Laserfiche WebLink
-necessarily the individual citizen. It is an unfortunate <br /> situation, I can see, that exists. In cases in the past and <br /> what weThave to look for in the future is not only the <br /> criminal but the individual who exists today in this county <br /> who has other rights that have to be protected. . .in addition <br /> to the criminal . If this could only be tailored to the `guy <br /> who is the habitual criminal then we would still defeat the <br /> justice system by incriminating him before we have given him <br /> his day in court. We can appreciate this. I always look <br /> at the situations as maybe the Prosectutor' s office does not <br /> get a good investigation from the Police Department. I think <br /> a lot of your cases today do not necessarily have to do with <br /> the situations that you are trying to point out here but that <br /> possibly poor investigation on the part of the Police Depart- <br /> ment could give you a bad case right off the bat. <br /> MR. ONO: I can ' t say enough for the Police <br /> Department for the support they have given us and the investi- <br /> gations-they have been giving us good cases. There are always <br /> borderline cases. There is the case that is close to being a <br /> crime but may not be a crime or may be questionable. In every <br /> investigation there may be some areas where there will be more <br /> investigation needed. It might not be complete. But I can <br /> appreciate your. . .all of your positions. . .because it is some- <br /> thing that is. . .I 'm not asking this. . .asking you to accept <br /> this Section and anything I say just put it into the Charter. <br /> It is something that is very controversial . Something that we <br /> believe to be a tremendous tool for our office to help to <br /> enforce the laws of this county but your fears as to citizens <br /> being. . .private citizens with no connection with crime being <br /> harassed would exist even without this power. It ' s not some- <br /> thing that is going to be any different than what can already <br /> exist now. If we didn ' t try to keep up any kind of integrity <br /> in the office and we just didn ' t care, I think the power exists <br /> right now to indict a person without any grounds whatsoever. <br /> If you try to fool a Grand Jury, if you try to purge a testimony. <br /> God forbid that anybody tries that in any of .the offices. . .we <br /> hope that never happens but I think it is something that as <br /> with all other powerful provisions , even the Constitutional <br /> provisions , you just have to rely upon the system that is set <br /> up already and again the Constitutional safeguards do exist. <br /> It is not something that is going to try to circumvent the <br /> Constitution. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Ono, I gather that according <br /> to this provision you have provided in this paragraph with the <br /> sanctions imposed should the witness not follow the subpoena <br /> order. . .you also indicated that should there be an abuse of <br /> discretion in the Prosecutor ' s office there are means to go <br /> beyond that. . .what would your feeling be of placing some limi- <br /> tation or placing some sanctions upon the prosecuting officer <br /> with some provision within this provision here. . .so that the <br /> members of the prosecuting staff would know that there are <br /> express sanctions against them should they abuse this process. <br /> MR. ONO: In the first place, I think it is <br /> not really necessary because all prosecutors pretty much live <br /> in fear of being fined for a prosecutory mistake. <br /> -15- <br />