Another Bad Interview for Sheriff Smith

It appears that the Sheriff thinks people are making “dishonest allegations.”  She’s not exactly clear on what we’re all being dishonest about — but if it was regarding Aldon Smith, I think the entire incident is well documented enough that we know whose ethics were in question here — clue, it wasn’t NBC.

Oh, and this going to be a “campaign about casting stones.”  No, Sheriff, you are not being victimized here with stone throwing.  Your office blew off the Audrie Pott case for a week, so people could “mourn.”  That decision was made at a captain level.  The administrative decision after that was to send in the SRO to write citations to these little criminals.  Until the public outrage demanded a real investigation into what happened.  At that point, phones had been “lost”, evidence destroyed and these sexual predators did 30 days of weekend jail.  You think that’s a “great job”?  I think that you believing that is tantamount to why you need to retire.  You let that girl and her family down.

While we’re here let’s revisit your office finding Sierra Lamar’s clothes and cellphone on the side of the road, then telling the media that your office still didn’t believe she was at risk, still only classifying her as missing and failing to increase resources for another week.  Another “great job” in your eyes?  What if that girl was still alive at some point while you were trying to justify the idea she was running around naked without her cell phone and that she really wasn’t “at risk“?

Let’s talk about how you blow off Jensen’s email problems in the interview.  Fascinating, your lack of concern when you say that a captain’s email “may have been compromised.”  Hello?!  Security breach at your highest administrative levels and you’re like, “…perhaps it was intentional, I don’t know.”  Are you kidding me?  I know why you’re not concerned.  There are only 4 people who have the level of authority to “interfere” with office email — You, Under Sheriff Hirokawa, and Asst. Sheriffs Neusel and Shervington.  We know that, you know that, but either way, you clearly don’t care that you had, at worst, a security breach, at best, you or your top level staff interfering with the successful operations of your office because you felt one of your captains taking advantage of our democracy is a “coup,” describing your own administration as if it was a dictatorship needing to be overthrown.  Puhleez.  Your response here embodies everything your staff as been trying to tell the public about you and how poorly you’re running this office, including the destructive levels you’ll sink too if you’re personally offended by some one having an opinion.

Then you admit you kept one of your captains out of meetings that would normally be part of his job because there was “confidential” information that you “knew would be used politically.”  Really?  I know Kevin Jensen would not consider for a second putting an active case at risk for any political advantage… ever.  But nice try at attacking his character, speaking of stone-throwing.  It just makes me so curious what is happening at an administrative level that you’re so desperate to keep out of the public eye.

I’ll let everyone read for themselves — below I have images of the article release in today’s Palo Alto Daily Post.

Why ANYONE would vote for the level of callous indifference to the job you show every time you open your mouth in an interview that isn’t staged is beyond me.

PAPOST - page 1      PAPOST - page2


5 thoughts on “Another Bad Interview for Sheriff Smith

  1. Pingback: A Few Notes | Casey Thomas' World

  2. The Sheriff claims she’s going to run on what the department does well. She quotes the AB109 program, gang program and maintaining low crime rates as her strengths.

    The low crime rates she mentions are for the contract cities of Cupertino & Los Altos Hills (Sorry Saratoga, better luck next year). I hate to be the one to break it to you Sheriff, but those areas are statistically always low. There’s not a lot of high crime that happens over there. It’s mostly property crimes and you FAIL these citizens even at that. If you focussed on this you’d actually increase the number of detectives you have assigned to the Westside. They have as large a case load as the HQ detectives but a much smaller number of detectives per case. Now I know you don’t seem to mention or care about the large number of citizens who live in the unincorporated areas (I guess they don’t donate as much money) and any crime reductions there. I guess that’s why we have fewer detectives assigned to HQ now than when you took office even though the number of cases have increased dramatically!

    The AB109 program is a complete failure all around. You claim you “Offer services to help newly released inmates reintegrate into normal life”. How exactly on God’s green earth do YOU do that? It’s nice that you do this for inmates. I guess that BBQ you hosted for them really did the trick!! You fail in all aspects of this. You fail them when they’re locked up in your jail because you’ve messed with staffing so much that they can’t program correctly. You fail the custody Deputies by not adequately training or staffing them in order to deal with the increased number of inmates and their level of sophistication. You failed the taxpayers by not correctly spending the millions of dollar given to you for this program. You fail your CASU Deputies assigned to oversee them by not allowing the Deputies to do their job and by assigning an unsafe number of Deputies to supervise released inmates. You want proof of your failure for this program? Stop by the courthouse sometime (it’s another one of your contracts by the way) and either watch for yourself or ask one of the Deputies assigned to the AB109 calendar. See if the calendar is increasing or decreasing in size. I’d give you a hint, but I know how you like to interact with your troops. Oh and by the way, the re-entry facility located on the corner of San Pedro provides most of the resources to these inmates upon their release.

    The gang program you supposedly run in order to reduce gang violence, which one is that exactly and how many Deputies do you have assigned? First off, I’d like to congratulate you on finally admitting we have a gang problem in our county. I know it must have been hard to admit after all these years of denying it, but I guess you had to come up for air sometime. As for this program of yours. I’d like to say I’m shocked that you take credit again for something that was not your idea, but the fact you mention it as one of the things the department does best is disgusting. Even for you. If you truly cared for the citizens of this County and truly cared about reducing gang violence in our communities then why Sheriff…..why did you refuse to staff your gang unit with the Deputy who was clearly the best person for the job? The Deputy that has proven their worth in dealing with gangs, made the most gang related arrests and was chosen by the people in charge of your gang unit as their first choice? Why Sheriff??? I’ll answer it for you. It’s because you are petty and vindictive that’s why. Anyone who’s ever fallen out of your favor knows what happens to them. You should be ashamed of yourself Laurie, but I know you aren’t and that’s the problem!!!

    You can say these are just “stones” being unfairly thrown at you by a disgruntled employee, but I disagree as would hundreds of others. These are facts and if facts are stones then get ready to be buried by a landslide come election time.


  3. Here we go again. More of Auntie Laurie getting her feelings hurt and crying vicitm. Her statement that the election will be one where stones will be cast and dishonest allegations are made is right. Unfortunately for her, shes the one whos gonna be guilty of both of em. She claims she that she knew nothing about Captain Jensen’s email be hacked and that it might have been intentional is a great example of her dishonesty. I thinks its funny that she was dumb enough to be quoted saying that in the very interview where she’s claims to be a victim of dishonest allegations. HA!


    • I wonder if she is going to also say the email system was hacked when Captain Rodriguez’s email was mysteriously erased from the server…. She and her top people clearly follow the “do as I say not as I do.” She does not believe the rules apply to her and she has allowed her power to corrupt her.


  4. Classic Laurie Smith to victimize herself. “Oh poor me. Kevin Jensen was staging a coup against me” Laurie, did you miss the high school civics class about free elections and elective office is open to anybody who is qualified? I think she should be investigated for conspiracy to commit Grand Theft. Kevin Jensen is a captain being paid somewhere around $10,000/month plus County contributions to CALPERS, medical, dental, etc. She effectively prevents him from doing the job for which the taxpayers of Santa Clara are paying from June until his retirement in December. Kevin Jensen did nothing wrong and was not suspected of doing anything wrong. She merely thought that he might.

    Now where would she get such a devious thought? How about from her own bad behavior? In December, 2003, just before the labor arbitration in the Scooby case, The Metro ran a story that included the results of an investigation undertaken by County Counsel in preparation of their case.

    This investigation is considered attorney-client work product, is not considered a public document and is not kept in the Sheriff’s Records Department. The only ones with access to it are County Counsel and the client who is none other than Laurie Smith. We can assume that they attorney did not jeopardize her job by leaking it and only Laurie Smith is the one with the personal relationship with the publisher of this newspaper. No wonder she thinks the worst of everybody else.

    By the way, why did the reporter in the Palo Alto paper write that Laurie is a resident of Palo Alto? How many places does she call home? Maybe Martin Monica is telling the truth that her address changes for convenience.


Comments are closed.