Dear Readers,

Just a short update on the campaign to keep you apprised. First of all I have rceived several on-line campaign donations. I want to thank those people who have so generously given to me and I will be thanking them individually by a thank you note.--Right now I am buying yard signs and bigger signs for business locations. A fifty dollar contribution buys quite a few signs. Every dollar helps. I was also offered the use of a rather large billboard owned by a business on Montana street. The owner is a friend and supporter of mine. The sign I need to hang there costs $800.00. Any help toward this expense would be a tremendous boost for me. Thousands of people pass this business every day. If eight people gave me a hundred dollars or 16 people gave me fifity, it would be paid for.

Secondly, I knocked on doors all day yesterday. I went to over a hundred houses in central El Paso. With the exception of one woman, everyone I came into contact with was polite and many were excited to meet me and wanted to vote for me. The feedback was extremely positive. People were angry that Esparza has already been in office for 16 years and now wants four more. They're also very upset about the corruption scandal and that he did nothing about it. People are sick about the scandal. Voters were even asking for my signs to put in their yards. My crew will gladly go back and hammer in signs where requested.

As I was walking down the sidewalk on Bliss street, a woman in a vehicle stopped me and told me that she lived on the east side and had just received my second mailout. She found it very informative. She said she had forgotten that the Times had said all those things about Esparza. She liked the detail of my letter. She told me she was going to vote for me. I was happy to see that the mailouts are wending their way through the community and having a positive effect. Her thoughts were that the newspaper was unfair to me.

Lastly and on a somewhat funny note but definitely a strange one, at around 3:00 p.m. I was knocking on doors at the 4600 block of Trowbridge when I looked over and who did I see standing directly across the street in front of a house (the house belongs to an employee of his and she has put up one of those corporate sized Esparza signs in her yard) with his hands in his jean pockets glaring at me? That's right, my opponent. At three in the afternoon on the same street but opposite corners happened to be the two candidates running for DA in the 34th Judicial District. But only one was campaigning, me-- I thought it was funny and I smiled and waived at Esparza but he didn't smile and waive back. I then got into Stuart's car so that we could go down to the 4400 block of Trowbridge, on the other side where we had some houses to hit. We went our way and then parked. The system is that Stuart waits and follows while I walk. As I was coming from a home, Esparza drove by on the opposite side of the street, whipped a U-Turn and then actually parked behind Stuart by half a block. Esparza sat in his car behind Stuart for about five minutes. Doing what if anything we don't know. He then backed up against traffic on Trowbdrige, which is heavy, and backed around a corner onto a side street and then backed down the side street (Marr Street).--Where are traffic police when you need them?--Is this Esparza's idea of campaigning? Following me around and trying to intmidate me and driving down streets backwards. 'Tis a very strange strategy if it is. His car also had no Esparza signs on it. I guess he thinks he doesn't need to campaign. He can just throw up a few corporate sized signs, put "integrity" on them and try and fool the people for another 16 years. And there you have it.

Remember, a week from today is the KVIA debate before the State of the Union address.

If you want to help, want a yard sign, etc. please call 566-0229.

Note: This is a letter I sent to the best voters this week. Please do me the great favor of printing out several copies of this letter and circulating it amongst your family and friends who vote and would take the time to read it. Help me spread my word. Also keep in mind that Charlie Edgren of the El Paso Times editorial board called me this week to "invite me to meet with them." This would be the same editorial board run by the same Dionicio Flores who ALREADY wrote that I would be "grist" for future editorials back in November 2007. Why would they think I would meet with them? I told Mr. Edgren, "I have sent a letter to the voters regarding my position on the El Paso Times editorial board. It will be posted on my website tomorrow." He said sheepishly, "ok." And that was the end of the call. Feel free to call me at 241-8418.


January 14, 2008

Dear fellow El Pasoans,

This is the second letter I have sent to dedicated voters. My name is Theresa Caballero and I am seeking the office of District Attorney for the 34th Judicial District in the March 4, 2008 democratic primary. I introduced myself to you in my first mailing on January 4, 2008 where you read about my credentials and some of the issues involved in this race. If you did not receive that letter, please visit my website, TC4DA.COM, where you will find it posted on January 4, 2008 in its entirety.

In that letter, I told you that I would explain why Dionicio Flores, editor of the El Paso Times, the only English Language daily newspaper in El Paso would use his monopolistic power to run a smear campaign against me and thereby try and influence you not to vote for me. Keep in mind that Dionicio Flores actually told you he was going to do this when he wrote in a November 2007 editorial that my campaign would be “grist” for future editorials. Since print media can wield tremendous influence, especially when it remains unchallenged, I take Mr. Flores at his word. It is for this reason that I write you this letter. I will not take the Times’ onslaught lying down, anymore than I would defer to any powerful interest as your District Attorney.

So now I pose a simple question to you: why would Mr. Flores be so rattled by me, a person he has never met and a person whose work in the courtroom as a lawyer he has never seen? What does he actually know of me? That I have fought against unwarranted higher taxes, I have fought for the rights of the taxpayer and I have fought against corrupt government. Why then would Mr. Flores be so emotional and vitriolic regarding a private citizen who has never previously run for or held public office? What have I done to engender such hostility? My honesty is regarded so highly that I was asked to help author the ethics code for the County of El Paso. I am an attorney honorable enough to appear in Federal Court, State Court and Military Courts-Martial. How then to make sense of Mr. Flores’ animosity? I write you this letter to explain. Just as they say never judge a book by its cover, as you will see, never judge the Times by what you read and mistake it for news. It is only spin, plain and simple; spin intended to further personal agendas rather than what it should rightfully be: unbiased reporting intended to inform.

Keep in mind that once upon a time, years before I announced my own race for District Attorney, Mr. Flores used his pages to comment on the different scandals my opponent Jaime Esparza created. Mr. Flores now apparently hopes his readers would think so little of what he once published that they have long forgotten. I had provided these articles in their entirety on my website, TC4DA.COM. The El Paso Times received full credit and attribution. Nevertheless, within mere days the lawyer for the El Paso Times demanded that I remove them. Mr. Flores, whose paper suffers from embarrassingly low circulation, for some reason did not want anyone to see what he had once written about my opponent. Why would a news outlet which purports to be proud of its publications not want greater exposure? What kind of newspaper editor first tells his readers that the current District Attorney abused his power, trampled on the first amendment, and wrongfully prosecuted the innocent, and now seeks to praise this same DA? Why would an editor try to destroy my candidacy when I represent positive change for El Paso? Why would he intend to sabotage my campaign when I only seek to expose exactly the kinds of transgressions Mr. Flores and the Times itself published about my opponent? Transgressions the likes of which persist to this very day? Let’s take a walk down memory lane. Let’s listen to Mr. Flores in his own newspaper’s words:

8-22-00, El Paso Times editorial sub-titled Police, DA Must be Held Accountable
“El Paso’s police and District Attorney want to abridge your first amendment rights by muzzling the media and by silencing and intimidating sources…What the police and DA are doing is a blatant attempt to muzzle the media to protect themselves at the expense of freedom of information, and with the very real danger of not investigating what needs to be investigated.”

8-24-00, El Paso Times editorial titled Justice Delayed
“This week it was revealed that the investigation of media leaks in the police department is not a search for the truth but a district attorney witch hunt fraught with spite, vengeance and senseless foot-dragging…What a pathetic display of law enforcement or lack thereof…Esparza’s intransigence is reprehensible.”

9-20-00, El Paso Times editorial sub-titled Esparza should turn his zeal toward real crime
“Picture District Attorney Jaime Esparza dressed as Don Quixote, a death grip on his prosecutorial lance, charging furiously at a windmill whose paddles are labeled George DeAngelis, Cerjio Martinez, El Paso Times, Channel 7, Larry Francis.

That’s the clownish level to which Esparza has sunk in his unhealthily obsessive pursuit of who leaked internal police documents to the Times and Channel 7-KVIA in June. Esparza and the DA’s office have been fixated with this crusade for an incredible 13 weeks. What an unnecessary waste of time and money for both taxpayers and those targeted by the investigation.

But it’s not nearly over. Now, desperately flailing about in his all-consuming attempt to trample the First Amendment underfoot, Esparza is …

An attorney called Francis [former mayor, Larry Francis] in the spring about two police officers- one of them DeAngelis-who were concerned about alleged improprieties in the police department and wanted advice about what to do.

It’s significant that they didn’t feel comfortable going to the department’s Internal Affairs Division, or to Esparza…

…and it deserves a thorough investigation, possibly by a special prosecutor, certainly not a local rubber-stamper.

Now the question is, who’s next on Esparza’s hit list?...

Imagine how El Paso would benefit if Esparza, rather than spending his time and effort trying to subvert freedom of speech…turned that zeal toward the prosecution of real crime.”

9-24-00, El Paso Times editorial titled Intimidation intensifies and subtitled Esparza is making whistleblowers think twice

“One of the most frightening aspects of the El Paso district attorney’s investigation of leaks of public information to the media is the chilling effect it already is having on whistle-blowers.

Whistle-blowers are employees who report fraud or misconduct by officials and companies, public and private. We need whistle-blowers…

But you’d never know that from the way District Attorney Jaime Esparza and a grand jury have targeted people who were simply trying to do the right thing: report problems in the police department so that they could be corrected...

The bad news is that, because Esparza is focusing more on punishing whistle-blowers than on uncovering misconduct or mismanagement in the police department, it may be a long time before anyone speaks up again. What a shame…

That’s a disservice to the Police Department, it’s a damaging blow to the spirit of public service, and it’s an insult to every El Pasoan.”

I have previously questioned where our District Attorney has been regarding the current, rampant public corruption that has unfolded on his watch. You have just read the El Paso Times commentaries regarding Esparza’s treatment of corruption charges on an earlier occasion. His past proves to be an indicator of his present, and our potentially dangerous future. When two high ranking police officers, one the deputy police chief, second in command only to the chief, came forward to blow the whistle on a possible drug cartel infiltration at our police department, Esparza did not pursue an investigation. Instead, he relentlessly hunted down the two officers who made the complaint and actually had them arrested and indicted. No wonder the FBI has had to investigate local corruption. Esparza made clear long ago that he will not. Worse. Woe to citizens, even police officers, who dare to speak out.

And woe to our pocketbooks. Amazingly, it’s not just tolerance of corruption but possible malfeasance of monumental proportions that also afflicts the current DA’s office. As recently as October 13, 2007 in an article entitled Feds say they paid county too much, the Times reported:

“The Department of Justice has asked El Paso County officials to explain, document or justify claiming $3.9 million extra in reimbursements from the government for prosecuting federally referred criminal cases…

A September audit report by the Department’s Office of Inspector General, …states the district [Jaime Esparza] and county attorney’s offices repeatedly sought and received too much reimbursement from the federal program…

The audit contends the county should have been paid $11.8 million since 2002, not the $13.5 million that was paid…”

This short, convoluted article written by David Crowder—the same David Crowder who Esparza not so coincidentally released on a DWI charge last year--tells us that the Justice Department believes Esparza has over-billed the federal government to the tune of millions of dollars and is now investigating Esparza’s office. In a city where the press performs its job and watches over all public officials, this would be front page, large font, headline news. The DA has a job to do and a budget within which to do it. Our sitting DA not only doesn’t do his job; he even charges extra for not doing it. And the El Paso Times? It merely whispers about it and lets it drop. The Times has yet to write one follow-up on this latest scandal. You can be sure that when the Feds want their money back from Jaime Esparza who they say possibly overbilled them, you, the El Paso taxpayer, will pay and go on paying for the millions overspent and owed. And you can be sure the Times won’t mention that either.

All this is happening against the backdrop of a nationally reported public corruption investigation into local El Paso politicians by the FBI. Esparza cannot answer for his failure to investigate let alone prosecute these corrupt officials who now admit they were selling their votes at our expense. He cannot answer why he didn’t notice rampant corruption even when some of it was occurring just one floor above him at the courthouse. He cannot answer why he, as the chief prosecutor for the state of Texas in El Paso, didn’t notice stealing at high levels when the average El Pasoan has known about it for years. The FBI investigation and the federal prosecutions of these corrupt elected officials are a stinging indictment of Esparza’s refusal to prosecute the corrupt. Had Esparza done his job, the Feds wouldn’t have to do it for us.

As you have read from the Times itself, before I ever entered the scene, Mr. Flores had accused Esparza of not upholding his oath to protect the Constitution, specifically the right to free speech; for prosecuting whistle-blowers; for misusing taxpayer money; for having a hit list; for using the grand jury as a weapon. But now the Times has changed with the times. Now Mr. Flores does not mention Esparza’s failure to act on our behalf and now he gives scant coverage to an investigation into Esparza’s multi-million dollar possible over billing. Things don’t get much worse for an incumbent. And yet Mr. Flores still writes that I, the candidate seeking genuine reform and the restoration of honesty to the DA’s office, am “grist” for future editorials. Again: why? Consider the following:

In May 2005, I appeared before City Council, as a private citizen, taxpayer and homeowner, to complain about property valuations by the Central Appraisal District. I explained to City Council that El Pasoans needed an investigation into CAD for its selective and uneven appraisals. Some people have high appraisals while others do not. I used the example of Dionicio Flores’ home. I explained before council, the public, public access TV and other media including the Times and El Diario of El Paso that Mr. Flores had purchased his home in the early 1990’s in the upscale neighborhood, The Willows and that since then his evaluations had hardly moved while the rest of us had been hit hard. I implored council on behalf of the abused taxpayer to look into the CAD because obviously the El Paso Times would not. Not unless its editor wished to publicly reveal his own valuations.

Only the Diario reporter was interested in the story. On May 23, 2005, the Diario ran a front page article that featured the gross inequities of CAD, highlighting Mr. Flores’ appraisals vis-à-vis his neighbors’ to illustrate the point. The Diario published that in 1993, CAD listed Flores’ home at $230,400. In 2004, CAD listed the same home, still owned by Flores, at $ 225,418. According to the Diario figures, Flores’ home valuation had DECREASED by 2.2%. According to the Diario article, the average home value in El Paso during the same time period had INCREASED by 47%. When the Diario called Flores for comment on what criteria the CAD uses to increase property valuations by 47% in the last 11 years while in exclusive sectors of the city, valuations went down, Flores was quoted as saying, “I don’t know…I don’t know about that…” When asked about his own home he said, “I don’t know how much it costs (the house) or how much it cost in 1993.” His final response was, “I don’t know why you are calling me, nor do I know with whom I am speaking and I don’t have to talk about this with you.” Flores’ frustrated response was also published in the Diario article. To this day, to my knowledge, there has yet to be an article in the El Paso Times regarding the vast disparities of property valuations coming from CAD. And in the interim? The Diario recently reported that 400 El Paso families each month lose their homes and are living in them up to the day they are evicted. High property taxes no doubt play a factor for those living paycheck to paycheck. Also in the interim, just a short two years since my presentation before council on Flores’ property and the subsequent Diario article, Mr. Flores’ home evaluation shot up to $319,152. Did I cost Mr. Flores some money? Is that why he says I will be “grist” for future editorials?

In July 2006, El Paso Times reporter David Crowder (the same reporter who was in council chambers the day I exposed the CAD and Mr. Flores’ property evaluations) was arrested by the El Paso Police for DWI. After investigation, the police determined that Crowder was intoxicated while driving. Yet when Crowder was taken into custody and his DWI case presented for prosecution, Esparza refused to prosecute the case. Despite police evidence, Crowder, who Dionicio Flores considers his star reporter, was immediately released. Flores well knows that Esparza’s decision to dismiss this case benefited Crowder and therefore the Times. In this chummy agreement between press and public official, one can wonder that a favor on one side naturally incurs a debt on the other.

I exposed the Crowder episode on my website months ago since it shows so transparently how the current DA regime fails to apply the law equally when it comes to those in power. Crowder’s case is but one of many that exemplifies how Dionicio Flores and my opponent, have created two El Pasos. One set of rules for the privileged and powerful and connected, another for the rest of us.

Recently, the Times has published several flattering articles lauding Esparza’s new DWI program to get drunken drivers off the streets. To call this shameless would be an understatement. Mr. Esparza’s record on the Crowder case alone speaks for itself. The rest of us still find ourselves sharing the road with drunk drivers who happen to have friends in high places. Can anyone believe the new DWI programs will ever apply to them?

Perhaps now you can discern why in November 2007, in the middle of my race, Mr. Flores told you that I will be “grist” for future editorials. I exposed the gross disparity between his personal property tax assessment and those of the rest of us. I exposed the special treatment his star reporter received at the hands of my opponent. I exposed Flores’ double speak regarding the sitting DA. When the Times tries to spin, slam and smear me, remember this. Ask yourself what Flores could honestly say about me as a private citizen. And compare that with what he once honestly did say about Esparza’s misdeeds as DA: trampling on the constitution, misusing the grand jury, prosecuting whistleblowers, maintaining a hit list of enemies. Remember this as you write your check this month for your property taxes while at the same time you read about public officials selling their votes to impose bonds that result in just those higher property taxes. Ask yourself why the Times has not written about 400 El Paso families losing their homes every month partly due to exorbitant property taxes, clinging to their residences up to the day they’re evicted. Ask yourself why Mr. Flores has not once written of Esparza’s failure to prosecute corrupt officials that are now FBI targets or follow up on Esparza’s “possible over billing to the Feds.” Ask yourself how Flores, in light of all this, writes that I, a homeowner and candidate for DA seeking reform in a cesspool of corruption, am “grist” for future editorials.

As the Times sits down at length to interview my opponent, they will attack me for not doing the same. They may claim, as others have tried to do, that I am not granting fair media access. Nothing could be further from the truth. I would like nothing more than a fighting chance with a fair press. But when blatant bias becomes obvious, an honest candidate interviewing with the Times and its ilk would be like Daniel walking into the lion’s den. But make no mistake. This is no lion’s den. This is a pack of wolves. No. I will not be interviewing with the El Paso Times editorial board run by Dionicio Flores. I only seek endorsements from those qualified to endorse based on their record of impartiality and fairness. That is why I seek only your endorsement. You, the voter, control the final endorsement and it is only your endorsement I seek. Vote for me for DA on March 4 and by doing so tell Dionicio Flores at the Times we’ve had enough of business as usual.

Our Constitution’s First Amendment is the most important and that is why it is first. It grants us as a people the right to free speech and freedom of religion, freedom of assembly and freedom of the press. Yet if a citizen does not have the right to speak out, then, logically, he cannot exercise any of the other rights that follow. How can you demand your rights if you cannot even state them? How can you fairly exercise your right to vote if the press does not properly inform you? How can democracy survive if those who exercise control over information mislead the electorate? How can you vote for Theresa Caballero for DA if you don’t even know she is running? How do you know what she believes if the media not only doesn’t tell you but vilifies her? The First Amendment may grant us freedom of speech, but when our voices are muzzled by a press that shirks its duties, when it has long ceased to be honest and fair, when it no longer functions as it should as the people’s watchdog on the government, then the First Amendment itself has been destroyed by the press, the very institution it was designed to protect. I have long believed that Mr. Flores, as the monopolistic manager of El Paso’s only English daily newspaper abdicated his responsibilities as a would-be journalist through his bitter bias that underscores his disdain not just for his opponents, but for the constitution we all revere.

We have suffered greatly because of this. I am not afraid to say so even when I know Mr. Flores will expend barrels of ink to suggest to you that I should not be your next DA. He would have you believe all is well in El Paso. That we live in America’s third safest city. I ask you: does El Paso feel safe to you? Does all seem well while corruption flourishes all around us? No matter what the Times spews, attacking me and complimenting my opponent, we cannot and need not endure another four corruption-laden years just because the Times pretends all is well. You now have a choice after sixteen long years of stagnation.

Please, stand up for me so that I can continue to stand up for you. I need your help at the polls on March 4, 2008. I also need your help as I face an inevitable onslaught from this well organized, well funded propaganda machine. I am fighting against entrenched interests whose coffers are bottomless. My own campaign is mostly self-funded. I ask for your vote for a better El Paso. I also ask for your financial help so I can best wage this battle against powerful forces. No amount is too small. Please, contribute whatever you can. You can send a check to the address at the bottom of this letter, or you can contribute on-line at TC4DA.COM. There you can also see for yourself what I truly believe, in my own words, unfiltered by Dionicio Flores. Read my numerous blogs on the many issues and please, provide your comments on this most critical election. Together, we can bring about the change El Paso needs and deserves.

Sincerely,



Theresa Caballero TC4DA.com
300 East Main Street, Suite 1136 thcaballero@hotmail.com
El Paso, Texas 79901
915-241-8418

Note: What follows is the tanscription of a letter that I received this week from retired United States Air Force Major Mark Bittakis. Major Bittakis was arrested by Richard Wiles at the El Paso airport and charged with possession of cocaine. Instead of taking Major Bittakis to a judge, as the law requires, Wiles called DA Esparza who authorized the arrest, set a bond of $75,000 and ok'd Bittakis going straight to jail-no judge. ONLY a JUDGE may authorize the arrest of a person and ONLY a JUDGE may set a bond. Esparza broke the law. Major Bittakis spent over ten days in jail unable to make such a huge bond. Keep in mind that Major Bittakis was a traveler from out of state just passing through El Paso on military business. After ten days in jail and paying an outrageous bond, it then came to light that what Wiles had thought was cocaine was in fact every day household LAUNDRY DETERGENT. This is called exceedingly poor training on Wiles' part. Major Bittakis' arrest was a DIMS arrest, meaning no judge. DIMS is Esparza's "baby" and he is proud of it because he says it is "fast and efficient." In fact, it is neither. This is the case that led Sheriff Samaniego to slam shut his jail doors to any inmate who had not been to see a judge first. This is the case that made Esparza so mad at the Sheriff for standing up for the Constitution.

If Esparza is re-elected, and with no Sheriff Samaniego to stop him, he will resume sending people to jail with bonds HE gives, thus erasing the judge. He will create hundreds if not thousands of criminals out of innocent people. He will create more people like Major Bittakis. Richard Wiles, Carlos Leon, Marvin Ryals, and Mary Lou Carrillo are four of eleven candidates for Sheriff who march in lock step with Esparza on this issue. Knowledge is power so vote wisely in the March 4th primary. Our liberties are at stake.

Ms. Theresa Caballero
Attorney at Law
300 E. Main, STE. 1136
El Paso, TX
79901-1381

Dear Ms. Caballero,

Enclosed you will find my contribution to your campaign for District Attorney of the 34th Judicial District for El Paso, Culberson, and Hudspeth counties. The need for a District Attorney's office in El Paso committed to honesty, even handedness, fairness, and the rule of law is so absolutely and painfully apparent. I am convinced that you are the person that can return to that office the integrity that it so desperately needs. It is clear that El Paso is in dire need of a change.

Sadly, the recent passing of Sheriff Samaniego leaves a huge void in the community. He was one of the few officials willing to stand up to Mr. Esparza's "fast-food, drive through" form of legal process. I only met him once but he struck me as a man of integrity. The announced candidacy of recently retired El Paso Police Chief Wiles for Sheriff of El Paso County should be a matter of community concern. He clearly was one of Esparza's minions. His vision of consolidating the El Paso Police Department and the Sheriff's Department into a single entity would give him a power base of unacceptable proportions. The combination of Jaime Esparza as District Attorney and Richard Wiles as Sheriff/Chief of Police would be clearly an ominous "Perfect Storm" of potential Constitutional abuse in the making. DIMS will take on a new meaning should both of these gentlemen be elected.

I am of course not a member of the El Paso community, but we have far too many "Nifong like" District Attorneys in office in this country. Bad government is similar to a disease in that it is contagious. It is every citizens responsibility to see that it does not spread. Mr. Esparza's DIMS program is particularly heinous. It is not only self-serving, but also misdirects hundreds of thousands of tax dollars every year from education, medical, and social services. It also denies the citizens of El Paso something as fundamental as the opportunity for a personal recognizance bond; an opportunity available to the citizens of every other county in Texas.

Once again, Ms. Caballero, I wish you the best of luck in your upcoming political race.


Sincerely,

Mark J. Bittakis

What follows is the final installment in the Nancy Hollebeke blog. This brings the saga full circle and to the final official word of the Court in that case. In the end what finally happened was that, after all the excuses, denials, cross-accusations of Jaime Esparza and all the taxpayer money spent by Jaime Esparza defending his actions in this case in the Court of Inquiry and Federal Court, Nancy Hollebeke was ultimately fully vindicated and emerges totally triumphant, to-wit:

1. Brief Recap: Remember, Nancy Hollebeke accused two El Paso Police Officers of sexually assaulting her (the father of one of them still works and worked for the DA's office as an investigator at all the crucial times decisions were made in her case by the DA's office but Jaime Esparza still refused to disqualify himself from the case and stated he did NOT have a conflict of interest). Jaime Esparza had Nancy thrown in jail and prosecuted her for Filing a False Police Report against the two Police Officers.

Historic Note: Years ago, when Number Two Police Officer in the El Paso Police Dept., George DeAngelis, brought forth allegations of drug cartel infiltration of the Police Department and corruption, Jaime Esparza, rather than investigating the alleged corruption, had him, George DeAngelis, the whistleblower, arrested and indicted. Are we seeing a pattern here?

2. In the Hollebeke case there was a horrendous interrogation of Ms. Hollebeke that was videotaped. El Paso Police Officer Brigette Ballew conducted this "interview" and Assistant DA's Karen Shook Larose and Penny Hamilton were hiding behind a one-way mirror feeding Ballew questions through headphones to ask Nancy in an effort to break down her story. Judge Stephen Ables of Kerrville, TX, who presided over the Court of Inquiry was outraged by this videotape.

DA Jaime Esparza personally signed the Motion to Dismiss the case of Filing a False Police Report that he had originally filed against Nancy Hollebeke.

3. On March 22, 2007, at 8:17 a.m. I filed my First Amended Motion to Expunge Records in the Nancy Hollebeke False Report case in a new lawsuit in the 171st Judicial District Court in cause number: 2007-782. In it, it is alleged that, my client, Nancy Hollebeke, was charged with Filing a False Police Report without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to do so; that we were prepared to prove, at the expunction hearing, by calling the following witnesses: El Paso County District Attorney Jaime Esparza, other members of his office (both past and present), El Paso Police Officers, members of the judiciary, and others, that Nancy Hollebeke should never have been charged or arrested at all and that she was set up from the very beginning.

Attached to this Motion to Expunge, as Exhibit "A", was a sworn affidavit from former Assistant District Attorney and current El Paso Attorney Roger Montoya wherein he stated that: His supervisor at the time, El Paso County Attorney Penny Hamilton (Chief of the Rape Unit) told him, before the videotaped "interview" of Nancy Hollebeke conducted by Brigette Ballew (assisted by ADA's Penny Hamilton and Karen Shook Larose) was ever even begun, that, words to the effect of: Don't worry or don't get excited, it's not going anywhere". The "it" that Penny Hamilton was referring to that was not going anywhere was Nancy Hollebeke's allegation of sexual assault against the two El Paso Police Officers. Mr. Montoya said, in his affidavit, that he took Ms. Hamilton's comments to mean that the case (her allegations against them) was not going to be prosecuted. Again, this was before the "interview" had even begun; ie-before the allegations had been fully investigated. Roger Montoya continues: "Ms. Hamilton then stated words to the effect that she didn't have a lot of time to talk because Jaime Esparza was with her and they were still working on the case."

On March 27-28, 2007, the El Paso County Attorney's Office, representing the District Attorney's Office, (the Respondent), in this Motion to Expunge Records that I filed in Nancy's case, filed a document entitled: "Answer to Petition for Expunction". In it, they stated the following: "A review of our records and applicable law leads the Respondent to conclude that Petitioner (Nancy Hollebeke) is entitled to expunction of records relating to cause number: 2003OCO2904 (the Filing of a False Police Report charge filed against her), as alleged in the petition.

Now, remember what it was that was alleged in the petition: See first full paragraph in item number 3 above: that she, Nancy Hollebeke, was charged with Filing A False Police Report without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to do so, that she should never have been charged or arrested at all and that she was set up from the very beginning!

On March 28, 2007 an Order Expunging the Records was filed in this case. On the signature page the El Paso County Attorney's Office, again, representing the District Attorney's Office in this case, signed off that they were Not Opposed to the expunction. The Presiding Judge of the 171st Judicial District Court also signed the Order Expunging Records and it was then filed and is now a final order.

What has Esparza learned with all his years of experience (almost 16 now) as DA? How to protect his employees' relatives? How to arrest the people reporting corruption but not investigate the corruption itself so it blossoms into something much bigger and flourishes? How to hold onto his job?

So, the questions voters need to ask are: Do we want a DA who sets people up? Do we want a DA who uses the power of his office to protect his employees' relatives? Do we want a DA who, instead of investigating corruption, throws the people who report corruption in jail?

If you answered NO to any of the questions your course is clear. Vote Esparza out of office now. Vote for change on March 4, 2008. Vote for Theresa Caballero for District Attorney. Remember check place # 1 in the DA category.

Remember early voting begins on February 19, 2008!

I have two good pieces of news to report. First, today was the day the candidates had to show up to demo headquarters to pick their ballot spots. My race was scheduled for 4:00. The ante-chamber was packed full of candidates there to pick their number out of a hat. I was there. My opponent sent a proxy in his place. Once again, he is too busy to take part in the process. And he very well might be too busy since his office is now tied up this month RE-trying TWO, not one, but TWO capital murder cases due to prosecutor misconduct. Because my opponent had filed one day before I did, his proxy got to pick the numbered ball out of the box. He picked number TWO. Which in a two person race means I am numero uno! That's right, my name will appear first on the ballot. This is a big boon. Many people stop at the first name when voting.

Secondly, KVIA (channel seven) called tonight and asked me to participate in a debate that will be aired on January 28, 2008, a half hour before the State of the Union Address. Gary Warner will be the moderator. Here is the format: there will be no opening statements. Mr. Warner will ask a question and will alternate between the candidates as to who goes first. A minute is allotted per candidate per question. Each candidate will be able to ask her/his opponent one question. KVIA is only doing this for two races, the DA's and Haggerty's and Margo's. Each race will get 15 minutes. This is a big deal.

Do you have any suggestions as to what should be my one question for my opponent? Any input is appreciated.