Dudley Will Retry Denunzio

Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

District Attorney Joyce Dudley announced this week her intention to retry Tony Denunzio on a DUI charge. A jury couldn’t reach a unanimous verdict during his first trial; a judge acquitted him of a separate charge of driving with a blood-alcohol level above 0.08. Denunzio made headlines not because of his driving but because of the events surrounding his subsequent arrest. He, and many witnesses, claimed Officer Aaron Tudor used excessive force to place him in custody. Dudley declined to pursue excessive force charges against Tudor or resisting arrest charges against Denunzio.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

I don't think that excessive force was used to arrest him, but I do think that excessive use of the courts and the DA's discretion to prosecute is being used against him.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why, because he's had other cases other than the DUI?

LegendaryYeti (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 5:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you DA Dudley.

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 6:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OK we are bored with these same 3 or 4 posters. If anyone else has something to say fine, otherwise this subject was played out on the last article with over a hundred comments, most from the same people.

sbreader (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 8:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes I agree sbreader and 14noscams...LOL. However, we did enjoy your stories of victimization by government forces.

LOOK OUT!!!! There's a cop behind you!!!

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 9:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Seems like a lot of money that could be put to better use. The first jury already made it's decision. So the DA doesn't like the jury's decision and decides she wants another trial? Weird.

sbs124 (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2013 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, not exactly. Joyce would not accept my invitation to actually take a 'hands on' role in representing 'her' client. She only goes to trial herself where the case is highly likely to result in a conviction. She prefers to let weaker cases tarnish someone else's trial stats. However, she is responsible for the performance of her office, so please keep that in mind when it comes time to vote on whether she should continue as your DA.

Moreover, pre trial motions take place at 10:30 am on March 21, 2013, and the trial is set to start March 25, 2013, but we shall see if that happens.

DarrylGenis (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 12:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

@DaryllGenis... It's quite obvious to me you've either lost some perspective or you're up late looking at your own image in the mirror again. Let me remind you of something.... THIS IS A DUI CASE!! Not a civil rights case being argued before the Supreme Court. The DA's time would be better served cleaning out her desk than entertaining your request.

I would even go as far as stating that my comment gets as many laughs as yours in the DA's office this morning.

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 2:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The national Slam A Few Back And Hit The Road Association of America supports "Clarence" Daryll Genis for Santa Barbara DA.

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 3:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Let me know who's laughing later today.

DarrylGenis (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 4:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Darryl, keep us posted on what happens in court.

sbs124 (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This comes from an opinion piece written by the Santa Barbara Rape Crisis Center in today's News-Press....

""I slit her throat and she doesn't even know she's bleeding" - when referencing Deputy District Attorney Mai Trieu, the prosecutor in a recent mistrial.

Mr. Genis' use of such graphic, violent imagery to describe what he perceives as his achievement in a courtroom against a female attorney is abhorrent and has no place in a civil society."

...Did Denuncio pay extra for the great PR?

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The criminal in this case is Dudley herself. She should be prosecuted for conspiracy to suppress evidence of Tudor's violent crimes, Beutel's ongoing fraud/corruption, and for prosecutorial abuses which are sadly ENDLESS in this community.
Does anyone in SB notice that on a "slow crime day" (no gang violence, no armed robberies, no hit-and-runs, no car-chases, no officer-involved shootings) that SBPD gets ultra-active in writing endless citations for 647E PC (sleeping in the park), 1.05.010 MC (possession of an open container; it can be a soft drink can, folks!), and 16028 VC (not having current insurance evidence in your vehicle)?
Bottom line: law enforcement and the courts in SB is the #1 BUSINESS. Without every petty arrest and every over-zealous prosecution (look at our arrest/trial stats compared to our population numbers; it's a joke), we just might have to cut staff in the courts and lay off those cretins who work at the jail. Wouldn't be good for the economy...but churning arrests and prisoners and collecting fines & bail sure is. The whole thing stinks and everyone on the street knows it. When's election day? Where is the Board of Supervisors in all of this flagrant over-reaching?
These people need to go away a.s.a.p.

Beachgirl77 (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@Beachgirl77..... Do you know why laws (citations & arrests) are enforced on all those cretins violating said laws? Because the vast majority of TAX PAYING and HARD WORKING citizens demand it.

No law abiding business owner should have to tolerate some urine soaked drunk loser sleeping outside their business, no law abiding citizen should have to deal with problems caused by said losers getting drunk in public (even when they pour booze into a soda can to hide it), and no law abiding motorist should be hit by an uninsured loser.

You don't like the laws then go to Sacramento and effect change. Don't complain about those enforcing it.

There's one more option for you. There's a country just south of San Diego that will let you do pretty much whatever you want, but you won't get hand outs down there. You might starve.

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 8:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People with IQ's < 90 are obviously entitled to representation. People who are too weak for LE or military service can simulate adequacy as members of SBPD by attacking helpless people and avoiding competitive adversaries - a lot of representaives of Sun Tzu's definition of defeat in SBPD's officers in good standing - no insult, they're proud to be losers.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2013 at 10:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

JUDGE RIGALI IMPOSES A GAG ORDER IN DENUNCIO CASE!!!!.... LOL!!!! Isn't that cruel and unusual punishment for little Darryl?

'However, he stated once the lawyers were outside the courtroom, "Everybody's behavior seemed to take a turn for the worse," referencing allegations have been made from one side stating the other is being unprofessional.

"With what has happened," said Judge Rigali, "it puts me in a position to impose a gag order, an order that the lawyers not talk to the media about the case.""

No, I believe Rigali was trying not to single out Genis even though the Deputy DA hasn't made stupid public comments, issued stupid challenge letters, or repeatedly been lured into posting in the comments section of the Indy.

Validated (anonymous profile)
March 22, 2013 at 11:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I guess I am now validated with a big:
I told you so.
My original quote was Humpty Dumpty. All Dudley's horses and all of her men (and women too).
And all Dudley and her minions can do is blame the judge for following the law instead of being intimidated by the DA.

DarrylGenis (anonymous profile)
April 11, 2013 at 8:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why no story in the Independent on how Dudley has backed down?

Thankfully, this county has at least one judge willing to follow the law. And we also have Noozhawk for "nooz":

at_large (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2013 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No-one seems to remember how Dudley's friend and co-conspirator Salud Carbahal demanded something be done about the Jusitia fire. The D.A.'s office was pressured into proceeding with a flawed case against the two good Samaritans with a weed whacker. Our fire department tried to fabricate evidence by making sparks with a weed whacker that was seriously different from the one used. By good luck this was discovered in time to prevent a wrongful conviction. Apart from Vindicated, any sensible person would correctly draw parallels to our police and prosecutors actions in Lance and Denunzio. We have a serious problem that will eventually result in a wrongful conviction. Usually the district attorneys don't file cases where there isn't evidence adequate to sustain a conviction. Is that true of Joyce Dudley's office?

beagle (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2013 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: