News

Boyarsky appointed chief assistant to district attorney

 

Long-time county prosecutor Jay Boyarsky has been tapped to serve as chief assistant district attorney by Jeffrey F. Rosen, district attorney-elect for Santa Clara County.

Rosen, who will take his new office on Jan. 3, 2011, announced Boyarsky's appointment in a press release Thursday (Dec. 9).

"I've chosen Jay because of his character, intelligence and experience," the announcement read. "I highly respect and trust his judgment and commitment to the district attorney's office."

Boyarsky has served as a county prosecutor for 16 years. During that time he prosecuted 35 jury trials and has been particularly adamant in his prosecution of sexually violent predators.

He ran the DA's North County offices in Sunnyvale and Palo Alto from 2001 to 2007, the statement said, and is known in the state for his expertise in hate crime prosecution.

In his new role Boyarsky will be responsible for daily operations of the DA's office and for filling in for Rosen when he is away.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by PAPD-Critic
a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 10, 2010 at 3:54 pm

Web Link

"And when the Weekly captured a photo of former Mayor Vic Ojakian and Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney Jay Boyarsky with their off-leash (therefore law-violating) dogs at Addison Elementary School in March, the topic took off."

Ask him if he has ever, ever, prosecuted a bad cop? The whole judicial system is in total disarray...From the cop's, DA's judges etc... and everyone, everyone looks the other way......and simply smiles. Even the Weekly.....


Like this comment
Posted by Kay
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Dec 10, 2010 at 4:37 pm

They are all the same. Like critic said, let me see them prosecute a bad cop (lot of em in Palo Alto btw). It's a sad world.


Like this comment
Posted by Not-A-Rosen-Fan
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 11, 2010 at 8:15 am

Rosen ran a pretty sleazy, empty, campaign. It's only a matter of time before the ethics issues begin to appear in the DA's department under his watch, just like in the Kennedy, and Carr, administrations.

The mission, and mechanics, of the DA's office is murky, at best. Rosen gave little hope that he would actually make it better. There's always a chance that he will make it better, but there's also a significant likelihood he will just make it bigger.

As noted in the previous postings, actually cleaning up the public integrity section of the department, and prosecute a few guilty cops, or public officials, would be a good way to show Rosen is just another lawyer "on the make".


Like this comment
Posted by homegirl
a resident of another community
on Dec 11, 2010 at 10:33 pm

Oh, C'mon. Boyarsky is a good DA. He headed up(or at least seemed to) the N. County Da's office during difficult times in the mid 2000's. He is a good man.
Rosen has not even taken the reigns yet and all you critics are already dismissing him.
Do you really want more of Carr? Do your homework, then comment.


Like this comment
Posted by PAPD-Critic
a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 12, 2010 at 7:34 am

To: Posted by homegirl, a resident of another community, 8 hours ago

I did do my homework homegirl....I asked both Dolores Carr and Jeff Rosen their position on prosecuting bad cops and why I should vote for you.

Only Ms. Carr responded: Here's her response:


From: dolorescarrforda@comcast.net
to
date Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:37 PM
subject Re: Why I should vote for you?
mailed-by comcast.net


Nice to hear from you. Our office has had a policy of turning over to the defense material involving police misconduct for a number of years. When I became the DA, we developed a written policy addressing this. I know you are aware that we will file prosecutable cases against police officers who break the law.

Take care,

Dolores Carr

I would suggest to do your homework. Jay Boyarsky was one of the first to come to forward in support publicly of former police chief Lynne Johnson's defense on racial profiling and the stopping and questioning of all African-Americans within the greater Palo Alto community.

Jay Boyarsky is in fact a "Law Breaker" disagree that's fine however, in legal terms, preponderance of the evidence. If you break a little "LAW" what other shortcuts has Mr. Boyarsky taken behind the scenes "off camera"? (see the first posting)

Criticism is apart of our Democratic process.


Like this comment
Posted by homegirl
a resident of another community
on Dec 12, 2010 at 12:49 pm

An email to a taxpayer during an election campaign? Really-you call that homework? At least Rosen had the sense to dismiss your question as the set up that it was. Yep, that's why some people lead and most follow.
Please research judicial records, court cases that they have prosecuted, successfully or not. Have you ever had a face to face with either of them? Talked to people that have worked with and under them? Yeah, I thought so. That's homework...
The DA is the Chief Law Enforcement Official in the County.
And, since Cops are Cops, don't you think they know alot more about how to cover themselves in the liability realm than most? Go ahead- when you, or someone brings Evidence instead of hearsay, lies and anger against a Cop, yeah, that's when the DA is going to prosecute a Cop or any other lawbreaker. It's called evidence--bring it or sling it.
Research, homework, compiling data. Not an email from a politician.


Like this comment
Posted by Not-A-Rosen-Fan
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 13, 2010 at 10:57 am


> Do your homework, then comment

Hmmmm .. the posting was about Rosen's campaign. Rosen did not offer the public much in terms of specifics about Carr's failures, other than unsubstantiated claims of "ethical violations". He did not offer specifics to the public about Carr's "violations", and he did not file complaints with FPPC early in the campaign, so that the FPPC could rule on his specific problems with Carr. He did file an FPPC complaint late in the game against Carr, but this was dismissed by the FPPC just before the election. If memory serves, he claimed it was "unethical" for Carr to have her picture included in a PSA about some service offered to the public by the DA's office on billboards around Santa Clara County--which was paid for by State money. The idea that Carr was somehow "enriching" herself by the inclusion of this picture during an election year did not seem like an ethical violation to anyone but Rosen. Once the FPPC had ruled, it was clear he was "gaming" the system to produce negative headlines for Carr late in the campaign--at no cost to him, or his campaign. Seems that this action on his part was about as "unethical" as Carr's.

Rosen was sanctioned by the Courts for something that most non-lawyers would not appreciate as being "unethical" (or disqualifying for the job of elected DA). Carr had never been "sanctioned" for any professional violations of the legal profession.

Carr did disappoint many when the young girl who claimed to have been raped by members of the Foothill/De Anza baseball team were not charged. Even though the Santa Clara County Sheriff felt that there was significant evidence to charge, Carr did not. As annoyed as most people seemed to be from the letters to the papers, Carr provided what seemed to be her "best professional opinion" about the matter. She referred the matter to the State AG, who decided with Carr. Bad things happen to stupid people sometimes. The girl was underaged at a party she had no business being at. Something bad happened. Carr's office was not charged with incompetence in the matter. Rosen did not make too much of this case during his campaign--which almost never involved direct contact with the public. He did claim, at one point, that he might look at it again, maybe. More likely than not, he will just leave this one along.

While Rosen made a few typical "anti-establishment"/"populist" campaign promises, it's difficult to believe that he believed anything he said.

> Do you really want more of Carr?

For most of us, we don't interface with the DA's office very much. So, it doesn't matter who the DA is, as long as the person is competent, and honest.

It might be nice to know how many cases were attempted last year, how many were won, how many were overturned, and so on. It might be nice to believe that the DA worked for "the people", and not the other way around.

Delores Carr seems to return emails from people, which is a plus for her. It's too soon to know if Rosen will return emails, and be open to public input (where applicable).

As to Boyarsky .. he's been a little too "political" over the past few years to believe that he is a "servant of the people". Boyarsky has made a number statements about the need for a new police station that were steeped more in illogic, than not.

By the way, what public records would you suggest that the public start requesting of the DA's office to determine Boyarsky's effectiveness in his new position?

> do your homework.

Well, I showed you mine .. time for you to show us your's.


Like this comment
Posted by Go, Jay!
a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 14, 2010 at 12:53 am

Congratulations, Jay! You're probably not reading this thread, and that's a good thing. It's amazing how a few know-nothings can try to make anyone's good day a bad day. Lots of armchair DA's here. They need a clue. Maybe a tour of the DA's office?


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

He said – she said – who is lying? Justice Brett Kavanaugh or PA resident Christine Ford
By Diana Diamond | 39 comments | 1,447 views

Global Warming Diet
By Laura Stec | 6 comments | 1,225 views

Couples: "Taming Your Gremlin" by Richard Carson
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,077 views

Preparing for kindergarten
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 593 views

 

Pre-registration ends tomorrow!

​On Friday, September 21, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run, or—for the first time—half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Learn More