Ex-Campaign Manager’s Letter Chides Sybert’s Political Moves

Losing congressional candidate Rich Sybert’s former campaign manager is dissing his old boss in print. And in no uncertain terms, too.

In a letter sent to Sybert’s past supporters, ex-campaign manager John Theiss said Sybert is the wrong man to run for the 37th District Assembly seat next year.

Sybert has been talking about doing just that, going so far, some sources say, as to interview political consultants.

The seat is now held by Assemblyman Nao Takasugi (R-Camarillo), who is being forced out by term limits.

A run by Sybert would involve him moving to the Ventura County district.

Theiss wrote that voters would see Sybert as “another desperate politician since he would be moving for the second time into another district to run for public office.”

The letter goes on to accuse Sybert of staking out some “pretty liberal positions” in his effort to win in the 24th Congressional District. He lost that race to Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks).

“If Rich were lucky enough to win the primary, and I don’t think he can, he would be a very weak nominee,” said Theiss, who is now an aide to Sen. Cathie Wright (R-Simi Valley).

Theiss’ motivation was clear in the letter. He’s supporting another GOPer, Tony Strickland, over Sybert in the 37th District contest.

Strickland was a staffer for ex-Assemblywoman Paula L. Boland. He now works for her successor, Assemblyman Tom McClintock (R-Northridge).

In a telephone interview, Theiss said, “Rich Sybert is groomed to be a congressman, and I’d like to see him run for Congress.”

Theiss said his former boss should take some time and reevaluate his next career move after losing two bids for Congress.

Sybert said he knew nothing about the letter and had no comment.

Close Encounter

In the wake of last week’s horrific firefight between the LAPD and two brazen bank robbers, the gunmen’s past became a matter of great interest.

Of particular note was their 1993 arrest in Glendale where police found them accompanied with enough weaponry to audition for a Schwarzenegger action epic.

After their trip through the legal system, records show, they got much of their arsenal back, raising more than a few eyebrows in hindsight.

Playing a bit part in that episode was Rep. James Rogan, now a freshman congressman, then a Glendale Municipal Court judge who encountered the two desperadoes, Larry Eugene Phillips Jr. and Emil Dechebel Matasareanu, after police pulled over their car for speeding and found within a “bank robbery kit.”

“If you had showed me those guys in a lineup and asked if I know any of them I would have said ‘no,’ ” Rogan said. “Now that I know they were in my courtroom, I have a vague recollection [about Matasareanu], but that was four years and 40,000 cases ago. I wish I could tell you they had steely eyes, but I can’t.”

Rogan served on the municipal bench three and a half years from 1990 to 1994.

After learning of his brief history with the two bank robbers, Rogan asked the court to fax him some of the records of the case.

“I held these guys to answer to everything, except for two charges the D.A. dismissed, and shot the case over to Superior Court,” said Rogan.

As for subsequent events--the plea bargain and retention of much of their suspicious paraphernalia--Rogan has no memory or involvement.

“I don’t know what happened over there,” Rogan said. “Back then, 95% of all those [Superior Court] cases were disposed of before a jury trial.” What unfolded in Rogan’s courtroom was a preliminary hearing, where the prosecution lays out its case.

The Municipal Court judge’s job is to determine if there is a reasonable basis for assuming the crimes were committed and that the defendants committed them.

“It was a two-hour hearing--a little more than routine--but with two defendants and multiple charges, that’s understandable,” Rogan said.

“A lot of people don’t know, but by law Municipal Court judges are not allowed to look at police reports or have any discussion with police . . . so our judgment isn’t tainted when we hear the evidence,” he said.

“Back then, [in preliminary hearings] there was no reciprocal discovery. The D.A. had to give up all its files and witnesses, and the defense didn’t have to give you anything. At almost every preliminary hearing the D.A. put on his case, and the defense rests because they didn’t want the D.A. to know where their case was heading.”

But once Judge Rogan sent the pair on to Superior Court, the relentless onslaught of cases in his courtroom pushed the details of his encounter with the future bank robbers far from his mind.

“Some cases you never forget--when the next of kin is in the courtroom, a heinous murder or a child molestation. A lot of those I wish I could forget.”

After You

A meeting of the Los Angeles City Council this week took on the aspects of a poker game when the panel began to discuss state legislation to make it easier for the San Fernando Valley to secede.

After much debate, the council adopted a flexible yet simple position: The city will support any secession legislation that removes the council’s power to veto a breakup movement so long as every voter in the city can vote on it.

But during the debate, Councilman Mike Hernandez, who represents parts of East Los Angeles, suggested that his district may also want to secede.

He said his district has the industrial base, the commercial corridors and the population to sustain itself as a separate city.

The Valley may feel disenfranchised, but Hernandez suggested that it’s about time someone paid attention to his district.

But Councilman Hal Bernson, who represents the northwest Valley and has supported efforts to make secession easier, called Hernandez’s bluff.

“If he really wants to go, I’ll let him,” Bernson bellowed across the council chambers. “Go ahead and leave.”

In the end, the council voted 9 to 3 to support the city’s position on secession. Hernandez was among the three “no” votes.

Democratized

If the TV series “LA Law” were still in production, an entire episode could be written on the legal skirmishes surrounding the effort to create an elected panel to overhaul the city’s 72-year-old charter.

Case in point: On Thursday, Jackie Dupont-Walker, a charter commission candidate in south Los Angeles, went to court to complain that her opponent Casey Peters had submitted a ballot designation that described him as a “democratic elections activist.”

Peters, who has worked with such organizations as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Voting and Democracy, said the designation is intended to show that he works to make elections more democratic.

But Dupont-Walker argued that the designation gives the impression that Peters is a Democrat, and would further suggest that Dupont-Walker, the opponent, is a Republican.

Dupont-Walker is a Democrat, which is significant in the south Los Angeles district where she is a candidate because the voters there are largely Democrats, too.

She said two people called her to ask if she was a Republican. “If they are confused, I assume others are confused, too,” she said.

When Peters and Dupont-Walker appeared in court, the two agreed to change his ballot designation to “democracy activist.”

Superior Court Judge Diane Wayne approved the settlement.

But now election officials are going to have to reprint 22,000 absentee ballots and other election documents to change Peters’ designation at a cost of about $4,000.

*

QUOTABLE: “We’re going to get some form of a secession bill this year.” --Valley Assemblyman Bob Hertzberg