.
Ed Boks posted his response to an "uninformed critic" (me) about the arrest of Ron Mason on the LAAS website on October 26 as Truth vs. Rumor #12. Boks cited paragraph after paragraph of a complaint I sent out to a wide community.
Concerning my objection that he turned Mason's arrest into a media circus to make him and the Animal Cruelty Task Force look good, Boks responded that it was part of his policy of making his department "transparent," and that critics (me) would have complained of lack of transparency if he did not turn the arrest into a media circus.
But there is more to it that that as I pointed out. Every element of Boks' actions could be viewed as slandering and libeling of Ron Mason.
The first order of business after the judge appoints a public defender is that Ron and I will make sure he subpoenas Dana Bartholomew.
It's not going to look good that LAAS lied to a reporter, particularly when they made such a point of bringing Dana in, which certainly gives the impression that this was intended as much for PR as enforcement. What does it look like to bring in a reporter and have this big photo essay -- which is prejudicial to the jury pool to say the least – with the wide circulation of the Daily News, including website hits, when it turns out they primed the pump by giving false information to the reporter?
Murderers get arrested with a lot less fanfare. I've never seen a photo essay of the arrest of a murderer or rapist. The case should be thrown out just for the pictures.
It seems like a competent public defender should also be able to make hay out of the "breeding stock" crack too. What is Boks basing that on? It wasn't in the Daily News story, and surely doesn't come from any statement Ron made. It's clearly something he made up to inflame a particular group, i.e. the animal rescue community. The email by Boks sent to me and others in the animal community, and is now on an official city website, is overtly aimed at the non-ADL rescue community.
It's a transparent lie intended to manipulate us into disliking Ron -- even the use of the word "stock" rather than cats or animals is intended to be offensive. But adding baseless charges that, even if they were true, wouldn't be criminal, on an official city site has got to be bad form, if not outright libel.
.
When they took him to jail or first detained him at his house, they had to read him his miranda rights before they asked him any questions. They had to say "you have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be provided to you." Then they ask him if he wants an attorney. He should have said yes. He needs to contact the court and tell them he wants an attorney. If they didn't read him his rights, anything he told them is inadmissable and he was jailed illegally.
ReplyDelete