WAZZUP DAWG? REQUESTS FOR INTERVIEWS WITH D.A. CANDIDATES HAS BEEN SENT OUT……..

ONE CANDIDATE HAS ALREADY SCHEDULED A TIME

12-27-2017

070716_0243_WAZZUPDAWGT1.jpg

Just to keep my readers informed Dawgs Blog has sent out requests for interviews with the candidates for Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office.

I will basically be using a generic question list for all three, as I am trying to get consistency in all the interviews and issues, but that is subject to change as the interview evolves.

The requests were just sent out, but I have received one response already, and Patrick Kolasinski, has already scheduled an interview this week. All interviews will be recorded and posted on my site in its entirety.

Feel free to send any questions you may want asked.

Dawgs Blog will make an endorsement after these interviews. Stay tuned.

Advertisements

WAZZUP DAWG? WHAT IS WITH ALL THAT ADVERTISING ON YOUR SITE NOW?

NEED FUNDING FOR ACTIVITIES DURING THE TRIAL

by Marty Carlson

12-09-2017

072316_0202_DAWGSBLOGPO1.png

I’m sure many of you have noted that have started advertising through WordPress and taking on sponsors. I always said I would never do such a thing but to keep disseminating this information of the Frank Carson et al trial that is coming up I need to raise some funds, and donations have come to a stop.

Someone recently suggested to me that we ask people to make monthly donation to Dawgs Blog in support of keeping this information flowing. There are constant expenses in regard to simply going to court, web site costs, supplies, printing materials, Podcasts, boosting posts on Facebook, the occasional purchase of court records like transcripts and other things, and many more.

If anybody is willing to make that type of obligation, which can also be done anonymously (please note if you do), please contact me either on my Facebook page, or you can email me at Dawgonnitdawgsblog@gmail.com , or you can send donations through the mail to PO Box 1115, Hughson, Ca. 95326. I also have a go fund me page that’s been up for some time with no activity for almost a year. https://www.gofundme.com/DawgsBlog 

I also understand there are people who cannot help.

I do not ask you to give anything more than you can afford, and there can be a full accounting at any time upon request. Note too: I am now turning Dawgs Blog into a business and have obtained a business license and all the proper government requirements, like the IRS. Make check out to Marty Carlson Services.

I am not personally trying to make money I am just trying to cover expenses as I am a sole proprietor of this business and not giving myself an income. All monies will be paid out for the website and dissemination of this information.

I appreciate the support that many people have given me, and I am personally here for the long haul to see this case through.

Any help that anybody can provide in regard to these matters would be deeply appreciated.

DAWG

FRANK CARSON UPDATE…….

THE TRIAL IS STARTING TO GET READY…….

By Marty Carlson

12-09-2017


Just a quick note they received word that several subpoenas have been served for the trial beginning on January 9, and for some reason it appears some people from the gallery have been served. It tends to sound like they are trying to fit out the gallery somewhat, at least that is one of the claims from one of the persons served but this person seems to forget they were awful talkative to the police when the search warrants were being served.

Apparently, they’re having a hard time locating some of these witnesses as tweakers tended to drift around, and probably don’t really want to do this as the vacuum that is normally done and are is not present in this case, as all activities are being disclosed.

If anybody hears any more information about this please let me know I can keep it in full confidence I just like to see the activities that are going on.

DAWG

WAZZUP DAWG? WHAT ARE THE RESULTS OF THE POLL FOR THE PODCASTS?

THE RESULTS ARE IN:

AFTER A TOTAL OF ALMOST 300 VIEWS OF THE POLL ARTICLE, ONLY 26 PEOPLE ACTUALLY VOTED.

NOT A STRONG SHOWING BUT THEY ARE A STRONG FOLLOWING.

IT APPEARS TO NOT HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENSE OF THE PODCASTS AND THE OTHER PROMOTIONS THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT. NOT TO MENTION THE DAILY COST OF JUST BEING IN COURT EVERYDAY.

SOMEONE MENTIONED TO ME THE OTHER DAY I COULD SELL ADVERTISING ON MY SITE, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING I DID NOT WANT TO DO, BUT NOW CONSIDERING. IN ADDITION, I CAN PUT A PAYWALL UP TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE ARTICLES. THESE ARE OPTIONS TO KEEP THINGS GOING AND TO KEEP EVERYONE INFORMED.

IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED IN ADVERTISING OR ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS PLEASE LET ME KNOW TO DISCUSS IT. DECISIONS WILL HAVE TO BE MADE SOON.


WAZZUP DAWG: HOW IS CALIFORNIA DOING WITH ALL THOSE NEW TAXES PAID THIS YEAR?

Will they spend it or save it?

(I THINK I KNOW)

11-21-2017

Kalifornia

From Sacbee

The state budget is in good shape to weather a moderate recession, and lawmakers should be able to sock away more money in reserves next year, according to projections the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office issued Wednesday.

The LAO’s outlook shows the state would finish its 2018-19 budget year with more than $19 billion in reserves – assuming lawmakers and Gov. Jerry Brown don’t make any more spending commitments. About $11 billion is obligated for the state’s rainy-day fund.

Lawmakers could spend about $7.5 billion of the surplus, although analysts recommend that they save it to prepare for a recession.

The Legislature also probably will have flexibility to spend several billion dollars in money that’s set aside for kindergarten through community college education, the report says.

The report represents a projection of how the office thinks the economy will fare next year, and what that means for the budget. It projects that the state will collect $135.5 billion in taxes and fees for the 2018-19 general fund, up from $127 billion in the current budget.

The outlook could change quickly if the federal government makes significant changes to tax policy, scraps trade pacts or withholds health insurance reimbursements, the report warned. The Trump administration and Republican members of Congress have advocated for changes to those policies this year.

“Especially in the short term, withdrawal from the (North American Free Trade Agreement) would introduce added risks to the economic outlook,” the report says.

California lawmakers are eying the favorable budget outlook and recommending ways to spend – or save – money. Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Orinda, released a statement calling for the state to use some of the surplus for a large payment on the state’s public employee pension debt.

DAWG SAYS:

WE KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN HERE AND THIS MONEY THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE BACKS OF THE PEOPLE WILL NOT GO BACK TO THE PEOPLE. MAYBE THEY SHOULD LOWER SOME TAXES.

WAZZUP DAWG? WHERE IS THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS REPORT ON JUDGES RULING?

REPORTER AHUMADA PRESENT IN COURT ALL DAY

NO ARTICLE PRINTED

zuniga

As you read and heard in a report yesterday, in the long ruling that judge Zuniga gave on the 1385 hearing, it appeared she was spending a lot of time justifying her rulings in the preliminary hearing.

She gave a long dissertation regarding the witnesses the credibility and the evidence given during 18 months of testimony. She also talked about problems that resulted in the length of the hearing.

She also went into extensive critique of the inability and the problems with the District Attorney’s Office providing discovery in this case. This is not unique to this area, as I am continually hearing from other attorneys about discovery issues for a long time in this county.

Judge Zuniga stated that she has the distinction of being the only judge to release capital case defendants on an OR release, she also noted that was not a distinction she was proud to have.

She went into a long narrative about why that needed to be done, and basically was because new discovery had been brought in by the District Attorney’s Office after everybody had rested their case, one piece of that evidence was an interview of Robert Woody, in fact the first interview of Robert Woody after he was arrested 2014.

fladagerbunch/ferreira

She noted that this was a case that the District Attorney’s Office, and I quote, “let get away from themselves because they filed charges to soon.” She also noted “they bumbled their way through discovery.”

She stated that the District Attorney’s Office right-hand did not know what the left hand was doing, as there was constant confusion between investigators from different agencies. She also noted an argument that attorney Hans had made to at the end of the preliminary hearing discussing that the infrastructure at the district attorney’s office was not up to the job to comply with the law.

Judge Zuniga never made mention from the April 10, 2017 ruling, of her telling the District Attorney’s Office that “she saved their case for them.” She never made mention that she was constantly advising the district attorney the proper methods of posing questions and building foundations to questions with the witness.

She noted that all attorneys were responsible in different ways for the length of the hearing but did put a strong share of the responsibility on the District Attorney’s Office in her insistent re-cross examinations as if she could never let it go.

Yesterday, September 26, 2017 is when she ruled against the defense on their motion for her to dismiss the charges.

Another note of importance, Modesto bee reporter, Rosalio Rahumada, was in court for this entire hearing and her ruling, and as of yet no article in the Modesto be regarding this matter.

In the past, I have been in contact with the Modesto bee and questioned their lack of coverage of the case that they declared was the third most important story of 2015. I have been told there has been extensive coverage by the bee on this case. I personally do not feel that is the case.

RAHUMADA

If anybody wishes to contact the Modesto bee namely Rosalio Rahumada here is his email address. rahumada@modbee.com

WAZZUP DAWG? WITH THAT STANISLAUS COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES AGENCY?

INTERESTING ANIMAL STORY HERE IN STANISLAUS

by Marty Carlson

8-20-2017


This last week I saw a Facebook live video talking about a dog, Rhino, that had been confiscated and taken to Stanislaus County animal control shelter on Cornucopia way. The owner of the dog had been arrested, for a minor warrant, and instead of releasing the dog to a friend that was coming to get Rhino, the police department chose to call animal control and put the dog in doggy jail.

The owner, who is low income, was not able to pay the more than $600 in fees that was amassed while she was taking care of her business. A friend of hers, the one that was coming to pick up the dog originally, was trying to get the dog released from the animal shelter and was running into a stiff brick wall of attitude by some employees there. They were not willing to be too cooperative but were willing to tell him that if the dog is not picked up and paid for by the 5 PM the following day the dog would be going and I quote “nighty night.” They had also claimed that the dog was being held because of a bite was not true they do not seem to be having accurate records there, and shortly thereafter discovered themselves that was not true themselves.

I guess the term “nighty night” must be a term specific to Stanislaus County animal services agency, as far is euthanizing dogs I have not heard that term before. It seems that there’s a negative type of demeanor that’s developed in the animal services agency that does not seem to consider proper customer service. And using that type of terminology to animal lovers is one of the most derogatory terms that you could use.

A plea was put out over Facebook to help this lady that is highly dependent on her dog, and many wonderful people responded with donations to keep the dog from being euthanized.

This reminded me of a personal experience that I had several years ago was stances County animal control services. I had relatives visiting from out of state and had brought their boxer with them, and the neighbor had called animal control stating the dog had bit her grandson. I personally observed the dog around her grandson and he was not bitten, was just scared by a big dog. There were no bite marks on the young man, but the dog was taken and held in the Stanislaus County animal control services facility for quarantine period, which by law could have been done right here at my house. They chose not to do that, forcing a return visit by my relatives and retrieve their dog, after the quarantine period.

I tried explaining to the animal control officer, who had a very poor demeanor with everybody involved, and was not willing to listen. After great expense of the incarceration was paid, the dog came out about 20 pounds lighter and full of fleas. The dog had a totally different demeanor coming out also. This occurred just months after this agency had moved to the new facility on cornucopia way. The dog was a very loving dog but was different after that experience.


About a year ago, an inmate from the honor farm, was working at the agency and took pictures from an area of the agency where they euthanize the dogs. There were dead dogs piled on the floor on top of each other and pictures were taken. See article here

The director, Ann Patton, was very quick to defend what they do, and also very quick to criticize the inmate in an effort to deflect their responsibilities. See article here

In addition, some time just prior to the pictures being taken by the inmate, there was a lady in Modesto who wrote a letter to the editor, stating her dog had gone missing, and had been missing for several weeks. She was never notified by animal control services that her dog was at their facility. She had originally adopted the dog from that facility, and when you do they make you pay for a chip that they insert for tracking purposes, that chip is not optional and youre required to pay. They did not check that chip in the dog or ownerships and had placed the dog up for adoption again. The lady that had originally adopted that dog, saw her dog on the animal control services website where it was up for adoption and contacted them.

She was told by Stanislaus County animal services that they are not obligated to look for ownership of an animal that comes into the facility, they were also demanding that she pay for long-term care of the dog for them having the dog for several weeks. She was put in a position that she had to pay a quite a bit of money if she wanted to get her dog back. Then try to settle the claim with the county later.

Again, the director at the time, Ann Patton, was quoted in the newspaper is saying that they are not obligated nor required to check ownership by chip even though they require people that adopt the dogs to pay for the chip for identification purposes. This director has been quoted also in the past stating that she doesn’t like animals and apparently, she has no big concern about the animals nor the people that own these animals and how much they mean to each other.

In that last example shows the government’s willingness to gather revenue over doing what I personally would consider the right thing. It’s an integrity issue.

Now let me hear what you think

DAWG