We haven’t had this much fun with a Times-Standard “My Word” piece since our favorite surfing district attorney signed his name to a column he straight stole from a South Carolina law professor.
Fond memories to be sure, although it should be noted that we at the Humboldt Mirror do not condone plagiarism—except possibly when the county’s top law enforcement official steals other people’s original thoughts because even he knows he doesn’t have any of his own, or when the above gets caught in the act and trips over his dick for the next few weeks explaining how the whole thing was completely “inadvertent.” What’s not to like about that?
Still, the story goes that surfer dude’s “My Word” foray into… uh… literary borrowing was not his first. Numerous current and former deputy district attorneys have long maintained that it was McKinleyville pot doc Ken Miller who penned the DA’s historic “fraud” suit against the Pacific Lumber Company, a document Paul Gallegos signed and submitted as though he were some kinda actual lawyer.
So it comes as no surprise that when the suit bellies up for the third time, and the venerable Times-Standard singes Paul’s butt hairs with a smoking-hot editorial, who should be first out of the gate to weigh in on the case but Dr. Ken Miller?
So rich, so fitting, so… well, lame.
Does Miller mention that after three attempts in two courts, not one judge could find a single applicable law in any of the filings—much less a law that had been broken? Does he note that after five long years, the case never even made it to trial? Does he apologize for the years of division and distraction, for the mass wasting of our tax dollars?
Yes. He’s that kind of guy.
Instead, he sticks to the script he wrote, trots out the same party lines he himself fed to the DA, and continues to pursue his lifelong passion of dividing Humboldt County into broken little pieces.
He also asks a question we would like to answer: Does anyone doubt Pacific Lumber committed fraud? That’s an easy one, Ken. We do. And joining us are the three respected judges who heard the recent appeal and dismissed out of hand both the legal and factual bases of your complaint.
So when you talk about the “foresight” of the suit with Paul’s name on it, suggesting that its visionary qualities may lead to profound changes in law, we’d like to ask a question of our own: How many lawsuits kicked out of court three times before trial can you name that have paved the way for landmark legislation?
Go ahead, Ken. Do write us a response. But please don’t forget to sign your name.