finished in tenth place.
After a six month investigation by the State Attorney General's office, and hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars spent by the County of Kauai Lum's property was returned to him and the investigation concluded.
As many suspected from the beginning it was a sheet feed error. When the document was scanned two pages accidentally overlapped and two paragraphs were omitted, making a three-page document a two-page document.
This video is a portion of that June 15, 2006 meeting. It demonstrates a political abuse of power and how a sheet feed error can be transformed into a conspiracy to damage a political opponent’s chances of being elected.
. . . and all at the taxpayers expense.
The Political Lynching of King Lum at http://kauai.net
Anon said - "ongoing opposition" on the part of a relative few (if we are going to be fair and objective about it)"
I believe it was "a relative few" that started both the American (US) and Cuban wars of independence.
"A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
- Margaret Mead
We'll see. I wouldn't bank on it. The Akaka bill will stop any further meaningful "rebellion" by kicking the slats out of any basis of success.
But Hawaiians will always be able to stay at the "Hawaiian Hotel". They'll have reservations, after all.
No state fought harder than Hawaii to become a full-fledged member of the United States, and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin beat the drum for the movement from the beginning.
Kinda makes you wonder how fair and objective the paper was in reporting the statehood vote when it was going down,
Oh the juicy irony! No county fought harder than Kauai against the superferry, and blogger Joan Conrow beat the drum for the movement from the beginning - even as she was reporting the story for the Advertiser! Kinda makes you wonder?
Interesting snippet from Star Bulletin letters to editor:
"Very few people are aware that it was Prince Kuhio, who as a nonvoting delegate to Congress, introduced and advocated the first statehood bill in 1919 and again in 1920, the same year the Hawaiian Homestead Act was passed.
He envisioned a modern Hawaii one day and in 1959 his vision became a reality."
So, even the highest of Hawaiian royalty at the time wanted statehood. He would be King of Hawaii if it were a nation back then. If he wanted statehood, then it appears that "royals" today don't really have a valid argument.
Anon said: "Oh the juicy irony! No county fought harder than Kauai against the superferry, and blogger Joan Conrow beat the drum for the movement from the beginning - even as she was reporting the story for the Advertiser! Kinda makes you wonder?"
Only if you do not know what irony means! The SB was on the side of the law breakers (see apology bill) and Joan was on the side of obeying the law (Hawaii Supreme Court). What is ironic?
Another interesting snippet from SB comment to editorial:
"If adjustments are not made in relationship to the land, kanaka maoli justice, carrying capacity, and the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, the Aloha Spirit will be no more. That's not what we want. Wake up."
No problem, anyone willing to give up welfare, foodstamps, sec 8 housing and ALL other freebies will be given a couple acres to grow their own food on. There will be no roads, no power lines, no phone service and no government provided services like health care, EMS or fire, you want a return to the good old days, that is it."
Yup...if USA goes, it will take all its removable infrastructure (social and physical) with it.
What's left will still require knowledge, skills and talents that for the most part will have to be imported.
Last SB snippets, I promise:
As a part Hawaiian when we were admitted into the union as the 50th state I felt a sense of pride. At the tender age of 13 there was celebration for days. We had a different feeling in the community that I grew up in (kailua). That feeling is still alive and well as we mark this day. My children and my grandchildren were born in Hawaii and I have taught them well. Nothing is to be taken for granted. My parents taught me that if you work hard good things will come your way. Don't expect that you will be given anything for free. You are a citizen of the USA and oppurtunities are out there for you to earn. I'm proud that they have learned this and today as I look back at my family they have done well I can truly say that I am glad that we are the 50th state.
=====
I am of Hawaiian heritage. I am also a proud American. Even though statehood sealed a relationship of American interferance and dominance in Hawai'i, it has been a good thing. The infrastructure of the islands since being a territory has changed dramatically. Statehood has allowed Hawai'i's people to partake in the American experience which in one word can be called opportunity.
Now for the "poor me" rant. Native peoples have always gotten pushed aside for the sake of progress. For the good of the masses. It is the same anywhere on this planet. For the most part, it is inevitable but should not be unpreventable. Labeling indigenous people as lazy, shiftless, and racist is merely a convenient way for some to dismiss an honest clash of cultural values. I have been raise with a very westernized set of values. I am at peace with it. Some of my ohana and friends have not. I am also at peace with that. I love and respect them the way they are. If anyone has a problem with that then it is their right and prerogative. It is also their own personal problem. Pau rant.
ill leave the "deletions" and definition of "swipe" alone
as to "the American (US) and Cuban wars of independence"...of course you recognize cuba has had at least two (2) revolutionary wars "recently" - one that got spain off their back, then a dictator (in exchange for another). otherwise i dont really think a "relative few" relates to pre-1776 years (and that MM quote is kinda wrong, in my view)
and well put August 21, 2009 8:58 AM, well put (same to August 21, 2009 9:30 AM)
dwps
Objectivity is a fiction that a good reporter strives to achieve, but is NEVER objective reality. If you need proof check out the 11th edition of Encyclopædia Britannica for many sexist, racist opinions posing as objectivity. Objectivity is impossible because of perspective and everybody has perspective unless one is omnipresent, but then they would be god herself!
So to be "objective" a reporter must restrain oneself and not opine. Such restraint comes at a price (read paycheck). Joan's blog is just that HER BLOG so she can opine away. I think Joan is more objective than most reporters, and her opinions are usually on the mark.
ED COLL wrote "Such restraint comes at a price (read paycheck). Joan's blog is just that HER BLOG so she can opine away. I think Joan is more objective than most reporters, and her opinions are usually on the mark."
U'no dat! write on ed!
I was appalled when I read Valencianoʻs sentencing...NOT surprised.
He is an example of how broken the system is: appointed by Lingle, he had no experience to even be a council member and his law experience was never to be seen when he was on the council. For this person to be a judge could have only occurred through republican manipulation.
I pray for the day that robe is removed from the little pretender.
The defendant had every right when called upon to give an answer that he probably felt and was genuine; some are not wordsmiths like the armchair authors on blogs.
Valenciano had no right to display his arrogant superiority on this defendant.
As far as Paul Curtisʻ ʻreportingʻ, I am only saddened that TGIʻs short time as a fair paper became, once again, tainted by the rehiring of Paul Curtis.
"I was appalled when I read Valencianoʻs sentencing...NOT surprised."
I was happy and amused, myself. His 4th conviction, already. If he were in many other states, the 3 strikes law would be invoked and he's be in the slammer for life.
Sounds like where he belongs.
Post a Comment