re: DA files no charges against Council of Aging

At least laTarsha can go back to driving her Escalade and park the Chevy Cruze now that the coast is clear

This 100% should have gone to a Grand Jury with subpoenas galore and putting witnesses under oath.

Making this conclusion based on an "investigation" is unsat in the extreme.

quote:

---

The auditor referred the findings to Moore, who says he had the legal jurisdiction to investigate two of those six areas: 1) that CoA employees engaged in political activity during work hours, and 2) that the CoA improperly donated funds to the Save Our Seniors PAC, which was created to campaign for the tax.

But Moore says in today’s report there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the CoA broke any laws.

With respect to the allegation that CoA employees engaged in political activity during work hours, Moore says, “the allegations are supported by documents obtained from the (CoA), including staff emails.” But he goes on to note that no surveillance was performed to account for the time of CoA officers and staff “who may well have spent additional hours at work to complete all of their tasks.”

Without that surveillance data, he says it’s impossible for the state to meet the high burden of proof that exists in a criminal prosecution. With respect to the CoA’s relationship with the PAC, Moore acknowledges, “that the (CoA) was lax in separating funds to be used for (CoA) purposes and political purposes, a fact that the (CoA’s) response to the audit acknowledges.” He says, however, there are two problems for a successful criminal case. “First, the use of funds as noted by the audit was arguably to support the dissemination of factual information, the exception that makes otherwise prohibited expenditures of public funds, if not the most prudent use of such monies, at least not criminal in nature. Second, as noted above, the (s)tate would be required to prove that the use of public monies was intended for a purpose unrelated to the dissemination of factual information.”

---

This looks like the difference maker.

Is that Tarsha and her Rolex?

Where there’s a will we’ll take it away.

quote:

---

is this that woman who tried to steal someone's inheritance?

---

Yes, it is. Not only that, when the woman's family filed a lawsuit to stop her, she countersued and the case ended up being assigned to her mother as the judge. You can't make this shite up.

(no message)