.
.
.
UPDATE: No one ran against Ferrentino; he’s in.
Below the photo. preserved for posterity, is the original (though changing) text of the story of the race to succeed Judge Clayton Biggs on the Orange County Superior Court.
A quick review: Senior Deputy District Attorney Tony Ferrentino served for years in the Orange County DA’s office as a prosecutor under disgraced former District Attorney Tony Rackauckas. When Judge Biggs didn’t file for re-election, I decided that it would be goof to look into ADA Ferrentino’s background to ensure that he was not someone who had been involved in the snitch scandal, the currently unfolding evidence tampering and withholding scandal, and other abuses — because, if we can help it, we don’t want someone like that to be a judge.
Because Judge Biggs was eligible (still alive, licensed, etc.) to run for re-election, it seemed clear to me that the race to replace him would go into “extension” — that is an eligible candidate would have until Wednesday at 5:00 to file to replace him. I confirmed this with the Registrar of Voters office and went to bed Thursday night satisfied that I’d have time both to research Ferrentino’s record and try to recruit a candidate to oppose him, if necessary, over the weekend.
I got a call just before 8:00 a.m. from the Registrar’s office, in which I was apologetically told that there had been an error and that the filing deadline for the judicial seat would not be extended. That meant no time for research or recruitment. This struck me as a terrible rule, and I wrote and published this piece prior to going to work as a consequence.
When I got back from work on Friday night, I noted that the ROV’s “Candidate Log” indicated pretty clearly that it was going into extension — and look, this is the sort of mistake that I make a dozen times a day, so I’m not exercised about it — but I wouldn’t be able to confirm with the ROV until Monday. What I did instead was to call Todd Spitzer today (Monday) and asked told him that I had a question regarding the replacement for Judge Biggs.
Somewhat to my surprise, the DA called me back within a few hours. I explained my concerns about Ferrentino, and asked him if he had, say, endorsed him?
Spitzer reminded me that his pledge in his race was that as DA he would not be endorsing candidates for office … but that because as DA he has better information than voters could otherwise obtain (my paraphrase) he would endorse for judicial seats.
And Spitzer told me that he had endorsed Ferrentino without reservations and that he thought that he would be a good and fair judge. I think that I can fairly infer from that that Spitzer does not believe that Ferrentino was, or would be, involved in any of poisonous shenanigans that have plagued our county’s administration of criminal justice for two decades before Spitzer beat Rackauckas thirteen months ago. He doesn’t have to cozy up to or cover up for such people, and I don’t think that he’s doing so here.
Look, if Senior Public Defender Scott Sanders or Ashleigh Aitken or the heretofore undiscovered clone of Justice Thomas Goethals gets into the race by COB on Wednesday, I’d probably endorse them regardless of what Spitzer has done. The main thing I care about is that Ferrentino does not seem to be a continuation of the Rackauckas regime — and, before he walks into office without an election, I’m glad to have had the chance to find that out.
The Registrar of Voters office called me this morning with a correction: judicial races such as the one to replace Judge Carlton Biggs in Office 4 DO NOT go into extension. So, if no one else files for this sole open seat by 5:00 today, ADA Tony Ferrentino will become a judge by default without an election.
I don’t think that I know Judge Biggs or Tony Ferrentino, nor do I know if Ferrentino had knowledge that Biggs would not be running for office. But I will tell you that this not allowing extensions — which I presume comes from a level above the OCDA’s office — is a bad rule. It allows people with inside information to get a jump start on a seat and cuts in half (if not more) the time they have to be vetted.
Ferrentino was a Senior Assistant District Attorney under Tony Rackauckas — and, as importantly, under Sheriff Sandra Hutchens and her assistant, now-Sheriff Don Barnes — during a time when we are now learning there were massive and astonishing violations of the responsibility to turn over exculpatory evidence. Without making any accusation (because I’m in no position to do so) I’d like to know: did he know about what was going on? Was he in a position where he should have known? Did he participate in any of the impropriety?
I was planning on looking into this over the weekend, when I (as a citizen journalist) have more free time. Now, unless someone else filed for the office by 5:00, it will be moot.
I’m sorry to have given anyone thinking of running the notion that they had until Wednesday. I don’t blame the ROV for following a rule imposed from above, but this is a terrible, terrible rule.
Your three questions in the third from the last paragraph are excellent. I never would have thought of those things. Your a good investigative reporter.
Sadly, they may never be answered now.
Any updated information about Tony Ferrentino as a judicial nominee? He is, of course, the only nominee on the March 3, 2020 ballot, but I can still maintain the dignity of not voting “yes” if to do so would be to support corruption. I’m hoping for optimistic news, but any additional information would be useful.
For the record, I’m writing in Bobby Waltman, my favorite Public Defender (that I met while doing Courtwatch)
Changed my mind – writing in Diane Wattles Goldstein of L.E.A.P. (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), also a former Orange Juice blogger.
She is a lawyer and has been a member of the CA bar for 10 (or maybe it’s 7) years, right? If so, write a story about it and promote it, so we can measure our reach.
Diane W. Goldstein of L.E.A.P. is better than Ferrentino; if he is “dirty” then WE MUST let him know that the jig is up and he should answer to and for any possible corruption. SHINE THE LIGHT PEOPLE … GET THE TRUTH. Thank you.
It would have been nice to get him on the record about what he knew and when he knew it, but realistically there was no way, not without a challenger on the ballot.
I still like Spitzer more than you seem to, and part of what I like about him is how much he really doesn’t like Rackauckas. So my guideline for assessing him follows this reasoning:
Placing himself into such a vulnerable position seems like it would be a violation of Spitzer’s Prime Directive. I therefore reason that Ferrentino probably wasn’t dirty (at least not in a way or to a degree that would redound to Spitzer’s detriment), and will probably be pretty much like the other DA’s that Racky supported in the past few decades. That is: likely much more conservative than I am, but not grounds for alarm.
Still, if Diane says that she wants the votes, she’ll have mine. Support for the likes of her does send a welcome signal, even though I’m not even sure that she’s eligible. It’s better than a “no” vote, which is much harder to decipher.
As I apparently have to justify my still liking Spitzer (despite my disagreement with some of his decisions, though way fewer of them than when Rackauckas was in power) every time I mention it, I urge readers to read this:
https://voiceofoc.org/2020/02/da-says-he-was-told-in-may-of-decision-to-not-prosecute-deputies-over-evidence-handling/
Kudos to Nick Gerda for the good reporting, too!