Joseph Donald O'Neill Jr
Lawyer in Oxnard, California
An Oxnard attorney under fire for his representation of a murder defendant denied Monday that he was abusive to his client, unprepared for trial and overwhelmed by the complex case.
Lawyer Joseph O’Neill took the witness stand for a second day in what has turned into an emotionally charged hearing on whether Bridget Callahan should receive a new trial on charges that she aided two skinhead gang members in the 1998 slaying of a teenage girl.
Callahan, 31, was convicted last fall of first-degree murder with special circumstances for her role in the killing of 17-year-old Nichole Hendrix of Ventura. She faces a life prison term without possibility of parole.
But a March 20 sentencing was put on hold to allow attorneys Kay Duffy and James Farley, Callahan’s new lawyers, to present evidence that O’Neill quarreled with his former client and failed to present a defense to the charges.https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-mar-25-me-callahan25-story.html
 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
| ||||
| ||||
 | Joseph Donald "Joe" O'NeillCandidate for Democratic Party County Central Committee; Supervisorial District 5 | |||
| ||||
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate. | ||||
| ||
| ||
| http://www.smartvoter.org/2000/03/07/ca/vn/vote/oneill_j/ | ||
Joseph O'Neill, provided ineffective assistance of counsel. T
he motion claimed, among other things, that counsel was ineffective for: (1) failing to sufficiently impeach Pinger's and Echols's testimony; (2) failing to call Callahan to testify on her own behalf; and (3) failing to offer expert testimony to support a duress defense to the underlying robbery and kidnapping.
II. The Motion for New Trial A.District Attorney Investigator Mark Volpei..........
Joseph O'Neill, provided ineffective assistance of counsel. The motion claimed, among other things, that counsel was ineffective for: (1) failing to sufficiently impeach Pinger's and Echols's testimony; (2) failing to call Callahan to testify on her own behalf; and (3) failing to offer expert testimony to support a duress defense to the underlying robbery and kidnapping. II. The Motion for New Trial A.District Attorney Investigator Mark Volpei https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1259075.html Library Rejects Book Called Anti-Semitic
OXNARD —
The Oxnard Public Library has decided not to stock copies of the little-known book
“There’s a Fish in the Courthouse” nearly one month after it was praised by a
City Council candidate but then blasted by critics as being anti-Semitic.
The book, written and self-published by Gary L. Wean, was considered by the
librarians to be inaccurate, “lacking in credibility and badly organized with confused, rambling and incoherent” writing style, said Cathy Thomason of the library’s public services program.
“We wanted to find something good about this book because it had gotten so
much attention, but it was just so bad,” said librarian Adrienne Morse, who was one of the three who read the book and recommended that the library not purchase it.
The book drew attention two months ago when then-City Council candidate
Roy Lockwood hailed it at a council session as an insightful piece detailing corruption in Ventura County.
Lockwood had no comment on the library’s decision.
The 800-page volume contains several inflammatory and offensive
descriptions of Jews. Wean states in the book that the Holocaust was a “scam” and that there was a Jewish conspiracy of power in the county’s judicial system.
“I’m happy that the library chose to not acquire the book,” said James Reach,
an Oxnard resident who criticized the book and its author after Lockwood praised it before the council. “It’s besmirched the Jews in our community on virtually every page and has no redeeming value.”
Librarians said the controversy surrounding the book did not make a
difference in their decision. Rather, they based their decision on the s ignificant number of inaccuracies in Wean’s book.
For example, he refers to the former editor of the Ventura County Star-Free Press
as Judas Gius when his name was Julius Gius, said Thomason.
Wean also states that Gius’ father was a Jew from Russia when in fact
his father was an Italian Catholic, according to Thomason.
“It doesn’t have historical value because of the inaccuracies in the book,”
Thomason In addition, the library had only received three requests for the book since 1987. Thomason said that because the book was self-published, it also lacked credibility.
Roni Blau, spokeswoman for the Anti-Defamation League who condemned
the book, said she was pleased with the library’s decision.
“We have always opposed the placement of anti-Semitic work and scholarly
work in the same place in the library,” Blau said. “They clearly do not have
the same value. We have encouraged libraries to mark the distinction
between Holocaust revisionist literature and scholarly work.”
On Sept. 12, 1996, upon reading the onslaught
of ADL lies in the newspapers a prominent Oxnard lawyer wrote a letter and sent it to the Editor of the Ventura County Star newspaper. The lawyer, Joseph D. O'Neill had been present at the City Council meeting on Sept. 10, 1996 when Roy Lockwood spoke and he totally refuted shyster James Reach's lies. In the letter (attached hereto) lawyer O'Neill makes the proper statement that, "No person or agency has the legal right to decide what another person can read or refuse to read." NOTE: (The Oxnard Star of David refused to publish this letter). http://archive.indymedia.org.nz/article/64222/re-rachel-huljich Library Staff Asked to Censor Book
OXNARD —
To offend or to censor: That is the question.
Caught in the middle of a minor controversy, Oxnard Public Library
staff members Wednesday discussed whether they should buy a book that has been labeled anti-Semitic and racist by the Anti-Defamation League.
The book, “There’s a Fish in the Courthouse,” by Gary L. Wean, purports
to chronicle the inner workings of the Ventura County government and court system in the middle to late 1970s.
In the 300-page manuscript, Wean states such things as the Holocaust
was a “scam” that became “big business” and that there was a conspiracy against him by “Jew Judges” in the Ventura County Courthouse.
After the book was endorsed by City Council candidate
Roy Lockwood at a recent council meeting, the library received one written request to buy the $29.95 volume and several calls from Oxnard residents asking that the library not purchase it.
At the council meeting, Oxnard resident Jim Reach said the book
was offensive and racist.
Library staff members decided Wednesday to appoint three
librarians to read the book, review criticism of it and recommend whether it should be stocked. They expect a recommendation within a month.
The librarians are confronted with the delicate task of deciding what
types of books should be available to the public. With their decision, they risk offending some residents or effectively censoring books that are controversial.
“If people are concerned, one has to respect and give due
deliberation,” said Peggy O’Donnell, one of the three librarians who will read and review the book.
“There’s hardly a thing that someone wouldn’t take offense to,”
she added. “Any time you deal with ideas, you are going to have people getting offended.”
The controversy began when Lockwood, a 75-year Oxnard
resident who has run unsuccessfully for public office since 1972, praised the book to the council, calling it an informative account of how Ventura County government works and suggesting the library acquire it.
On Wednesday, Lockwood, asked about the issue, said: “No comment.”
Wean, who ran unsuccessfully for the Ventura County Board of Supervisors
in 1988, states in the book that he is the victim of “a crazy Jewish plot to destroy me.” The book was published by Casitas Publishing.
In addition to other criteria when purchasing a book, the Oxnard
Library considers the permanent value of the volume to the community, the author’s credibility and attention given by reviewers. Due to funding cutbacks, the book’s price is also considered, O’Donnell said.
Reach said the library should not buy the book because it has no
redeeming social value and only contributes to anti-Semitism. Although Reach admits he is supporting a form of censorship in this instance, he says it is for the public good.
“The library can’t carry every single book that is published,”
Reach said. “I draw the line at a book which is filled with lies and makes members of my faith in this community the villains for every judicial and political action that has occurred.”
Roni Blau, director of the Anti-Defamation League in the
San Fernando Valley, said the organization, which has labeled the book anti-Semitic and racist, condemns its distribution. B ut Blau said that as “advocates of the 1st Amendment, [the ADL] would not tell the library not to carry the book.”
However, Blau added, the library should make a clear distinction
between Holocaust revisionist theories and factual literature.
“Wean has been spouting this anti-Semitic rhetoric for years,” Blau said.
Douglas E. Mirell, an American Civil Liberties Union board
member and private attorney who specializes in 1st Amendment cases, said that because the book is not already on the library’s shelves, the decision is really a matter of following purchasing guidelines and not a 1st Amendment issue.
“Not having been already purchased, this really becomes a matter
of policy whether you want to open up your forum to this kind of book,” said Mirell, who practices in Los Angeles. “Anyone is free to express their opinion on whether a book is or is not appropriate. . . . It is purely a matter of personal predilection.”
A recent article in American Libraries magazine said there has
been a nationwide increase in individuals and groups asking libraries to remove books they consider offensive. The article said that many librarians were “worried about a general climate of intolerance for unpopular views and minorities.”
Yet nearly 90% of the librarians questioned in the survey for the
article said they have not withdrawn a book because of a community request.
“We don’t have to agree with everybody’s point of view,”
said Oxnard librarian Adrienne Morse, who will also review the book. “We trust our readers.”
Morse noted that the public library carries the complete works
of Adolf Hitler, which could also be found offensive to many people.
Added O’Donnell: “You can’t have a public library that has only
one point of view https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-09-26-me -47740-story.html
It was set up that the Oxnard Library Board would hold a meeting on September 25, 1996 to consider acquiring the book, `There's a Fish in the Courthouse' but the Mishpucka put pressure on the Board not to consider acquisition until after the November `96, election.
On September 26,`96 in the Los Angeles Times, Ventura County Section, front page, appeared an article by Times staff writer, Lorenza Munoz, "LIBRARY STAFF ASKED TO CENSOR BOOK RIGHTS, a panel will review the work by a writer who tells of a crazy Jewish plot by the local court system to destroy him, TO OFFEND OR TO CENSOR THAT IS THE QUESTION. Caught in the middle of a controversy, Oxnard Public Library staff members Wednesday discussed whether they should buy a book that has been labeled anti-Semitic and racist by the Anti-Defamation League. The book purports to chronicle the inner workings of the Ventura County Government and Court System. Library staff members decided Wednesday to appoint three librarians to read the book, review criticism of it and recommend whether it should be stocked. They expect a recommendation within a month. One of the three librarians, Peggy O'Donnell said, 'If people are concerned one has to respect and give due deliberation. There's hardly a thing that someone wouldn't take offense to, anytime you deal with ideas you are going to have people getting offended. You can't have a public library that has only one point of view.'"
Roni Blau Blau, top ADL provocateur said, "We are advocates of the First Amendment and will not tell the library not to carry the book." Blau added, quote, "However, the library should make a clear distinction between revisionist theories and factual literature." (In other words, the threat is there, if the library buys the book the ADL and ACLU will sue the City of Oxnard for everything they've got). This is Jew Blackmail.
Obviously Blau Blau has been aware of the author and his book for years and has been stabbing him in the back all along, because now that she-he has been forced to come out in the open Blau Blau screams to high heaven, "Wean has been spouting this anti-Semitic rhetoric for years."
With a diligent search I find nothing in either criminal or civil codes which says it is a violation to oppose Jew corruption, or as they call it, `anti-Semitism.' Munoz says in the L.A. Times, quote, "A recent article in American Libraries magazine said there has been a nationwide increase in individuals and groups asking libraries to remove books they consider offensive. The article said that many librarians were worried about a general climate of intolerance for unpopular views, (Jew censorship), yet nearly 90% of the librarians said they have not withdrawn a book because of a community request."
Oxnard librarian Adrienne Morse who will review the book said, quote, "We don't have to agree with everybody's point of view, we trust our readers - we carry the complete works of Adolph Hitler."
|
One of Joseph O'neill's Special investigators
Greg Irvine
| Phone | (805) 650-6069 |
|---|---|
| gwirvine@aol.com |
Who is Greg Irvine - Was Greg a Cop? What Happened?
The lead detective in a multiple rape case was himself investigated last fall for allegedly sexually molesting two teenage girls, according to confidential documents obtained Wednesday by The Times.
Even though prosecutors concluded that no criminal charges can be filed against former Ventura Police Det. Gregory W. Irvine, the development could undermine the case against an Ojai man suspected of raping three elderly women last summer.
Irvine’s attorney, James Farley, said the 47-year-old former officer, who resigned in February, is not guilty.
“I don’t care what the D.A.'s investigator came up with, my position is very simple,” Farley said. "[The allegations] are absolutely untrue.”
But in a second confidential memo, a prosecutor close to the rape case informed Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury in January that Irvine’s testimony was essential to the Stocks prosecution.
*
“In addition to being the investigating officer for one of the three cases, Det. Irvine played a crucial role in obtaining a confession from the defendant,” wrote Deputy Dist. Atty. Patricia Kelliher. “Since none of the victims can identify their assailant, the confession is ‘the case.’ ”
Irvine arrested Stocks in August and interviewed him for four hours at the Ventura Police Department. During that videotaped interview, Stocks confessed to two of the rapes, according to testimony by Irvine at a preliminary hearing.
Kelliher argued in Superior Court this week that the allegations against Irvine should have no bearing on the tape’s validity.
But defense attorney Susan Olson claimed that Irvine’s arrest of Stocks was improper because the unemployed construction worker was not properly read his Miranda rights. She is asking that the videotaped confession be ruled inadmissible and she intends to question Irvine’s credibility.
In her memo three months ago, prosecutor Kelliher stated her own concerns about the detective’s credibility.
“The confession was obtained after Det. Irvine contacted the defendant in Ojai and asked if the defendant would voluntarily accompany him to Ventura to discuss a burglary case wherein defendant’s name had come up,” Kelliher wrote. “Whether or not that initial contact was voluntary depends on the credibility of Det. Irvine as no one else was present for the initial contact.”
Chief Assistant Dist. Atty. McGee declined comment on the memos Wednesday.
Earlier in the day, Superior Court Judge Stephen Z. Perren ordered prosecutors to turn over detailed information about the Irvine investigation to the defense. Until that point, Stocks’ attorneys were only told that the former officer was the subject of a criminal investigation.
Perren said at a hearing Tuesday that he thinks the allegations against Irvine will never be revealed to the Stocks jury. And Kelliher argued that the case will hold up because three other officers were present when Stocks agreed to be interviewed by Irvine and one other officer witnessed most of the videotaped interview.
Perren directed attorneys Wednesday not to discuss the Irvine inquiry. Olson’s superior, Assistant Public Defender Duane A. Dammeyer, refused comment on the memos.
Ventura Police Chief Richard Thomas also declined to comment on Irvine, who spent 10 years on the force, except to say: “It’s a sad case.”
In prosecutor Corona’s Dec. 22 summary of her inquiry into allegations against Irvine, she details sexual molestation of two girls beginning as early as 1986 and continuing into 1995. The latest incident theoretically could still be prosecuted under the statute of limitations, but the evidence is weak, she said.
On 10 occasions, she wrote, Irvine allegedly molested the girls, one of whom was 12 years old at the time of the first encounter. The alleged molestation included nude massages and fondling, according to the memo.
The Ventura Police Department investigated a report of Irvine’s alleged molestation of one of the girls in mid-1995, the memo said. But friends and associates characterized the girl as emotionally unstable and not reliable, Corona wrote.
In recent months, however, Corona’s interviews with the second girl revealed similar allegations against the officer, the memo said. Credit Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-11-me-57075-story.html
Investigator in Rape Case Target of Probe
A lead investigator in the multiple rape case against Peter A. Stocks is himself the target of a criminal investigation, the third time in the past year that alleged police misconduct has become an issue in a Ventura County criminal case.
The revelation that former Ventura Police Det. Gregory W. Irvine, 47, is under investigation came during a hearing Monday in the Stocks case when defense attorneys asked that they be given more details about the probe. Prosecutors have since divulged that Irvine is under investigation, without providing any further information.
Defense attorney Susan Olson said details of the probe could be used to question Irvine’s credibility and are vital to preparing Stocks’ defense against charges that he raped three elderly women.
Ventura County Superior Court Judge Steven Z. Perren said he agreed with Olson but put off making a decision pending the outcome of the hearing. He is set to rule on the motion today.
At the moment, neither side is sure what, if any, effect the probe of Irvine will have on the case against Stocks, who is charged with 15 counts of rape, assault and burglary.
Irvine arrested the suspect in August and interviewed him for four hours at the Ventura Police Department. During that videotaped interview, Stocks confessed to two of the rapes, according to testimony by Irvine at a preliminary hearing.
The allegations against Irvine, Deputy Dist. Atty. Patricia Kelliher argued, should have no bearing on the tape’s validity. Kelliher declined to discuss the Irvine investigation, but did say it had “nothing whatsoever” to do with Irvine’s handling of Stocks’ arrest.
But in a separate issue, Olson alleges that Irvine’s arrest of Stocks was improper because the unemployed construction worker was not properly read his Miranda rights. Olson is asking that Stocks’ videotaped confession be ruled inadmissible. Perren will decide that issue later.
Stocks was arrested and charged with a string of violent sexual assaults, reminiscent of a string of unrelated attacks that terrorized the Ojai Valley community between 1993 and 1994.
In one instance, Stocks is accused of tying an 89-year-old Ojai woman to her bedposts before raping her in July of last year. He also is accused of raping two elderly women in their east Ventura homes last summer. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges. His trial is scheduled to start later this month.
Ventura Assistant Police Chief Ken Thompson declined to comment on the Irvine investigation and refused to confirm that Irvine is no longer with the force. But Olson said police officials refused to accept a subpoena for Irvine on Friday, telling the process server that Irvine is “no longer a city employee.”
It is the third time in a year and the second time in less than a month that alleged police misconduct has been raised in a Ventura County criminal case.
Former Oxnard Police Officer Gary Zamberletti is under investigation for allegedly hiding a shotgun used in the slaying of an Oxnard man in December. Zamberletti is the brother-in-law of Joaquin “Jack” Ayala, who is accused of murdering Josue Salazar Carrera. Investigators allege that Zamberletti disposed of the murder weapon, which has never been found.
Prosecutors are continuing their investigation, and no criminal charges have been filed against the 24-year-old rookie, who voluntarily resigned from the department earlier this month.
In August, a drug conviction was overturned when a Simi Valley officer was charged with perjury. Though a jury acquitted David S. Ming of the perjury charge, Simi Valley Police Chief Randy Adams fired the 26-year-old officer. Ming is appealing his dismissal. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-09-me-56281-story.html
No comments:
Post a Comment