Monday, June 10, 2013


UPDATE:  I was at the VA all day - unhappy with an abscessed tooth I  decided to add a diverticulitis infection.  I am now on 2 antibiotics.  Anyway - my big gorilla fingers caused me to delete a post - it is a good post - so I am doing a copy and paste it here..

I am sorry to the reader for the mistake - but approving posts on my cell phone is a real challenge

"I disagree. Villalobos was the head law enforcement officer in the county and he sold justice. You can not give him probation no matter what he has to serve up. The best he should get is a sentence that is less then maximum in return for information and testimony but it must include a big hunk of jail time. I mean, you don't trade the big fish for smaller fish, you trade up.

My Response:  I agree - if all he has to offer is smaller fish then no deal.  You are correct.

Original Post:

The fact of the matter is, Armando Villalobos is less than the tip of the iceberg.  This being said, if he is willing to talk, DOJ should offer probation along with surrender of his law license.  The State Bar is going to take it anyway based on his own testimony of pursuing illegal forfeiture actions, if nothing else.

I keep hearing that I need to dig deeper.  In some ways you do not have to dig deeper, because key players are still acting as if the same old system of institutionalized corruption is in place.

Sunday's post was a precursor to today - the goal was to show just how easily lemmings are created and played. 

Judge Hanen it is alleged was taken aback by the fact that nearly all 100 prospective jurors in the Villalobos trial had heard nothing about the case.  My question is, how would they have heard?  The Herald is not read.  I know of no one with a subscription to the Herald.  TV news listeners are 18-40 year old non-college graduate women.  On top of that it is a very small number when compared to the general population.

Do not forget over 7000 people voted for an indicted Armando Villalobos to be their Congressman.


"That being said, nothing can do more harm to society than an individual, (or a group of individuals) armed with a law license (or working for someone armed with a law license) that has no moral compass, no respect for the rules governing ethical conduct and no respect for the truth."

This week, maybe starting Thursday the BV will do several stories to show how the corruption still continues.

Actually, tomorrow I will  write on the pending Tony Juarez case related to his post divorce.  There are no rules in court.  While listening to his attorney Frank Perez I wanted to puke.  In as clear of terms as possible in open court he said -  "The law does not apply to me or my client."  And such as Judge Hanen encourages this conduct (the irony in his order) Justice Fred Hinojosa also encourages the  conduct.  In this case, the ex wife got all of the documents she wanted.  But that is not enough.

On Villalobos - he needs to speak.  He needs to give up everyone.   If he does, DOJ needs to offer him probation.


If the DOJ recommends a lessor sentence for Abel Limas based on his cooperation, then the DOJ is worse than Armando Villalobos.  Limas had zero credibility.  At times he was nearly laughing at what he had done.  He is at the center of the virus.  He needs to die in federal prison.  With every day he walks free the above words of Judge Hanen are mocked.

If Abel Limas gets anything less than the max, the message is clear.  As a judge you can corrupt the system, corrupt young lawyers and even the DA, but walk so long as you come forward first.

This would be a very, very dangerous result.

I cannot imagine any juror having believed one word of testimony by Abel Limas.


Today there will be several new decisions.  This afternoon the BV may be back if there is an opinion on the Voting Rights Act or gay marriage.


BobbyWC said...

Reader i accidently deleted you comment when i get home i can copy and paste it . i agree villalobos should not get a lessor sentence for small fries . bpbby

Anonymous said...

BS, you've gone soft on AV for some reason. I don't understand. You were on his ass before the trial....probation my assssss. He extorted, lied and sold his office to the highest bidder. Do some investigative work and check on the bail bondsmen fiasco. Selling not acquittals, but out right dismissals on his watch. Probation, LMAO. He deserves what he gets, he didn't come forward of his own fruition. So, a little bit of the judicial book should be thrown at him. Probation my ass! He admitted to illegal forfeitures on the stand. Please be unbiased and call it like it is.

BobbyWC said...

I am not going soft on anyone - but - I get your frustration with my post - I agree with everything you said - remember I covered the trial.

But here is the deal - are you saying that if in exchange for probation he is willing to take down the bigger fish, the DOJ should say no and allow them to walk?

My opinion is no - I want the judges and very high profile lawyers , and even some other elected officials other than judges to spend 20 years each in federal prison. Unless someone speaks - they walk.

But I respect the opinion of those who say - it is better they walk than to give Villalobos probation.

I am not talking small fish - every time in pretrial hearings and at trial when Gilbert Hinojosa's name would come up - everyone would run from his name - the discussion or tape was immediately cut short - why?

Look, unless he has some really big fish - I agree he needs to do the time - as I noted I also oppose Limas getting one day less than the max.

The bailbondsman issue did come up at trial.

It was a small part - but it did come up.

But look - if people prefer the big fish walk - then so be it.

The reality is, it is all speculation on my part that Villalobos would even entertain such a deal - without giving up some very, very big fish, my view remains the same - the maximum sentence allowed by law.

Bobby WC