More
trouble is smoldering at the courthouse, with Hawaii News Now reporting that Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho was one vote short
to indict Human Resources Manager Janine Rapozo on gas theft. She
needed 11 votes from the Grand Jury, but sources reportedly told the
TV station she only had 10. As reporter Rick Daysog noted, “Why the
indictment was handed down anyway is unclear.”
Former
Prosecutor Craig DeCosta, who is representing Janine, is seeking to
have the charges dismissed, with a hearing set for Tuesday. He's also
reportedly accusing Shay of misconduct.
The
Star-Advertiser, meanwhile, is reporting that Shay blames Mayor
Bernard Carvalho for her defeat, and that the theft indictment is
retaliation.
Speaking
of which, there's also trouble brewing in the auditor's office, which
conducted the fuel audit. The County Attorney on Wednesday is seeking approval to spend up to $15,000 to hire special counsel to advise and
represent the Council “in matters relating to the investigation of
personnel matters involving the County Auditor’s Office.”
I'm
sure Kauai County is the laughing stock of the Hawaii legal
community, as we pay Oahu attorneys to wash our dirty laundry and mend the bad choices made by those who hold power.
Speaking
of which, the mayor's decision to build the Path on Wailua Beach will
be coming before the County Council on Wednesday. Councilman KipuKai
Kualii has asked planning director Mike Dahilig and someone from the
UH Seagrant program to attend the meeting and brief the Council on
how erosion there may impact the Path.
It's
a total legit concern given what we can see happening with our own
eyes — not to mention all the scientific warnings about rising sea
levels, greater storm intensity, accelerated coastal erosion, etc.
Yet
paid Path promoter Tommy Noyes wasted no time in sending out emails
trying to quash all discussion. As he sees it, the matter has been
thoroughly studied. And to back up that questionable
assertion, he links to his own 2010 website posting that rehashes a
county press release that states the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) has signed off on it all.
That's
supposed to be proof of thorough studies? Since 2010, we've seen
quite a lot of erosion. I've also been hearing from members of the
Hawaiian community that the Section 106 federal consultation process
was flawed, because it was not conducted prior to decisions being
made, and that Hawaiian concerns were misrepresented and ignored.
Why
are we even thinking of putting this beautiful beach at risk just for the sake of running
a Path along it — a Path that could be moved mauka? Why push ahead
even though Hawaiians have expressed grave cultural concerns? Why not
take some time to rethink, or at least discuss this portion of the
Path in light of new developments, instead of acting like it's all
hunky dory?
What
is the burning rush? Because once we start messing with this beach, there will be no turning back.
Posts
22 comments:
If that Grand Jury came back 10-4 and the PA told the Court it was an indictment, (its not) and Janine got arrested based on a false representation to the Court hat there was an indictment ... well get in line for another lawsuit against OPA baby.
Rule 6(f) of the Hawaii Rules of Penal Procedure:
(f) Finding and return of indictment. Eight members shall constitute a quorum. An indictment may be found only upon the concurrence of three-fourths, but in no event fewer than 8 of the jurors present. The indictment shall be returned by the grand jury through its foreperson to a judge in open court. If the defendant is in custody or has given bail and the required number of jurors do not concur in finding an indictment, the grand jury through its foreperson shall so report to the court in writing forthwith. Evidence supporting a superseding indictment shall be considered by the same grand jury panel that returned the original indictment, and shall be found only upon the concurrence of three-fourths, but in no event fewer than 8 of the jurors who considered the original indictment. A grand jury panel considering a superseding indictment may consider any evidence presented to support its original indictment. In regard to both an original indictment and a superseding indictment, evidence of a clearly exculpatory nature known to the prosecution shall be disclosed to the grand jury. In the event that the term of the grand jury that returned the original indictment has expired, a new indictment may be presented to another grand jury.
Looks like they got their votes.
Why are they proceeding when there are serious Hawaiian concerns?
Because that only works when some haole is affected and they USE the Hawaiian issues for their own defense.
Hey Annonyous at 12:38, 10 votes out of 14 = 71.4%. Not sure where you went to school or what theory of math you use, but that is NOT 3/4 of 75%! Wake up and learn some math befroe you post. As for lying to the Court, people lose licenses for that stuff. Which would be a good thing here.
If there is any justice, people also lose licenses for targeted political vendettas. When you misuse your office repeatedly to prosecute your enemies by making things up and withholding crucial information someone might eventually hold you accountable. That would be a good thing too.
We will be paying for Shay for years to come.
Wailua Beach is narrow. Lots of sand by the river mouth.
This indictment is total BS. If there is an underlying crime, go for it. You don't go after an employee. The case against the mayor looks as weak as an office runners pipe dream. So you go against some one who has no say??
As for the beach walk, Noyes is correct. First it was imaginary bones (the beach was very thin when I was a kid, so no bones there). Now it is something else. Always something. Always simply something because the lunatics want to be luna.
6:45p
Go back where ever you came from.
That would solve a whole lot of problems.
Nobody is going back to where they come from. Sorry, every time I hear a comment like that I call up a few of my mainland friends and invite them to move to Kauai. If you don't like it here maybe you should move somewhere else or go hit a bag of golf balls ala South Park Kauai. Maybe that will make you feel better.
> Sorry, every time I hear a comment like that I call up a few of my mainland friends and invite them to move to Kauai. <
Doing your part to help bury the soul of the island in transplants, tourism and real estate development, eh?
Tell all your friends and family that we should petition for a commission against corruption here on Kauai. Our public officials have gotten out of control. We cannot sit here and just watch them get away with crimes. I have contacted the international commission against corruption and congress against racism and corruption in law enforcement. The people MAY unite together and SHALL end the corruption on Kauai.
2012 7:34 PM
Obviously I am from here.
I might mention Tom Noyes is local also, but Honolulu family I think.
"I might mention Tom Noyes is local also,"
So what? That doesn't mean he's doing the right thing to put the bike path on Wailua beach.
We need an operation "Ivan" on Kauai.
Only God can be the judge......we just pay the bills.
If our public officials feel justified in "taking gas" because they feel disadvantaged and lacking enough income.....maybe that is right? Steal because you feel Righteous.......or is it steal because you are "sneaky".
Then why not just say it?!
Your local Good Ole Boys are running the show and ruining the aina into the ground.
Business as usual. Power and money corrupts. Christians....."he" died
on the cross for your sins.
"Loyalty"......the sticker on big trucks.....what a joke! Kauai Mafia is a better term.
"Doing your part to help bury the soul of the island in transplants, tourism and real estate development, eh?"
The soul of the island is not static. Most folks who come here do so because of their love and appreciation for the place. Many of them start a business and contribute positively to our quality of life. No doubt that over development is a problem but that problem has been mainly been created and abetted by locals in County government and in the planning department.
Who on the Council has voted to stop overdevelopment and who has voted with developers? When big landowners used the global economic trouble to get out of or reduce afordable housing commitments who on the Council went along and who voted no? Do the readers of this blog even know? Hint, look who A&B and Grove Farm give money to and who they don't.
Hint, look who A&B and Grove Farm give money to ....
Mel, Jay, Nadine
Tim is the one who pushed through the ag land tvr bill (apparently at the behest of his client, the mayor).
30 minutes till dismissal.
Post a Comment