Release of informant recording disturbing

If the leadership of the Monterey County District Attorney's Office really thinks it was OK to give a career criminal a videotape of an informant being interviewed by a detective, it's time for a serious round of prosecutorial soul-searching or oversight by a higher authority.

[henry]

A tape exists of a traffic stop of one of our local judges, case TR09-014874. Under the CA Govt Code, because the case has been resolved, the tape must be released upon request according to the CA Public Records Act.

Good luck getting the DA to release it. Several citizens have tried and been turned down.

[True hypocrisy]

Is that the tape of Judge Kay Kingsley getting stopped in Carmel and Carmel has refused to release the audio and video portion of the tape? They don't want to make Judge Kingsley mad so they deny the record to all those who requested it, too bad Judge Kingsley isn't a drug using drug dealing snitch then people who want the tape could get it from the DA for 10 bucks.

Circle the wagons, these people are hypocrits and the records law does not apply to them. Regarding this tape the DA's office, run by Dean Flippo, has nearly always sided on the sleazier side of decision making rather then simply following the law.

[CPRA]

It is unfortunate that this interrogation tape was used in a negative way but a public record is a public record, once released to the public there is no control and we can't have the district attorney's office manipulating the public records act one way or the other. It sounds like the da chose to make a record public as it benefits them then throw up roadblocks to legitimate members of the public e.g. non-criminals, and that does not meet the intent or spirit law leaning strongly to the publics right to know and most certainly does not follow the law.

The over broad 6255 denial is used on too many occasions without adequate support and I believe my friend Neil Shapiro would agree.

[video on youtube]

just put the video on youtube