The Piercing Truth

This is right from the dictionary and seems to describe Albuquerque, Berry and Schultz. Fascism (f ash ,izem) noun An authoritarian right wing system of government and/or social organization. (in general use) extreme right wing, authoritarian, chauvinistic and/or intolerant views or practices. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one group over another, national, ethnic, especially social strata or monetarily; a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach. Compliments of one of our Eyes

Oct 28, 2008

Endorsement: Torraco

We don't often agree with the Albuquerque Journal's Editorial Board. However, this time we find ourselves in complete agreement. Tuesday, the Journal officially endorsed Lisa Torroco to replace incumbent DA Kari Brandenburg.
Crime stories have been stealing the headlines in recent months, making it clear the district attorney is a key position in local government, and the race for the top prosecutor slot a critical question on the ballot.

The Journal endorses Lisa Torraco for the job.

Torraco, a Republican, says one reason she is running is because she sees resources squandered on cases that should not be prosecuted — resources that could be used to manage Bernalillo County's huge caseload more effectively, reducing delays and increasing the conviction rate.

Her candidacy is motivated by cases that shouldn't be prosecuted, but are. Charging DWI when breath tests fall below the presumed level of intoxication can often fall in that category. Torraco thinks there's plenty of work to be done at the .08 limit and above.

Worse is the injustice committed against a young man with an IQ of less than 65. He should not have lost 24 of the 32 months he spent in jail awaiting trial for murder, while all the DNA evidence pointed to another person who went unidentified until June.

Then there are cases that should go to trial but are plea bargained, she says, like the career criminal who, thanks in part to a deal, was adding to his list of homicide victims instead of being in custody.

And, in too many of the cases selected for trial, the conviction rate indicates prosecutors don't have the evidence — or the trial skills — to prevail. Torraco argues these examples are symptomatic of poor assessment of cases presented to the DA.

A member of the bar since 1991 who has worked on both sides of the criminal justice process and taught prosecution skills at the University of New Mexico, the challenger has experience.

Just as important, Lisa Torraco has the potential to shake up the District Attorney's Office.
The District Attorney's job is to protect the public... not to protect the system. Kari Brandenburg's obsession with her early plea program may have reduced the number of cases that judges and juries have to hear, but her inability to tell the difference between a first time offender and a serial killer have cost the lives of far too many. Lisa Torraco not only has the experience to prosecute criminals, but the will to see criminals kept safely away from their potential victims.

----- Correction -----
For some reason we just can't seem to spell Lisa Torraco's last name right or even the same way twice. We spell it with one R or two Cs, an O instead of an A - all in the same paragraph! We apologize to Ms. Torraco for the continued mutilation of her last name. We hope we have at least four years to get it right.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

With regard to the man who had a 65 IQ - although it has been said before, it must be said again, and clarified. That man confessed in great detail about how he raped and murdered an 11 year old child. His confession matched the physical evidence, including specifics about how he murdered the child and how he left the child. He said he used a condom, which would explain the lack of his DNA evidence at the scene. He was seen with the child prior to her murder, which is how he was initially identified.

That man also had a prior criminal history, among other things, including battery on a peace officer, and bringing a weapon to school.

The judge could not decide whether or not the man was competent, so the judge left it to a jury to determine. A jury found him competent to stand trial. Not too retarded to be held responsible for his crime, but competent to stand trial. In a public jury trial.

Subsequent to that, the court determined that the confession should be suppressed because of the police's conduct, not involving the specifics of the confession.

After that, there was a DNA hit for another man on the DNA that was at the scene of the murder/rape. Because there was no connection to be found between the two men, the man's case was dismissed, and the other man was charged with the rape and murder of the 11 year old.

Anonymous said...

What a surprise that the "Eye" would also buy the same lies being sold to the community by Lisa Torraco---just like our esteemed Albuquerque Journal! Guess you are all happy to be played by Mickey Barnett and his side-kick Pat Rogers. All they want is to have a "prosecutor in their pockets" to pursue their political enemies under the guise of criminal prosecutions!

Shame on all of you! It's all about dirty tricks and politics isn't it?

Ms. Torraco has neither the experience nor intellect to find her way out of a paper bag, so she's a great choice as as a puppet for her right-wing benefactors.

Voters need to open their OWN "eyes" and see right through this staged "endorsement" by both the Journal and the "Eye". Don't be deceived. Vote for Brandenburg!

Anonymous said...

Good for you eye. Finally seeing the truth behind the liberalsim of Brandenbergs office. I heard both Kari and Lisa on KKOB and have had it with Karis lies. I am a consevative democrat and am sick of the BS that goes on with this crime ridden City of ours. I am glad to see the editorial board at the Journal make a wise choice.

Vote Torroco

Anonymous said...

It turns out that when Brandy claims a 95% conviction rate, she's claiming plea bargains among the convictions - which is just a little different that actually winning.

I don't trust her.

Vote Torraco

Anonymous said...

i think it is funny that the APOA endorsed Kari on their own. there are 5 members of the political action committee and they are the ones that voted to endorse. The department as a whole wants LISA. the apoa was so afraid to put it to vote because they knew kari would not be endorsed.

Anonymous said...

I don't trust either of them, surprise surprise, politics as usual in New Mexico! Nothing to lose in voting for Torraco, I guess how much worse could it be? And that's not a rhetorical question BTW.

Anonymous said...

Her candidacy is motivated by cases that SHOULDN'T BE PROSECUTED, but are???? Charging DWI when breath tests fall below the presumed level of intoxication can often fall in that category??? Torraco thinks there's plenty of work to be done at the .08 limit and above??????? .... Who the hell does this ignorant woman think she is? Above the law???

Anonymous said...

Her candidacy is motivated by cases that shouldn't be prosecuted, but are. ... Lisa Torraco has my vote!

Anonymous said...

Ms. Torraco claimed in a recent radio interview that her "calling" is to prosecute cases. If that's true, perhaps she'd care to explain why she's been been a criminal defense attorney for last several years.

One would suspect that if her "calling" was to prosecute cases, then she'd be prosecuting criminals, not defending them.

Her only "calling" is to say whatever happens to be politically expedient at the time.

Anonymous said...

We wouldn't be having this debate if we just imposed a 2 term limit for the D.A. as well.... problem solved.....

Anonymous said...

Do you also want a "two-term limit" on your doctor or your accountant? Of course you are too smart to think that would be a good idea! You don't want your surgeon or other professional to be a neophyte who's just starting on-the-job training.

The best prosecutors' offices are usually led by a DA who's served two or more terms in office. They have learned what works as opposed to what simply sounds good to voters who don't know any better.

A two-term limit is one of Torraco's stupidest ideas yet, and that's quite a feat when she has so many ridiculous notions.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree...prosecuting people who blow under the legal limit is wrong and ties up the courts. I shouldn't have to fear having a glass of wine with my meal then getting locked up for blowing a .04 .If you have less than two drinks it doesn't make a person a criminal!!!

Anonymous said...

The 95% is calculated the same way as any prosecutor's office in the country would calculate it. A conviction is a conviction, whether through a plea agreement or a long and expensive jury trial. When a defendant pleads guilty there is no appeal, a fact usually appreciated by victims and their family members. If there were no plea agreements, taxpayers would need to pay to hire about NINE TIMES as many judges, prosecutors, public defenders, court clerks, bailiffs and secretaries than are presently employed---at NINE TIMES the cost we're paying now. Of course we would have to pay for NINE TIMES times as many courtrooms, offices, judges' chambers and equipment as at present. The funny thing is that after paying for all that the results would often be exactly the same as they are now when about 90% of all cases in the country are settled through a plea agreements. Anyone who thinks that even 50 % of all cases could be taken to trial is grossly uninformed and naive.

Ms. Torraco doesn't have much real felony experience, but even she knows that she would need to plead out about the same number of cases, or the entire system would go into grid-lock and the majority of cases would end up dismissed as a result.

The only alternative available would be to simply do nothing about the vast majority of serious felony cases, and only seek indictment on those the court would have time to try. If you don't like the idea of using plea agreements these alternatives are much worst I assure you. Or there's always the option of paying to build all those extra courthouses, and paying millions of dollars more each year to assure that every case goes to a trial.

Oh yes, don't forget that about NINE TIMES as many jurors would be needed, so plan to spend a lot of time on jury duty!

Get real people! Quit buying the garbage Torraco and company are trying to sell to those who don't know any better. You're smarter than that.

Anonymous said...

I think the $50.00 stimulous check that Gov. Richardson and the legistlature plans to give us should be returned with a note saying that it is about $4000.00 short. Look at it this way, If you spend $50.00 for dinner with your date and get pulled over for having a glass of wine, then the DWI fees will be at least $4000.00. That would be an expensive dinner and hardly worth giving some struggling venue your business! May as well stay home again. :(

Anonymous said...

I don't know the complete details about Ms. Kari, but being a retired Cop, I know that any DA that Plea Bargains with felons and those felons walk and they commit crimes and God forbid Murders should have their perverial butts kicked out of office!!! End of Story!!! They should have their heads checked, they contributed directly to the crime rate and gave many families undue and wanted stress not to mention nightmares! What the Hell is the matter with You Lady!!!

Anonymous said...

For the poster several up... Well, you shouldnt be worried if that "one glass of wine" doesnt impair you. If after one glass of wine you are unable to operate a motor vehicle safely and are unable to balance, etc. then you deserve to go to jail you idiot

Anonymous said...

October 30, 2008 9:36:00 AM MDT

A number of arrests have sent innocent people to jail because of low life idiot cops like you! You automatically think people drink too much even if they are within the presumed level of intoxication, blowing only an .02. How can you call that impairment? Everybody has their own story to tell. You are an abuser of power and the 4th amendment, usually not having "probable cause" while "seizing and searching" motorists, not having a "warrant," particularly stating to a judge through an "oath of affirmation" what you are searching for? You then lie about your encounter on a criminal complaint. You are a pervert of the U.S. constitution, law enforcement, and a disgrace to humanity itself! A lot of people are paying out their hard earned money, and then their cases being dissmissed because the truth becomes evident. Individuals like you shouldn't be representive of good cops in the APD in the first place. This is all about making quotas and hurting U.S. citizens. Maybe it's about you getting a paycheck or a pat on the back from your gay buddy? Read the newspaper, they report about what they see. You certainly don't care about anyone's safety or our economy. Some see you as you are, a hard ass that could probably use a vacation and an attitude adjustment. Please, crawl back under the rock you came from!

Anonymous said...

Is a 90 pound person who blows a .08 as impared as a 200 pound person who blows the same .08? It is interesting to me if your answer is yes!

Anonymous said...

October 30, 2008 9:36:00 AM MDT

I don't drink and drive. I think you are an idiot! Nobody deserves to be stopped due to your personal mistaken opinions. They deserve respect!

Anonymous said...

I tottally agree with above post. Kari is a freaking idiot to be plea bargaining with convicted Felons. What about the three strikes law. DO we have one in this state and is not being used for habitual offenders. It is absolutely outragous that we have to be worried when we go out at night that we will either be robbed or hit in a car by a repeat offender. Kari for DA. Hahahaha. Yeah right.

VOTE Torroco for DA, please. We need to change this freaking mess she has made.

Anonymous said...

cases are dismissed because lawyers are running the show. It's all just a show. Nothin' but an empty gesture. It's sad, really.

Anonymous said...

Well, the Dems. that vote straight ticket will have no one but themselves to blame when the felons are back out on the street, killing and robbing, business as usual. If you're gonna vote for Obama, at least SPLIT your ticket and vote republican for Torraco AND White!!!! Don't forget: all politics is local. (or is that loco???)hahahaha. Vote for Lisa & Darren (at least we repubs. have a sense of humor!!)

Anonymous said...

... Her candidacy is motivated by cases that shouldn't be prosecuted, but are. Charging DWI when breath tests fall below the presumed level of intoxication can often fall in that category. Torraco thinks there's plenty of work to be done at the .08 limit and above... I will vote for Lisa Torraco!

Anonymous said...

Well of course the Dems will benefit from more felons on the street, now if only they[felons] could vote.
In other news we find that apparently Mark Rudd, a former Weather underground player along with Ayers & Bernadette Dorhn lives here locally and contributes to the Heinrich campaign. Not that that really is damning, since, if you were a [former] bomb-making radical with a few bucks who else here could you donate too??

Anonymous said...

What kills me is the so called conservatives are always accusing the Democrats for the mess republican's created ... The liberals always seem to know how to clean up after their apponents though! Thank goodness.

Anonymous said...

"Is a 90 pound person who blows a .08 as impared as a 200 pound person who blows the same .08? It is interesting to me if your answer is yes!"

It really doesn't matter what his/her answer is until the law is changed. Right now the law reads a driver must have a .08 BAC in order be found guilty of a DWI. Until that is changed, it doesn't matter if the alleged offender weighs 80 lbs. or 350 lbs., if they blow <.08 BAC, they CANNOT be convicted of DWI.

If you want that changed, I suggest you talk to the Legislature, not the DA. Neither Brandenburg nor Torraco can make the laws, they can only attempt to enforce them.

(Which, consequently, is why I'll vote Torraco - she at least seems to understand that someone has to actually have broken a law before she wastes money prosecuting them.)

Anonymous said...

Just to clarify for those of you who think you know the law but do not, there are two ways you can be guilty of DWI: The first is to be "impaired to the slightest degree by drugs or alcohol that you cannot safely operate a motor vehicle. This standard has been the law in NM for well over 50 years. The .08 part everyone latches onto as the "gold standard of intoxication" is something called a legal presumption. If you test .08 or above you are presumed to be intoxicated. Lots and lots of people are "impaired to the slightest degree" at levels well below .08, and they kill people just as dead as other DWI drivers who happen to test at .08 or above.

At least go read the law before you start expounding upon it like you know what you are talking about.

One additional thought is this: many repeat DWI drivers know that taking a breath or blood test will only go to prove they are intoxicated. They refuse to take a test the next time they are stopped. Without a blood or breath test they are among those proven guilty of DWI by being "impaired to the slightest degree".

Anonymous said...

Well, then perhaps I will lobby for THAT portion of the law to be changed. Allowing bitter, arrogant, presumptuous APD officers to make a judgment regarding someone's impairment is like letting my four year old daughter judge when she's had too much Halloween candy.

Most officers I've come in contact with would have hauled me in if I'd so much as misspoken a word at a checkpoint. Nowadays, you're drunk unless and until you can prove you're NOT.

Anonymous said...

Citizens often times "misspeak" (as you put it) at check points, LEOs are trained to overlook it, or laugh with you as the case may be. Driving buzzed is driving drunk, get over it or go to AA.

Anonymous said...

Who said anything about being buzzed? I'm talking about being sober-as in having had NOTHING to drink-and being scared I'm going to be hauled in becaue some under-trained, overzealous APD officer decides I'm drunk based on whatever his own criteria is.

Anonymous said...

correction now HIS own criteria... its based on NHTSA... you idiot...

Anonymous said...

Name one case where a person was " hauled in" by an under trained DWI Officer at a check point? DWI Officers are very highly trained and skilled. It is misguided uninformed people like you who makes false allegations and assume you are right even though you don't have the slightest clue of what you are talking about. The criteria is set forth in state law and followed by these highly trained officers. You obiviously have never had a friend or family member killed by a drunk driver. Well I have and I am grateful for these higly trained officers!!!!

Anonymous said...

who ever defends drunk drivers is scum!