THIS COULDN’T GET BETTER, RICHARD D. ROTH, CONTRACT ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, FILES A DECLARATION FOR THE ASSIGNED JUDGE TO THE VALMONT GRAHAM’S CASE TO BE RECUSED FROM THIS CASE. THE ASSIGNED JUDGE, JACQUELINE JACKSON IS A FORMER PROSECUTOR FOR LA AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, AND RECENTLY WAS APPOINTED AS JUDGE BY GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. THIS DECLARATION STATES THAT JUDGE JACQUELINE JACKSON IS PREDJUDICE AGAINST THE PARTY (CITY) OR THE INTEREST OF SAID PARTY (CITY) SO THAT THE PARTY (CITY) CANNOT HAVE A FAIR OR IMPARTIAL TRIAL. NOW, JUDGE JACQUELINE JACKSON IS AFRICAN AMERICAN AND RPD SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM IS AFRICAN AMERICAN. GET THE PICTURE? SORRY WE HAD TO GO TO THE CITY’S LEVEL TO MAKE THIS CLEAR. DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE CITY BELIEVES A BLACK JUDGE WILL FAVOR A BLACK PLAINTIFF, JUST BECAUSE THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME SKIN COLOR? THERE IS NO SPECIFIC REASON IN THE DECLARATION INDICATING OTHERWISE, WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS ARE. THE QUESTION IS, WILL THIS CASE EVER WALK THROUGH THE MARBLE CARPETS OF THE SUPERIOR COURT THEATRE AND BE PLAYED OUT? PROBABLY NOT. THE RIGHTS TO THIS SCRIPT WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE BOUGHT WITH THE POTENTIAL DRAMA NEVER TO BE SEEN.
Richard Roth, Attorney for the City of Riverside and California Senate Candidate. Using the Generalisimo schpeel, of course which he earned, but using it as an adjunct for his campaign. Well done! Of course we thank you as American’s for your service, but then again, this is ridiculous…
SO, IS IT QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE JUST INCRIMINATED THEMSELVES BY INDICATING RACISM IN A DECLARATION? AFTERALL, ISN’T RPD SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM INDICATING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN HIS COMPLAINT, AND THE CITY DOES HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF CASES INDICATING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, WHICH HAVE BEEN SETTLED OUT OF COURT.
WHAT ABOUT THE CASE OF RETIRED LAPD OFFICER WAYNE K. GUILLIARY? THE CITIES LITIGATION FUND NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB, THAT IS WHERE ENORMOUS WAIST HAS OCCURRED OVER THE YEARS, WITH IT’S SUBSEQUENT BURDEN TO THE TAXPAYER. THE CITY ALWAYS DENIES IT BUT OOPS! DID WE INADVERTANTLY MAKE A BOO BOO WITH THIS DECLARATION?
RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER SERGEANT VALMONT GRAHAM’S COMPLAINT AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CLICK FOLLOWING LINK TO VIEW FULL COMPLAINT: COMPLAINT OF 07-19-2011
NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT WAS NEWLY APPOINTED CHIEF OF POLICE SERGIO DIAZ, FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON, FORMER ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TOM DESANTIS, FORMER ACTING CHIEF JOHN DE LA ROSA AND CAPTAIN MICHAEL BLAKELY.
UPDATE: 01/13/2012: HEARING DATE MOVED TO 02/22/2012 IN THE CASE OF SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.
UPDATE:01/17/2012: ATTORNEY RICHARD D. ROTH ANNOUNCES CANDACY FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY 31ST DISTRICT SENATE SEAT. RIVERSIDE’S MAYOR RON LOVERIDGE ANNOUNCES HIS ENDORSEMENT.
UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM BY THE WAY, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!
jehunter51
TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption 
Val didn’t file a lawsuit when his racial background got him promoted early to Sgt. Sorry, but he can’t have it both ways.
Barry,
Are you alleging he was incompetent because he was black? So, you know for a fact he was incompetent. You don’t s…t about his test scores i’m sure, our is oral interviews, or his experience…noooo i doubt it, that requires brains. , just a f…kn bone head statement as usual from a loser in life. Its obvious you have some major failure issues in your life you A-hole….what a stupid statement….
Wow, I detect some very real anger issues. Hope your not one of Riversides finest. All I said was that Graham can’t play the race card at both ends of this game. Now, please take a deep breath and try to avoid calling other people names, or worse.
. Barry, nobody angry..sir it’s just you making statements as if they were fact. You don’t have any evidence that this sergeant has played the race card today or any other time…I guess speculation is fact .now……..What if i say “Barry XYZ” is a child molester because he’s (white, Mexican, Jewish) or whatever crazy racial epithet comment . I’m sure you and your friends and family wouldn’t love that. Again, just bone head statements. Why don’t you wait until all the facts come out and listen to the testimony from the case before opening that pie hole of yours
It’s just a shame that RP employees are so quick to sue US, the taxpayers. While we may sometimes feel vindication when disgruntled employees take on The System, we NOT the City are stuck with the bill. I would rather that our tax dollars serve our neighbors who are in need.
The reality is, that Riverside has so many lawsuits ahead of Officer Sergent Valmount it may take a long time to get through the court system. Unless the Citys’ choice is to settle. Discrimination is deep seeded in all Departments of Riverside Government. It needs to be exposed and changed.
He has every right to file his Law Suit we live in America. He deserves his day in court “justice is open to everyone in the same way as the Ritz Hotel- Judge Sturgess”. The citizens of Riverside have already been ripped off.
And justice requires people to pay the rent they agreed to when they lease buildings. Don’t’t you agree, TMC?
Somethin tells me Viv don’t wanna talk about that.
Wrong! Did we hit a nerve? I would be more that happy to discuss any aspect of our lease. In fact, TMC will report all the sorted ugly details regarding the negotiations with the city. Our original lease was with The Freeman Company for 10years. We had $150,000 in tenant improvements and $70,000 a year lease, PAID! Unresponsive City takes over, “incompetence”. Obviously you don’t know me very well.
Will you also reveal how you stopped making rent payments? And that your demanded concessions that would have had City residents subsidizeing your failing business? Youre anger has so blinded you that I’m afraid you don’t even remember all of the facts. And it’s led you to take our your venom on everyone at the city via this hate filled website. You would be much happuier to find peace and let this go, Viv.
All I know is after the City took over the building, all the tenants were chased out. What grand plan do they have in store for that building?
Yes, I told you we will reveal everything! If you would like to continue this dialog you need to reveal yourself, or wait for the article. The only people in negotiations were Mike Gardner, Tina English, Deanna Lorsen, Brad Hudson, Sometimes city attorney Richard Milligan, Joel Belding (no longer with the city) and John Curts (no longer with the city). If you think the facts are hateful you are misguided, they are simply the facts. Again we live in America and privy to the freedom of speech, if you feel this is venomous you also have the right to refrain from reading. I’m not angry, you are! We were not asking for subsidies, we were asking for a reduction in rent with reference to market trends. The city construction did not help any either, there was no consideration for main street merchants, unless you were in the preferred merchant class with the city. The citizens of Riverside have subsidized many failing businesses: 1. Provider/ Market Broiler , this is a city owned restaurant, we have spent millions and have not made 1 cent in profit toward the taxpayer. , 2. The Fox Theatre, again same scenario, about 2 million in operating cost to the taxpayer, no profit, 3. The Star Trek Exhibit. Mike Gardner personally told me this was going to be great, 80,000 people are expected to spill on main street. This exhibit wiped out the museum fund, this is just to name a few. I’m only one of eight who work on this blog. Facts come from everywhere, some come from the cities website, public records request, fired employees, city employees etc.
Wow I didn’t know this would turn into such an interesting and charged dialog. I must say, however, that this site is rather loose with some facts and quick to present inuendo as fact. It would be helpful if the writers could give some thought to this.
Barry, if you have facts or information to state otherwise or to submit, we will gladly update the story, such as a true association between plaintiff and the judge. There must be a hearing or statement of reasoning of such, regarding why Richard Roth feels this Judge Jacqueline Jackson is predjudice against the City of Riverside as indicated in the declaration. If the city decides to be unclear with the community, their is room to question their facts, until clarified.
See, that’s part of the problem with this sight. Anyone can submit “facts” and the story is updated. So many people have been slandered on this sight, with meanspirited comments published as fact. I must agree that Ms. Moreno’s anger with the city takes so much credibility away from her postings. Sorry, but it has to be said.
Barry,
Do you always talk without facts??? My God…. Just mouthing off again with no heading in sight.
Thirtymiles, good point regarding judge Jacqueline Jackson. She is a new appointed judge so why would she have a prejudice….Non…. just Riverside exhibiting their arrogant. This usual strong arm tactics they do to people who get in their way. This is great for the potential juries to hear the city was trying to remove a female African American judge because of her skin color…….heheheheheh I love it with they act stupid and its going to them write a “Bigger” check. I already talked to many people who it pissed off…Valmont case will never see a court room…..I guarantee it ……they will settle this way before the date….This has Tennie Pierce (case) all on it. (LACFD).1.5millon ….LOL 3mil Valmont…heheheheh LOL what fools at the city.
It’s completely irresponsible and hateful to post a theory of racism when there is absolutely no proof. Wait for the truth, then post it. If that is the City’s argument then by all means, publicize the heck out of it.
“Barry, if you have facts or information to state otherwise…”
On this site, everyone working in the City and the entity itself are guilty of any theory the author puts forth, until proven otherwise. Hypothetical conversation:
Accuser: “My neighbor is a bank robber.”
Friend: “How do you know?”
Accuser: “Look at all the stuff he owns!”
Friend: “How does that make him a bank robber?”
Accuser: “Well he hasn’t told me otherwise so he must be one.”
Friend: “That’s a serious allegation. Can you prove that he’s a bank robber?”
Accuser: “Can you prove that he’s not?!”
A governmental entity may not be a person with feelings, but allegations without proof can be harmful nonetheless. Furthermore, behind every City action is a person or persons. Those individuals do not deserve to be labeled racist or guilty of any other crime unless there is evidence to support the accusation. To the author: how would YOU like to be the person accused of being a bank robber, or an adulterer, or a pedophile, etc. and then realize that it’s pretty impossible to prove that you didn’t do something. The only hope you would have is that you are more believable than your accuser.
So hopefully most people agree with Reader and recognize the problem with this site:
“…So many people have been slandered on this sight, with meanspirited comments published as fact. I must agree that Ms. Moreno’s anger with the city takes so much credibility away from her postings…”
I sure agree with him. Well said, Reader!
Thanks for your comment Anonymous, this article was not written by Ms. Moreno, but you must admit the cities position to recuse a black female judge in lieu of hearing a case of a black plaintiff, is quite compelling. But as indicated in the article, the position of city has yet to be brought to the forefront. But they have indicated in their declaration without a conclusive reasoning as stated in the following: that Jacqueline C. Jackson , Judge/Commissioner of the above entitled court before whom the trial of the aforesaid action is assigned, is prejudiced against the party or the interests of said party so that the party cannot, or he/she believes that he/she cannot have a fair and impartial trial or hearing before said Judge/Commissioner. We must therefore wait to hear the arguments of Richard D. Roth, Esq., representing the people of the City of Riverside.
thirtymiles, I do not find the request for recusal compelling enough to start and spread a rumor that it might be based on race. Actually, it would not have occurred to me that it was based on race because no attorney in their right mind would file a recusal on those grounds. The declaration does not require conclusive reasoning; that is what the subsequent hearing is for.
Again I insist, the responsible thing to do is wait and see what the argument is. A good citizen would not seek to stir up racial tensions in their own city just because they distrust the City’s motives. It is harmful to the relationship of the City’s citizens, and they deserve better. We should strive for a racially diverse but united City with common goals and ideals.
I care about this City and I don’t want to see it torn apart by unfounded rumors and innuendos.
[…] CITY OF RIVERSIDE SEES SKIN COLOR AS PROBLEMATIC? […]
[…] CITY OF RIVERSIDE SEES SKIN COLOR AS PROBLEMATIC? […]
[…] CITY OF RIVERSIDE SEES SKIN COLOR AS PROBLEMATIC? […]
[…] THE CASE OF SGT. VALMONT GRAHAM HAS BEEN RUMORED TO HAVE BEEN SETTLED OUT OF COURT. CONGRESSIONAL … CINDY ROTH, PRESIDENT/CEO OF THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IS ALSO INCIDENTLY SUPPORTED WITH FINANCIAL DONATIONS BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. […]
[…] WAS ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND GENERALISIMO RICHARD ROTH’S OFFER TO SERGENT VALMON… […]
[…] THE…kaptalizm on CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CUTTING THE…BOMBSHELL! FORMER DE… on CITY OF RIVERSIDE SEES SKIN CO… […]
[…] UPDATE: CINDY ROTH AND THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER RECEIVES FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY, OVER A HALF A MILLION OVER THREE YEARS FOR “KEEP RIVERSIDE CLEAN AND BEAUTIFUL” PROGRAM, AS VOTED AT SEPTEMBER 23RD CITY COUNCIL, WITH THE ONLY NO VOTE BY COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS. INCIDENTALLY, COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS FOUND THIS QUITE PECULIAR ENOUGH THAT HE REQUESTED THIS ITEM BE REMOVED FROM THE “CONSENT CALENDER’ FOR DISCUSSION. The discussion led to questions regarding how Cindy Roth’s Greater Riverside Chamber is paid. First, the taxpayer must pay for this “Volunteer Program” in their “Trash Bill.” Five other cities in California wouldn’t think of doing this. Riverside does. Therefore, the issue of this item becomes an illegal charge or tax against the taxpayer! Since the charge comes from the Public Works Department, it must be brought forth for “bid.” Secondly, there must be a contractors contract, referencing item by item, how the taxpayer money is to be spent. Non of this has ever been done! With her attorney husband and now Senator, “Something seems to be Rotten in Denmark!” Question have arose over the disbursements of taxpayer monies, which appear to have never been reported to Council in the past. Taxpayers continue to argue that it is a “money laundering” scheme. Incidently, Cindy Roth, CEO/President, her husband is now Senator for the State of California, Richard Roth… In the past has done outside legal work for the City of Riverside, which has been allegedly been questi… […]
[…] God Like Behavior has cost the taxpayer Millions in Lawsuits… PAUL DAVIS-MIKE SOUBRIOUS-VALMOUNT GRAHAM. Back in 2012 Mayor Bailey was blamed for diffusing a promotion of an Black RPD Police Officer by […]