Ethics Commission rejects Mirkarimi delay request

|
(143)
The Mirkarimi case has generated intense media and political scrutiny.
Luke Thomas/Fog City Journal

The Ethics Commission – in a decision made by Chair Benedict Hur, to whom the commission had given the authority to make procedural decisions – today rejected a request by attorneys for suspended Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi to delay transfer of his official misconduct case to the Board of Supervisors until after the Nov. 6 election.

Mirkarimi's attorneys argued that the decision has been overly politicized during the election season, with supervisorial challengers turning the decision into a litmus test and interest groups polling voters on whether they would be more likely to reject supervisors who voted for reinstating Mirkarimi. The City Charter requires the board to act within 30 days of receiving the official record from Ethics, which will probably happen early next week.

“The fate of the sheriff has been made a key political issue in the election by the media, candidates, consultants, mayoral appointees to commissions, and others. Sending the record to the Board immediately prior to an election deprives the Sheriff of a neutral decision-maker, as guaranteed by the Due Process clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments,” attorney David Waggoner wrote to the commission on Sept. 10, attaching eight articles and campaign pieces linking the Mirkarimi decision to the supervisorial races.

But Hur disagreed. “There is no evidence suggesting that any member of the Board of Supervisors will disregard the facts and the law and instead vote to sustain the charges based upon perceived political pressure,” he wrote. Actually, he argued that “granting the Sheriff's request would cause the Commission to engage in the type of political maneuvering that it seeks to avoid. The commission will not manipulate the timing of the Board's decision in a misguided attempt to predict the nadir of public pressure on the Supervisors.”

Mirkarimi told the Guardian that he was disappointed by the decision, noting that it was Mayor Ed Lee's piling on of excessive charges that the commission found no evidence to support that have delayed the board's deliberations until the height of the election season. “This is so vividly and transparently political.”

Comments

The people of this city are entitled to know who their sheriff is going to be ASAP.

Board vote will be close. If a normal majority vote applied, Ross would be doomed. I've no idea why 9 votes are needed given that 8 is the most that is needed for anything else, and usually it is just 6.

Ross might just manage three votes, and then be a lame duck sheriff for 2 years.

Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 4:17 pm

by reinstating our progressive sheriff to his office with back pay - that is the only solution we, the women of San Francisco, will accept.

Of course the awful DV women like Bev Big Butt Upton and Attorney Poison Ivory Madison don't want that - they want to destroy this beautiful family. They are threatened by the love the incredibly gorgeous Eliana and the powerfully masculine Ross show for one another. They are determined to destroy that love because they're jealous of it - it's sickening to watch this spectacle unfold. Where is the outrage at how this lovely family is being treated?

Posted by jccourt on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 7:12 pm
Wtf

Wtf

Posted by Guest on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 11:50 pm

his improbably gorgeous looks, the people of this city are - sadly and inexplicably - 75% against him. Ross fears the voters will demand that the Supes vote against him.

So, in the end, it's all politics. But then - wasn't it always? Would SFBg be making such a fuss if this were a republican? Nobody believes that.

Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 4:13 am

"How dare Mayor Lee try to capitalize on my family's misfortune, berate my husband, but not have the decency to ever call me to ask my opinion about his prosecution of my husband? But as an increasing number of San Franciscans have concluded, this case is not about domestic violence; it's about politics.

"As an outspoken progressive and a public servant, Ross has his share of detractors because he's not all things to all people. That's never been his style. But he is principled. When this process wrongfully forced us apart by a court order that neither one of us wanted, they used our seven-month separation to try to break Ross' spirit.

"To compound their effort, they used our family as a weapon by suspending him without pay and without due process so that he couldn't provide for me and our son.

"In my home country of Venezuela, news reports of what is happening here to me, Ross and our 3-year-old son, sum it up as a coup d'etat. When we're out and about in all parts of San Francisco, many people refer to this ordeal as 'ugly politics.'"

"With politics this dirty, no one believed Ross would remain in the fight. But they do not know Ross as I do. Even when we were forcibly separated, we remained strong."

"Now, together again, we are stronger than ever, and we will not stand by as this city's political machine tries to ruin us - and make a mockery of domestic violence."

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Eliana-Lopez-decries-SF-...

Posted by Guest on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

will say anything, act out and shed crocodile tears to try and get Ross's paycheck back, so she can then turn around and sue his sorry ass for big-time alimony and child support.

This whole Ross and Eliana fairy story is a concocted, self-serving attempt to manipulate public opinion. And the poll show very clearly that it is not working.

Ross must go.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 5:46 pm

I keep hearing this lie repeated over and over, as if by saying it enough, people will begin to believe it. But I've haven't seen even a shred of evidence to support this lie. Eliana is intensely loyal. She came back to support Ross when you (trolls) swore she'd never come back to SF. She has stood by her husband through the worst of his ordeal. And she is obviously in love. You can see it in her body language when she's with her husband. Yet you contine to repeat this lie that she is just after his alimony. Hell, you don't even know her, but that doesn't stop you from saying the most vicious, hateful things...just a stream of abuse and lies. Tell me, how do you sleep at night?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 6:09 pm

"But I've haven't seen even a shred of evidence to support this lie. Eliana is intensely loyal."

LOL. Why did she make the video then, if she was so "intensely loyal"?

Obviously, she was gathering material for her planned custody suit.

The only mistake she made was that coming from a Third World dictatorship, and knowing that Ross was a "powerful man", it never occurred to her that Ross could lose his job over a bruise.

In macho Latin America, people would laugh at that - but Eliana didn't realize that leftist and feminist militants wrote the DV laws in San Francisco, where "verbal abuse" can and is treated as a crime of violence. Ross comes out of that militant political culture - he deserves to be prosecuted under that culture's laws.

Now Eliana will utilize every ounce of her telenovela actress skills to get Ross' job back, so he will have some money that she can seize.

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly Persistent on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 7:07 am

Madison: "Screw him!"

"Screw him!," remember?

So Eliana and Ross had argued -- more than once. We *know* that.

Do married couples sometimes argue and yet remain fiercely loyal to each other?

"It never occurred to her that Ross could lose his job over a bruise."

No. It never occured to Eliana that Ivory Madison, her erstwhile friend giving her legal advice would reveal the presence of the video to authorities *AGAINST* *HER* *WISHES*.

You know what? You reveal yourself plainly in your false claim that Venezuela is a "third world dictatorship." Chavez was elected several times by large majorities; last time by nearly 63 percent of the vote. (Landslide!, Landslide!)

San Francisco is looking like a third world dictatorship because the election of Ross Mirkarimi as sheriff is being nullified through false interpretation of the city charter and purely motivated by political vendetta.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 7:55 am

"You know what? You reveal yourself plainly in your false claim that Venezuela is a "third world dictatorship." Chavez was elected several times by large majorities; last time by nearly 63 percent of the vote. (Landslide!, Landslide!)"

LOL. Yeah, right. Didn't Eliana lose her job because Maximum Leader shut down the opposition TV station that ran the program she was appearing in?

Mirk and Eliana should move there - they would find the political climate more appealing, and I understand that there is soon going to be an important political job opening up in Venezuela.

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly Persistent on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 8:38 am

is always a positive sign. Fob it off as "rhetoric" if you can, but it seems so much more authentic when you lie boldly.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 9:17 am

is always a positive sign. Fob it off as "rhetoric" if you can, but it seems so much more authentic when you lie boldly.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 9:18 am

"[Mirkarimi's opponents] are quick to point out that the misdemeanor was for what sounds like the troubling crime of "false imprisonment." They fail to mention that it amounted to nothing more than Ross turning around our minivan on our way for pizza and heading home because we were having an argument that was inappropriate for a public setting."

Many of the same vituperative bile spewers I've thankfully forgotten, such as Maxpilatus who had some personal gripe with Mirkarimi over a crime he was prosecuted for when Ross was with the DA's office; Emeraux, my erstwhile friend on SFGate whose irrational hatred for the sheriff I chalked up to his own hetero-phobic compulsions, and so many others.

And then there are the minority of decent people who have my thumb-up support in spirit if not in practice.

Somebody tell Jusher I said hi.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 6:16 pm

Did the Doar Committee call the Watergate when they were about to impeach Nixon? Eliana Lopez's take on this is about as relevant. Mirkarimi committed a crime against society, not his wife.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 2:21 pm

“There is no evidence suggesting that any member of the Board of Supervisors will disregard the facts and the law and instead vote to sustain the charges based upon perceived political pressure,” Ethics Commission Chairman Ben Hur wrote.

There is no evidence suggesting that Ben Hur is not a bag man for the Brown/Pak/Lee machine.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 4:20 pm

Clearly he's now part of the conspiracy too.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 4:46 pm

As if this fiasco couldn't get any more ridiculous.

Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 4:58 pm

There are no imps on this board!

By the way, have I mentioned that I'm converting to Mormonism?

Posted by lillipublicans* on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 6:37 am

of free speech and an open, sunshiney, wishy-washy liberalism.

Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 12:49 pm

except me, Guest, because I know better than to post my real name. ha!

Posted by Guest on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 3:28 pm

Look at the disgusting talking points he's ordering his followers to use - "he's a progressive being targeted by City Hall" and blah, blah, blah. He's completely politicized this issue and continues to do so.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 4:44 pm

Sure is enough evidence to support “that any member of the Board of Supervisors will disregard the facts and the law,” its on video tape, particularly regarding meetings in which land-use issues unpopular with S.F. residents are heard.

We have it from a former player’s mouth: It’s only in election year that the S.F. Board of Supervisors might be swayed by the majority opinion of its constituents and dump him. As soon as the election is over, Ross could be in like Flynn.

We need to dump Mirkarimi, but more important is fixing our legislative body, based on his wake-up call.

Dump district elections!

Every proceeding at the Board should be neutrally deliberative on behalf of a broader body of S.F. residents than it has been since wily Brown’s eye caught sight of reconfiguring land use in S.F. on behalf of out-of-town special interests.

Tom Ferriole

Posted by Tom Ferriole on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 7:27 pm

It's not just district elections, the local people just need to care in general.

How many people can even name 3 Supervisors? How about their own?

The voters have a feeling that the local stuff doesn't matter much but in fact it affects their daily life greatly.

An informed, involved electorate would never elect someone like Aaron Peskin, who creates a viscerally negative reaction in people when they first become aware of him. Wake up!

Posted by Troll on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 8:09 pm

I am very happy about this ruling. Frankly, I think it completely appropriate for supervisors to have to face the voters after making this decision. This is not a criminal trial. Supervisors should be held accountable by the voters for their vote on the Ross issue. To delay things until after the election unfairly deprives voters of their opportunity to speak on this issue.

Posted by D. Native on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 7:41 pm

The BOS seldom face such potential immediate accountability on an issue. Some of them must be mighty nervous.

Posted by sfsoma on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 6:23 am

The People Love Ross!

Have The Supes Vote Now, So They Can Be Rewarded By The Voters For Standing With Ross!

Posted by Guestier Than Guest on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 6:35 am

"There is no evidence suggesting that Ben Hur is not a bag man for the Brown/Pak/Lee machine."

There is no evidence suggesting that lillipublicans is not a poorly-designed bot, created to spam discussion boards to make progressives look dumb.

Think of him as the Stuxnet of the vast right-wing conspiracy!

Posted by Politics Is Fun! on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 6:39 am

""There is no evidence suggesting that Ben Hur is not a bag man for the Brown/Pak/Lee machine."

A framing worthy of Christine Craft. I'm reminded of the Doctor Who episode where the Doctor brings down a Prime Minister by whispering "Don't you think she looks tired?" to just one person.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 2:51 pm

Well, they're gonna have to do their homework alright...I assume each will give their reasons for voting the way they will vote. All we can do is speak out, and hope that sanity, love, and a willingness to look at all aspects of this case will prevail. I'm hoping for a measured response, not a "reaction" based on fear, which is an all-too common response in our society, from the medical model (ie we have the technology to use, so let's use it at all costs out of fear, rather than look at the lifestyle of the patient and try to address certain issues and follow the patient---to the military model of pre-emptive war as in what we did in Iraq.) I'm tired of that model and think it is what drives the anti-DV advocates and Ed Lee, et al. I believe San Francisco can do better than that. I believe in love and wisdom, and I hope it prevails.

Posted by Daniele E. on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 7:33 am

A sick lust for revenge and fear of the earthy sexuality which is so easily on display between our proud, strong progressive sheriff who is under threat at the behest of evil Ed Lee, and his beautiful and elegant wife Eliana. The awful DV women fear this sexuality and they fear the will of the voters too. They will stop at nothing in the efforts to destroy this young family. It's sickening - where is the outrage!

Posted by jccourt on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 8:57 am

If you're going to imp someone, at least try to be original. Stop saying the same exact words over and over, as if it's somehow brilliant and original. I know, you think you're funny, but it's just so monotonous and I hate being bored.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

parody and satire, as she originally expressed support for Ross in terms of his animal magnetism, and also extolled Eliana's evocatively exotic and enigmatic mysticism.

So she walked into the criticism, should have known the risks, and took her chances. She can hardly now complain when she gets taken apart as a result.

ChrisCraft self-destructed in her own hubris, while Lilli has morphed into a caricature of a demented buffoon. That should have been an adequate warning to others and, if they didn't heed, they must perish under a withering current of targetted wit and irony.

Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 3:53 pm

We are mothers, sisters, aunts and daughters, straight and lesbian, trans and pre-op - all coming together to stand by Ross and to stop the destruction of this beautiful family. As women we thoroughly understand that sometimes a man loses a bit of control. Ross has admitted this and is working through his anger issues in city-mandated counseling. He has paid a terrible price for his small loss of self-control and we feel that is enough.

Our progressive sheriff has helped so many vulnerable communities during his time in office. He also protected us from plastic bags and supported legislation banning handgun possession. Despite finding out he owned multiple handguns at the time of his arrest we feel his heart was in the right place. Ross is a powerful man with many enemies - he needed those guns (and not knowing where they were either is easily explainable, just ask Ross about it).

Ross and Eliana have suffered enough at the demented hands of evil women like Bev Big Butt Upton and Attorney Poison Ivory. This case is really about these awful women and their hatred of a powerful, masculine man like Ross Mirkarimi. It's time to end this sickening show trial and return our progressive sheriff to office - with back pay please. Thanks.

Posted by JCCourt on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 11:34 pm
Posted by Anonymous on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 8:20 am

JC Court never said anything about Eliana's "evocatively exotic and enigmatic mysticism." All the talk about how "elegant" Eliana is, and how "masculine" Ross is, is coming from some stupid troll. Was it you, Anonymous? There's nothing remotely witty about it. You seem to think so, but it's just silly and pathetic. How would you like it if we start putting words in your mouth?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 4:21 pm

"All the talk about how "elegant" Eliana is, and how "masculine" Ross is, is coming from some stupid troll."

Bruce B. August 17th:

"Eliana Lopez once again stole the show as the Ethics Commission Thursday debated the “ethical fate” of her husband Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi inside City Hall while the Stand With Ross forces and their opponents staged back to back rallies on the City Hall steps.

...

Eliana was greeted with cheers as the tv cameras and reporters crowded in on her.

She spoke with ease and authority, greeted many friends, spoke in Spanish to several Spanish language radio and television reporters, and walked easily through the crowd shaking hands and talking with supporters in two languages."

Come on - this is the SF Bay Guardian trying to imitate "Teen Beat".

Posted by Politics Is Fun! on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 9:29 pm

No mention is made of Eliana's looks. The focus is on her actions and the general scene. It's the "what" as in "what happened", which is at the heart of good reporting. Ever hear about the 5 "W's"? If Eliana stole the show, then that's just what happened. Undoubtedly, you will scream about bias. But is it really that hard to figure out that she's a charismatic person?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 2:36 pm

She's a TV star in her native Venezuela - known throughout Latin America for her dynamite combination of sultry seductiveness and skills at acting. Her husband is strong, virile and a very powerful man. Many women, like Bev Big Butt Upton and Poison Ivory Madison are threatened by this dynamic couple and their obvious sexual magnetism. They want to destroy this beautiful family and they're using these trumped up charges as ammunition in their sickening campaign. We will not stand for this - we, the women of San Francisco, demand the return of our progressive sheriff and an end to this coup d'etat. With full back pay for Ross - thanks.

Posted by JCCourt on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 2:50 pm

beauty that transfixed the attendant hordes and drove our correspondent into a rapture that still lingers until this day. Such raw, trenchant sexuality can induce an intoxicating miasma in all those who are present.

Randy Ross and Exotic Eliana's only crime was to evoke erotic envy in those harlots and harridans who typify DV activists - flabby, frustrated flakes who probably never achieve the ecstacy that Mirk and Eli routinely transcend.

The motives of those who impugn our progressive hero and heroine are putrid and we must resist them. We sisters of the left must continue to fight for justice.

Posted by Daniele on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 3:10 pm

Dude, whoever you are, usurping my name is not cool. You people are the lowest of the low. But good timing. I was just about to take my writings where they might make more of a difference. Again, this type of behavior says more about you than anything else. How do you sleep at night?

Posted by Daniele E. on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 3:52 pm

and clearly possesses a pitiable lack of intellectual force and development.

I've been imp'ed too, and have joined others in asking the SFBG staff to take action to abate the problem, which I believe may have been done to some minor extent.

Hopefully more can be done, and I'd like hereby toss out the idea of the SFBG adding a requirement for a CAPTCHA as part of the commenting process.

The need to complete such a puzzle might provide relief since it takes a certain type of intelligence to complete them; and the trouble for doing so will seem most onerous to those who exhibit little mental capacity in their "contributions" here.

Failing that, or in the meantime, I'd like to offer a positive way of looking at being imp'ed Daniele: realize that you have been paid a compliment.

You would not have been imp'ed if your commentary had not been seen as damaging to the troll's reprehensible cause.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 4:28 am

I know lilli. Compliment taken! Anyways, onto bigger fish. Have a good day.

Posted by Daniele E. on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 5:21 am

So lilli is arguing that he should have unique rights to his nic, and that other people ("disgusting imps") should not be able to use his nic.

Sounds like an assertion of property rights to me!

Lilli will be a Republican before you know it - once you assert that a nic is your property, who knows where it will end?

Posted by Demented, Yet Terribly, Terribly Persistent on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 7:32 am

I had some trouble earlier accessing the sfbg.com site.

Anybody else?

So I made one of my rare -- exceedingly rare -- visits to SFGate.

They ran a story about the younger brother of the Yahoo president who was just sentenced for beating up his girlfriend.

The woman was repeatedly abused both verbally and physically, then she was threatened with more of the same plus psychological torture.

This went on over the course of months and finally she reported the most significant physical attack which she documented at the time with a camera, though she didn't report it to the police out of fear.

One of the reasons she was afraid, she said, was that she was threatened with the release of embarassing, revealing, photos that had been taken of her.

I'm not doing the story justice -- it really is too awful -- but one beating she suffered multiple blows to the face and body, had an earing pulled through her ear lobe, split lip, eyelash pulled out... I'm not going to go on... horrible.

The upshot of my comment here is that the perpetrator had the felony battery, felony witness intimidation and another felony charge was dropped and he pled to .... wait for it.... wait for it.... misdemeanor false imprisonment.

So he's been sentenced to... you know... yes. Just the same as you get if you are a progressive sheriff and you grab your wife's arm for a split second.

And the SFGate comment board? Filled with inane comments from such complete jackassess as "fibdiddler" glibly equating the Ross Mirkarimi's brief transgression with the malicious attack featured in the story -- and multiple "this comment violated our terms and conditions" or "this comment was left by someone who's been banned from SFGate" messages.

The one comment visible which mildly asked if it didn't seem like the parity in sentencing between the perpetrator and Ross didn't demonstrate that the system had not meted out equal punishments for grossly unequal crimes... *disappeared* from one minute to the next as I scanned the other comments.

So basically, my message is that SFGate *is* run by ghouls, and populated by ghouls. Disgusting, awesome, horrible.

Intentional? Is is a cruel joke being perpetrated on right-thinking people? Like cutting down the most grand tree in GG Park, just to "prove a point?"

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 14, 2012 @ 10:44 pm

"They ran a story about the younger brother of the Yahoo president who was just sentenced for beating up his girlfriend."

Let's make him sheriff, too!

Pleading guilty to crimes has nothing to do with Ross' fitness for sheriff!

Posted by Politics Is Fun! on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 6:15 am

I guess I must have missed the part about Marissa Mayer's brother getting paid to represent the legal system in San Francisco.

Why not? He was only convicted of 'false imprisonment'. That's not a very violent crime. Let's encourage him to run for office. Sounds great.

Posted by Another Guest on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 8:17 am

No. That's exactly the "point" which extreme twit "fibdiddler" -- and so many other -- sought to make. (Anti-Mirkarimi playbook, much?)

The point is that rather than pleading guilty to midemeanor false imprisonment for turning his family van around, the Yahoo- and Google- related miscreant pled down to false imprisonment for straddling his girlfriend and beating her repeatedly about the head and torso, causing multiple serious injuries which included a torn eyelash and earlobe.

He pled to misdemeanor false imprisonment after being charged with several *felonies* including assault and domestic violence.

From Huffington Post: "Mayer allegedly attacked Trent, pulled out her hair and eyelashes, punched her repeatedly and slammed her head on the floor, and told her that "the only way she was going to get out of this is if he drove her to the Golden Gate Bridge and she jumped off.

The incident allegedly ended when a friend of Mayer's came to the front door to pick up his car keys."

So, no. It isn't the same as turning the family van around and a momentary arm grab, which -- just to be clear -- occured before Ross Mirkarimi was sheriff and therefore has no connection to his suitability for serve in that office as the results of the election ought to control.

Posted by lillipublican on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 9:33 am

Which is incredible as you rarely make much sense at all. You're attempting to draw connections between two completely unrelated cases in order to make a point which is still, despite your 700-1000 posts on this topic, totally unclear.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 10:03 am

If so, we may have a winner here:

"a momentary arm grab, which -- just to be clear -- occured before Ross Mirkarimi was sheriff and therefore has no connection to his suitability for serve in that office"

So something that he did a few hours before becoming Sheriff has "no connection to his suitability". Why? Because aliens captured and reprogrammed him at midnight on New Year's eve?

In reading these posts I am struck by how the Mirkarimi supporters will cling to any technicality to help prop up their cause. But when there is an 800 pound gorilla of a FACT working against them, a criminal conviction...well...that doesn't count because of some extraneous factors that they consider paramount. Why, anyone who feels that a criminal conviction is significant just doesn't understand why Mirkarimi should be Sherriff!!!

No...only the facts that WE care about matter.

Posted by Claris on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 10:06 am

Official misconduct is conduct occuring while in office. Plain and simple; Paul Renne's possibly senile ramblings notwithstanding.

Posted by lillipublican on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 10:22 am

Related articles

  • Supervisors advised against Mirkarimi recusals, essentially removing their gags

  • Full circle

    After months of discussion and faulty charges, the case against Ross Mirkarimi comes down to the initial act — and how broadly to define 'official misconduct'

  • Eliana Lopez is a victim, but of whom?