Reinstate Ross! Reinstate Ross!

|
(117)
Ross and Eliana Mirkarimi and son Theo stand with Women Standing with Ross

More than l00 women supporters of suspended Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi gathered on the City Hall steps Sunday  to stand with Ross in a show of support and  a photo shoot.

The women held signs reading “Stand with Eliana and Ross, Reinstate our Sheriff” and “I believe Eliana” in English and Spanish.

Ross told the women that Mayor Ed Lee was seeking his ouster as sheriff as a way to knock out the top elected progressives in the city and to consolidate power against the progressive community.

But, he said, “as a community we stand our ground and we maintain the principles of what is just and fair.”

He said that Lee was orchestrating the supervisorial vote on his ouster to come before the November election and thus put maximum pressure on the supervisors.  He called on the community to fight back, contact the supervisors and the media and let them know that the public wants Ross to be reinstated as sheriff.

His outreach information, distributed at the event, stated: “Let the Board of Supervisors and media hear from you on behalf of Ross Mirkarimi.  He is a good man who has dedicated himself for years to serve the citizens of San Francisco.  Ironically, although his career is in Justice, he has experienced the lack of Justice at the hands of City Hall."

And: “We elected Ross and should be the only ones to determine who is our sheriff.  Not the mayor, not the Ethics Commission, but the voters.”

The statement noted that Ross got more votes in November than did Lee for mayor and that the voters have been disenfranchised by Lee.  It also noted that “there is no precedent for suspending an official without pay.  What a terrible, unjust thing to do to a man.”

Comments

--*and* she never reported it to the police; evidently feeling that she was in no danger.

Her *lawyer* Ivory Madison did report it, and violated Eliana's attorney-client confidentiality privilege to do so. I like to have made that point.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 10:54 am

reporting it to the cops. They fear the cops will do nothing and then the abuser will punish them even more for the betrayal.

That is the basis of the "zero tolerance" approach to DV. Unless the victim is guaranteed that the system will protect her, she cannot trust enough to call the cops.

If Madison had not done an intervention, Eliana would have gotten many more bruises, or worse. She could even be dead by now. The system worked the way it should - putting the woman and the victim first.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:09 am

desire to leave the country and take Theo with her does not make Ross into an abuser. Of course, the situation is far more ambiguous than the anti-Mirkarimi haters would like to suggest.

Your claim that Eliana "would have gotten many more bruises, or... could even be dead now" is absurdly false. Liar.

While there can be no doubt that in the past women often suffered abuse for years without reporting it, *no* such claim can be substantiated with regard to Ross and Eliana; irrespective of the opinions of Ivory Madison -- a person known to hold *extreme* views in regard to domestic violence and the relationship of men and women through her published writings. I'd like to see your citation for this claim that the situation to which you refer is currently the case, but since I'm haven't been getting word back when I ask for citations, I'm not going to be holding my breath.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:48 am

reasonably ask for other than Ross's own admission of it? He has pled guilty to a DV-related crime, admitted it on camera, and apologized for it. It's not clear why you would call Ross a liar and deny that.

The only remaining question is whether the Supes deem that sufficient for Ross to not hold office and, if they follow the expressed will of the SF voters and their elected mayor, they will.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 12:31 pm

I'd like to see your citation that Ivory Madison holds extreme views about domestic violence and relations between men and women. No, her fiction doesn't count. It's fiction.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 11:03 pm
Posted by Guest on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 12:51 am

Not all women think and act alike. This is a reality which the professional domestic violence industry does not acknowledge for obvious reasons. They collect lots of dollars pimping the idea that all women who don't follow the infantilizing script of the dv mavens, all those women are lying and can't speak for themselves. It's a load.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 4:35 pm

Not all women think and act alike. This is a reality which the professional domestic violence industry does not acknowledge for obvious reasons. They collect lots of dollars pimping the idea that all women who don't follow the infantilizing script of the dv mavens, all those women are lying and can't speak for themselves. It's a load. Don't encourage them.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 4:37 pm

In the video she points to her bruise and says "it's happened before", clearly indicating there had been previous violence.

Then she said there had not been.

On which occasion was she lying?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:03 am

In the video she said "this is not the first time this is happening" -- which is far more ambiguous than your falsified representation would suggest -- and can easily be interpreted to mean exactly what she has subsequently clarified it to have meant: that she and Ross had argued previously about her taking Theo out of the country.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:34 am

to incriminate Ross, it is clear what she meant when she pointed to the bruise and said "it has happened before".

However, I don't mean by that that it is 100% certain that it had "happened before". The point was more to show that Eliana, as a "soap opera actress", will say whatever she thinks will achieve her ends. Her ends changed over time, and so did her story. And she clearly had not anticipated that Ross would lose his and hers paycheck.

Goes to her credibility not Ross's culpability.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:48 am

Eliana Lopez's attorney, attempted to suborn perjury by encouraging Eliana to claim a previous arm grab, but that the furthest she could get Eliana to go with that was to make an ambiguous statement, I might be tempted to stipulate that possibility.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 6:00 pm

And can easily be manipulated into saying anything, on camera or elsewhere?

Hmmm, interesting.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 4:21 am

Almost certainly you feel that claim means that Eliana's indictment of the system which was perpetrated on her family is false, and the initial allegation -- made not by her, but stemming from a video made at her lawyer's behest and with the intention to hold in reserve as insurance against a possibly future custody battle, and released without her permission in contravention of her constitutional right to attorney-client confindentiality -- is true.

But how can anyone honestly suppose that every claim made by women regarding domestic violence is true? Is it not obvious that some percentage of claims are indeed false? And even in cases of a very marginal or ambiguous natures -- which, of course, some will continue to claim do not exist even though anyone with any sense will realize otherwise -- is it not completely understandable that the reporter of such -- which , again, *Eliana* *was* *not!* -- would recant after seeing the phenomenal and completely disproportionate apparatus which is put in motion over such reports?

Hypocritically, the reactionaries who are pushing the hardest on this case also hate what they term the "welfare state"; government services which empower women to leave truly dangerous situations. You can't have it both ways, lying filth.

Oh, yeah. The question: citation please?

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 10:46 am

seems little point or value in you calling Ross a liar.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 11:04 am

Thanks for your coverage of the women's rally supporting Ross Mirkarimi. If this entire scenario were submitted as a movie script it would be rejected as too implausible. The treatment of Eliana and Ross at every step of the way has been cruel beyond precedent. It was wonderful to see the family reunited. NOw the next step is to reinstate Ross.

Posted by Guest Vivian on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 5:30 pm

It does sort of boggle the mind. Can we really understand the restraining order separating Ross from the tearful Eliana when they arrived at the court for his arraignment holding hands? Over an *arm* *grab?* Really?

Don't tell me this is SOP. Don't ask me to understand. If Eliana had had a bruised face or had had to go to the hospital following their argument, I could very well consider it. But it was a momentary *arm* *grab* for chrissakes!

I'm *not* saying that an arm grab is justified or right, but balance people! The judge forcibly separated a man from his wife and son.

I'm thankful for having had a chance encounter with the sheriff at the supermarket to tell him personally how badly I've felt for him and his family.

A feather in the cap for domestic violence prevention and prosecution advocates? Hardly.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 6:00 pm