Trial vs Hokog/MV Luta goes on

The trial in the lawsuit against Biktot Hokog and principals of the MV Luta would proceed in court sometime in the near-term.

Per the Bellas decision, Hokog can’t be sued as a legislator. But the court leaves everything else in the lawsuit for judicial disposition.

The issues include the violation of the ethics law (Open Government Act) and the illegal release of the $400,000 without legislative appropriation.

Lest we forget, the ethics law came via a legislative initiative where voters approved accountability for all public officials. It’s a powerful voice of “we the people” to ensure corruption doesn’t spread in our democratic institutions.

I heard the Office of the Public Auditor has completed ocular review of the $400,000. Its findings and recommendations piques my interest.

Pertinent provisions of law says, “If the person investigated is the governor or lieutenant governor and the public auditor finds that corrective action should be taken, the public auditor shall make his or her report public.”

Where the law turns interesting is the mandate that the public auditor submits such report to the Attorney General’s Office for disposition. What would the AG do in the event of findings of violation of laws and recommended actions given that it represents Hokog in this case? Would the AG still do due diligence to recover the $400,000 in taxpayers’ money? It’s an interesting conflicting case of representation that should not have been permitted from the outset.

There’s hope, though, that through trial or evidentiary hearing we would find, via a demand for an accounting of expenditure, how and where the money was spent. Moving the MV Luta from Louisiana to Rota won’t cost more than $150,000. How much of the $400,000 went for the trip and where else was the balance in taxpayers’ money spent?

The innocent, comprising of all taxpayers, must be protected in this and every other scheme to milk them of their hard-earned taxes. As it is, every public official is culpable to wrongfully dispose of public funds either out of pure ignorance or willful disposition.

Perils of ‘touch DNA’

The assumption that DNA is synonymous with “guilty” in the investigation of crimes isn’t quite what we make it to be! There’s “touch DNA” that “exposes the double edge sword of forensic science,” according to a piece by Michelle Malkin, a conservative blogger and nationally syndicated columnist.

“With just an innocent handshake, an indirect transfer of epithelial cells, you could find yourself suspected of heinous crimes, charged with rape or convicted of murder,” she pointed out. She’s committed to shedding light on the use and abuse of touch DNA in the criminal justice system. “Detection methods involving tinier and tinier DNA samples have advanced rapidly during the last three decades.”

She asserts that the “mere presence of DNA does not prove a crime happened. It does not tell you how or when the material got to its discovered location. Contrary to Hollywood crime show oversimplifications, DNA is not a synonym for ‘guilty’.”

“At the annual American Academy of Forensic Sciences conference last February, experts spotlighted the case of a homeless man charged with murdering a Silicon Valley mogul at his mansion—despite the accused being hospitalized, nearly comatose and under 24/7 medical supervision the night the crime occurred in 2012,” Malkin related.

“As Scientific American reported, the defendant’s DNA had been transferred inadvertently by paramedics who had touched and treated him three hours before arriving at the businessman’s home. The EMTs used the same oxygen monitor on both men’s fingers, unknowingly transferring skin cell DNA from the homeless man to the multimillionaire he had never met.

“The case provided a definitive example of ‘a DNA transfer implicating an innocent person,’” the journal noted, and illustrated “a growing opinion that the criminal justice system’s reliance on DNA evidence, often treated as infallible, actually carries significant risks,” she pointed out.

It’s good for our system of justice here to be wary of this finding so DNA isn’t used as the infallible tool or synonymous with “guilty.” It’s bad enough that here on the islands you’re guilty until proven otherwise. But isn’t it more like an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a competent court of law? Where did I learn this?

Land compensation

We are humbled by a move by the NMI to pay longstanding land taking cases due the landowners for more than 30 to 60 years. Payment is focused on the largest amount owed in an effort to cut down interests the NMI must still pay as it settles other cases.

The issue reminded the undersigned what’s owed the family (grandparents) for the use of their land in Oleai for public access (main thoroughfare and entrance to the Oleai Elementary School).

Grandpa (Elias P. Sablan) could not possibly submit any claims to it. He was the land title officer, the equivalence of the secretary of the Department of Public Land. It would have raised eyebrows, legitimate the claim may be.

Over 30 years later, I sat in his chair as secretary of DPL and purposely skipped the issue altogether. I recalled grandpa’s words about public service, that it is about “others” first, thus the fitting decision to shove any claims to the Oleai land. I’m now out of the bind and ready to litigate the issue to claim what’s rightfully the purview of the Sablan clan.

For the longest time we’ve heard the redundancy of “just compensation.” Putting in a claim for it now is the only way to ensure that my grandparents are justly paid for their property they’ve given up for the main road in Oleai.