El Dorado County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
Education Committee El Dorado Union High School Placerville
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F5, F6, F7
Findings 10 findings
F1
Investigations were conducted by both the Placerville Police Department and the El Dorado County Sheriff’s Department into the activities of Women Helping Women in El Dorado County.
F2
The Placerville Police Department and El Dorado County Sheriff’s Department investigative reports were forwarded to the District Attorney.
F3
On February 13, 2002 meeting with five members of Women Helping Women, the District Attorney advised the women no action would be taken if they stopped all group activities in El Dorado County as of that date.
F4
The alleged head of El Dorado County Women Helping Women was one of the five women who met with the District Attorney and was told no charges would be brought against her if she stopped all her activities in El Dorado County as of that date.
F8
The District Attorney had an ex parte communication with a Court Commissioner in violation of Rule 5-300 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys.
F9
The District Attorney misled a Court Commissioner with a false statement of fact in violation of Business & Professions Code, Section 6068 (d).
F10
The District Attorney misrepresented facts regarding his communication with the Commissioner to the State Bar of California and to this Grand Jury.
F11
The District Attorney sent a letter to the Grand Jury misquoting Rule 5-300 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys.
F12
Sworn testimony by the District Attorney and other witnesses conflicts in important and significant details.
F13
Portions of the District Attorney’s testimony and documentation were found to be lacking in truth and veracity.
Recommendations 5
-
R2The District Attorney should establish written procedures pertaining to his “personal” safe whereby all items are properly logged in and out with the appropriate detailed information.
-
R3The personal safe and evidence locker should be audited annually.
-
R4All cash received should be maintained in “double” custody.
-
R5To avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, the District Attorney should set up a written protocol regarding cases whenever the accused is related to or has a relationship with an employee in the District Attorney’s Office, including the District Attorney.
-
R6The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors should revise the County’s nepotism policy to include “significant others.”
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
El Dorado Union High School District
School District