What makes these two audits of criminal records searches so different?

February 2, 2007
Bill Brown
Sheriff of Santa Barbara County

Dear Sheriff Brown:

Commander Sam Gross was only too happy to provide two red herring audits that he contributed to a false declaration. But it was a different story when I asked him to provide me with the two audits that he partially described in a letter to me. He refuses.

What makes these two audits so different?

I spoke to Sheriff’s counsel Kelly Duncan Scott today. She refused, as she has repeatedly done in the past, to provide the two CLETS audits for “maura” or “larkins” that were described in detail by Sam Gross in his November 24, 2004 letter. These audits turned up eight searches in 2000 and 2001. To make clear precisely which audits I’m talking about, I have circled the pertinent section of Mr. Gross’s letter, and attached the letter to this fax. The letter is also on my website at the bottom of the page that contains my complaint against Michael Carlson..

Kelly Duncan Scott refuses to discuss these two audits with me. In fact, she even refused to return my call to the switchboard when she was finished talking to me. Her secretive behavior makes me quite certain that these two audits show the precise dates on which Michael Carlson conducted illegal searches and began a long string of criminal acts which did enormous damage to Chula Vista Elementary School District. Kelly and Sam Gross wouldn’t be trying so hard to cover up these audits if they didn’t reveal Carlson’s first crime, committed long before Carlson obstructed justice and suborned perjury.

Why wouldn’t Kelly transfer me back to the switchboard? I think she’s afraid that I might actually find someone who disapproved of sweeping felonies under the rug. I’d very much like to know who is that person that Kelly fears—the one who would disapprove of hiding a series of crimes committed by Sheriff’s employees. I’m hoping that person is you, Sheriff Brown. Sam Gross and Kelly Scott would not be so determined to cover up these audits if they were not incriminating.

Please consider this letter an ethics complaint about Michael Carlson, Sam Gross and Kelly Duncan Scott. I believe Kelly has been giving very bad legal advice to the Sheriff of Santa Barbara for many years, advising cover-ups of crimes committed by sheriff’s employees. Of course, I also believe that that’s the kind of advice the sheriff’s department wanted in past years when Jim Anderson was sheriff. If this letter is not adequate to initiate an official complaint process, please inform me of the proper procedure.

I am aware that Michael Carlson’s demurrer to my complaint may well be sustained on February 16, 2007. At that time, I plan to go to the Court of Appeal.

I believe that the policy giving complete tort immunity to those who suborn and commit perjury in lawsuits is the most important tort reform needed in our society. There are some powerful dissent opinions in case law that disagree with the current situation that allows law enforcement officers should go “Scott” free (pun intended) when they turn our justice system into a joke, a circus, a sham.

I plan to make a public issue of this matter.

Yours truly,
Maura Larkins