By Robert Haugh
Indicted Santa Clara City Councilmember Anthony Becker’s trial for felony perjury starts at the end of the month.
He faces charges of leaking a Grand Jury report to the 49ers and lying about it.
If convicted, Becker could serve up to four years in prison.
Becker is also on the ballot for re-election. He’s actually campaigning. Yup. Here’s a post from him on Facebook:
Of course, Becker is innocent until proven guilty. And someone under indictment is legally allowed to vote.
But what if he’s found guilty before Election Day?
Here’s what the California Secretary of State’s website says:
So, if Becker hasn’t voted yet or won’t soon, he may be out of luck.
If he’s tried and convicted before Election Day and is sentenced, then it doesn’t look like he’s eligible to vote for himself.
If Becker makes a plea deal before Election Day and is sentenced, he won’t be eligible to vote either.
So if you see Becker at the post office dropping off his absentee ballot, don’t be too surprised.
This situation is a first for Santa Clara and really unusual.
No one thought Becker would drag out his trial for 18 months after he was indicted.
Or voted on major 49ers items while under indictment.
And no one thought his 49er Five colleagues would make him Vice Mayor while he was under indictment. Yup. No kidding.
That was another Santa Clara first.
Let’s hope it’s a last.
Out of curiosity. If Becker was passed over to be VM, would another person take the role? Does the council still vote on that?
I can’t wait for the day you don’t have to write this type of article Robert. The people is Santa Clara need to vote the new candidates in and get rid of those that do not have our interests in their view. Please please vote for our city
This blog also work diligently (assiduously – what is this? SAT prep??) to expose the truth about elected officials that has clearly been corrupted by outside influence. If that is perceived as negative – so be it – it’s the truth and we need to confront ourselves with this ugly reality.
The role of Vice Mayor is a rotating position and Becker was next in line. Regardless of how one might feel about the accusations against him, Becker is innocent until proven guilty and allowed to vote. Haugh knows this from experience.
With jury selection expected to start the last week of October (28- Fri Nov 1) it’s unlikely a jury would return a verdict before Tuesday November 5th. And, hypothetically, let’s say Becker is convicted in November, keep in mind these two facts…
1. He may have an option to appeal and during that time is allowed by law to vote.
2. In California, a person convicted of a felony but not serving time in a State or Federal prison is still allowed to vote. https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-california/who-can-vote-california/voting-rights-californians
Again, hypothetically, if Becker is convicted of a felony but sentencing is time in a local detention facility, parole, probation, supervision, Federal supervised release – anything other than being in a State or Federal prison – Becker is allowed to vote.
I understand this blog works assiduously to post negative material against Becker, Jain, Hardy, Park, and Chahal but hopefully readers don’t get emotional and adopt a mindset that mere accusations should be cause for others not participating in society.
Wouldn’t call leaking and lying about giving a confidential report to the SF49er organization a “mere accusation”. Becker was indicted for felony perjury. There’s a price to pay. Too bad Rahul Chandick is getting away with his role in all this. Snake in the grass that he is.
CSC,
The question of whether or not Becker could vote for himself because of a felony conviction is simply a moot point I agree. The only reason to speculate is to be able to discuss how he is going on trial for a felony crime.
But the fact that he is innocent until proven guilty of a crime in the criminal justice system does not mean that his council colleagues need to or should consider him innocent until proven guilty. When there is a preponderance of apparent evidence that points to an elected official’s guilt of a crime that is deemed significant enough then it is at least appropriate for others to call for their resignation or impeachment or removal.
It is even more appropriate to not elevate them to a higher level position even if that position is by custom just given out in the form of rotating terms. And even when the position or title is basically a ceremonial one. There is still a vote made by the city councilpeople to appoint Becker to the position of vice mayor or to not appoint him. His “Forty Niner Five” allies all voted to appoint him as vice mayor.
They did so with it being reasonably safe to assume that he lied. He not only lied but lied while offering testimony to a grand jury after swearing to tell the truth. He not only lied about his illegal action but accused another person of committing that crime while knowing that it was him who did. And the misdemeanor crime of using his public position to obtain and then leak what was confidential government information was committed in order to leak it to a corporate special interest that often has financial interests that are at odds with the city’s. A corporate special interest that has spent millions of dollars to help him advance in his political aspirations.
For Suds Jain this is not just making a judgement in advance of what a trial verdict will be but knowing that Becker lied because Suds testified that Becker told him that he leaked the report to Carolyn Schuk of the Silicon Valley Voice.
So Suds Jain knew that Anthony Becker swore to tell the truth in front of a grand jury and then lied to them. And saw fit to not only defend Becker against demands that he resign from the council and also saw fit to elevate Becker in title and to serve as the presiding officer over council meetings when the mayor is not present.
Suds and his allies on the council all deserve to be criticized for this. Becker of course deserves to be criticized for not stepping down from council and voting on Forty Niner issues when it is reasonable to assume that he was willing to commit a felony in order to hide the fact that he used his office to help that company.
Committing this crime should be seen as disqualifying a person from a council position in our city because it shows a lack of moral character and being untrustworthy. And also because he committed a crime to help a corporate special interest and that proves the strong conflict of interest he has when deciding on matters that could benefit the Forty Niners at the expense of the people of Santa Clara. And also because it was stupid and reckless and we do not want stupid and reckless people making important decisions for us.
And Anthony Becker has shown himself to be stupid if not reckless many times in many ways other than committing a misdemeanor to help the Forty Niners and committing a felony to try and hide that crime.
@Adam: An indictment is a formal accusation. If the DA’s office were simply pursuing a misdemeanor charge they wouldn’t need a Grand Jury. Good example is the evidence the Santa Clara County DA presented to a Grand Jury to accuse Lionel Rubalcava with the crime of “drive by shooting.” Rubalcava was indicted on felony charges, tried, and convicted spending 17 years in prison. In 2019, the Innocence Project at Santa Clara University found new evidence that, if presented by the DA at the time, would have likely resulted in Rubalcava never being indicted. This past June, the City of San Jose agreed to pay Mr. Rubalcava $12,000,000 for incompetent and corrupt evidence provided to the Grand Jury from police and the DA during this wrongful prosecution. It was not the civilian Grand Jury who convicted Mr. Rubalcava upon being presented with the evidence; it was incompetent cops and prosecutors who railroaded a man for a crime he never committed. https://www.kqed.org/news/11990929/san-jose-paying-12-million-to-exonerated-man-in-wrongful-conviction-suit
Because Rosen and Malinsky wanted to examine a felony charge against Becker, they needed to present preliminary evidence to a Grand Jury first. A Grand Jury does not focus on guilt or innocence, rather that the DA has submitted enough evidence to pursue a felony charge. It’s an important step in our justice system to ensure law enforcement isn’t abusing its powers. https://sfbaydefense.com/indicted-vs-charged/
Regardless of the amount or veracity of evidence presented to a Grand Jury, Becker is still innocent until proven guilty and is allowed to vote.
@Buchser: while I usually appreciate your extended evaluation of all points, I simply don’t want to rehash the same pieces of evidence and accusations week in and week out. I choose to engage in new items of discussion such as the proceedings itself. This post is about whether Becker is allowed to vote but somehow in your 615 word rebuttal you drifted back into the same ol’ bits of evidence and whether or not the Council and general public should condemn Becker as guilty before his trial starts. Obviously, you can post what you like however, I appreciate our engagements more when you remain on topic.
Impressive that CSC saunters across the Siegfried Line from the coziness of the Silicon Valley Der Stürmer to express opinions, while well-articulated, such opinions are designed to deride Santa Clarans and drive our beloved city into darkness.
CSC as a “good soldier” supports the 49er 5…..
Vote as Burt Field encourages.
CSC is Michelle Ryan.