would that constitute official misconduct?it be official misconduct for the sheriff or members of the board? under the mayor's theory, i think just about anything, members of the board of supervisors might do, could be deemed to be official misconduct. what if you declared bankruptcy. you've made contracts with people and haven't paid them money you owe them. under the mayor's theory that could be official misconduct because you as a body promulgate the laws here. if you file your tax returns late, if you default on a loan, and some of the members of the board have already posed this question, we're certainly happy to engage in answering any questions you may have, but the problem with the mayor's position is that it is not a workable standard. and it doesn't have any support in the law. that's why, when they tell you that our position, that you have to be in office in order to commit official misconduct is unsupported, they have to go to other jurisdictions to try to get some case law to support their position. and we submit

his official duties.isconduct >> president chiu: supervisor kim. >> supervisoríyw want to repeat the points that manyrv) of my colleagues have been making tonight. but i did just want to say that""y )z was personally upset to see some members of our public criticize and> berate some of our domestic violence advocates that came out+eoañ today. i think that that was unfortunate and it was incredibly inappropriate. i think!íuyu that people are entitled to their opinions and just as your opinion is respected in this room ióc!<÷ think you should respect those of others. i think domestic violence is anhm0 incredibly sensitive issue. because of that we have to have a higher level ofiykó morality and ethics whether we have a discussion about what constitutes domestichhx+t violence. but i'm going to speak just to the issue that is before us i think that the board of supervisors is being asked to do four┐q things. one is to address the timing issue. when, atgta commitojaqs official misconduct. the second question i

who commit official misconduct. the people have also given you the mayor and the ethics commission a definition of official misconduct. it requires wrongful conduct by a public officer in relation to the duties of his or her office. now, the sheriff can test the ethics commission findings that his crime and his conviction and his sentence constitute official misconduct because he had not yet taken the oath of office when he attacked his wife. he says there's no relationship between his misconduct and the duties of his office. and he also argues, although usually not in his briefing, that his misconduct just isn't that serious, just wasn't serious enough to warrant removal. i'd like to address each of these three points in turn. first of all, as the superior court already did, and as the ethics commission implicitly did, this board should reject the argument that the sheriff cannot be removed for misconduct prior to taking the oath of office. you know, first of all, as a matter of fact, his misconduct isn't limited t

an elected official could, for example, commit domestic violence on tuesday, and be safe from any official consequences. but if the oath of office is later that day, he couldn't do the same thing on wednesday. that's a completely arbitrary line. it makes no sense whatsoever. it's very different if you draw the line at the election. that makes perfect sense. once an official has been granted the voters trust, then he also has the ethical obligation to protect that trust by not committing official misconduct. there is no such sensible distinction drawn at the line of the election. and in fact, there is not a single case anywhere, in any jurisdiction, that overturns the finding of official misconduct on a basis that an elected official had not been sworn in at the time that he committed a misdeed. the sheriff relies exclusively on the mazzola decision, but mazzola didn't consider, for a moment, whether or not it mattered that the conduct occurred before or after swearing in. mazzola's an airport commissioner. he wasn't even sworn in. there is no oath of office for an airports commissioner and

for official misconduct for actions taken before tj")h person are officially in office.o set and aqx 4u slippery slope to be opening up this process as a political tool.k however, intolerable and unacceptable we find actions of our former colleague on the day é december 31 or subsequent actions following that our duty is to uphold& process, public faith in city government and safeguard06jo the integrity of democratic processes and not/cbuu)áu or contort the law that we think best serveswj!or everyone. i will not be voting today to sustain the/ >> president chiu: supervisor:k wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you, ú?7t% %9q. >> president chiu: order please. : supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you. this whole process i know has been incredibly%0b= hard for other than --c4í,÷ everyone involved especially being asked to judge a former colleague.4 and i am going to speculate that i don't think any of the 11 of us are goingwxas' to walk out of this room tonight feeling great, no matter what happens, no matter how weóçuon vote. this case has been incredibly messy

found to have committed official misconduct shall be removed from office. so it seemed to me there is no discretion for the commission to determine or to provide a recommendation to board as to what should happen, should the board find that the sheriff committed official misconduct. so i just want that to be clear in terms of why our order doesn't address what the affect of the findings shall be, because the charter really provides no option. commissioner hayon? >> while that may be the case, i do understand that the charter spells out what punishment should be based on our recommendation or finding. sheriff mirkarimi guilty on those two counts. i do feel there has been a tremendous amount of confusion about this in the public and even in the media to some degree. and even if our recommendation really has no bearing, in the case of what the punishment should be, i feel that the commission should at least go on the record as to how -- what we feel the punishment should be and the board can certainly ignore that particular recommendation, or use it to bolster

so then your argument that's thv official duties. -- i mean -- >> he may do somethingkkç el >> supervisor elsbernd: but that's the official part. so, in other words, if we were to go back, forzón' example, te campaign debates that the sheriff entered into, or/kç maye go to the campaign website where the sheriff talks about the as sheriff, that is not the official duties. because he's not commanded to do any of those things. he's commanded by thebsqqa chao do certain specified things, cheefl to keep the jail, andw>no execute lawful orders of the court. >> supervisor elsbernd: and some of the duties that have been imposed to him outside of the charter, ordinances that have been passed, appointing him to various boards and commissions, requiring he play a role beyond those limited official charter duties would those be considered official? >> well i'd agree if he's commanded by some legislation to perform other things, and then, yes, we would consider those to be part of his official duties. >> supervisor elsbernd: okay. and then some

or not official misconduct? so not how severe the misconduct is but you're stating we're supposed to use our standards of decency, you're suggesting. >> i see where i've miscommunicated with you. this is why the standards of decency or the standard of conduct is position-specific. because it's not up to you, and your personal view of what the standard of conduct should be for the sheriff. it's actually a standard of conduct that is known to members of the profession of how a law enforcement officer and a chief law enforcement officer is expected to conduct himself or herself in the course of discharging his or her duties. that is a standard that's capable of discernment with the help of other people in the profession. >> supervisor kim: is the position of marijuana considered as falling below that standard. >> for whom? >> supervisor kim: you said that there was actually a point that it wasn't a moving target, right? that actually this could be discerned as falling below -- i don't want to put words in your mout

item 2 is the motion sustaining motion of official misconduct. in the three is not to sustain the -- of official misconduct. >> president chiu: why don't we start with a couple of housekeeping items. we have a number of individuals unable to join us due to the capacity of this room. there are at this moment at least three overroom rooms, room 263, 273, and on the fourth floor room 416 upstairs. through the course of this afternoon and evening, as there are other rooms made available on the fourth floor, we will open them up to the public as well. the procedure for today's hearing was set by a motion of this board of supervisors on july the 31st, 2012. let me go over that. today's hearing will involve presentations by the ethics commission, by representatives for the mayor, and for the sheriff, in the following order and with the following times. first of all, for a presentation of up to 10 minutes, we will hear from the ethics commission. and i want to thank and welcome the president of the ethics commission who is with us today. then we will hea

that applies to all officials equally. by increasing this specificity with which this statute is applied, the board ensures that fairness outweighs politics. we must apply this section with pinpointed accuracy so as to preserve integrity with which it was adopted. restorative justice contrary to comments made by -- in the hearing i believe even an elected position such as sheriff the conflict of restorative justice does apply. where we have learned from this experience is that in san francisco, neither the sheriff, supervisor, or any elected official is above the the law. however, what we also have the opportunity to demonstrate is that serving in one of these positions does not deem a person unworthy of redemption. to declare public officials don't deserve second chances goes against we are as a city. personal conduct from the previous mayor on do unto civil servants. we have been open minded by allowing people with criminal records to reengage with society responsibly and be accountable for their actions. whether a publi

official capacity and i think case law supports this view.hile the majority believe that mazzola did not apply mazzola actually did discuss this portion of 15105e, and they discussed it extensively and determined that relation of the duties of his or her office must have a direct connection to the duties. and finally, as a matter of public policy, i think the voters wanted this to be clear, and i think that clearly they intended for official misconduct to be different than some other type of misconduct, likely personal misconduct. the reason i dissented is because if you follow what the majority did, they did not provide a clear basis for how official misconduct and personal misconduct would be delineated. and i think a bright line rule. >> president chiu: thank you. >> required here. thank=)ñ you. >> president chiu: colleagues, any questions to the chairman? supervisor olague. >> supervisor olague: i'd like to hear him continue his sentence. >> president chiu: could you finish your final thought. >> thank you, mr. president. there is -- i th

the official misconduct provision talks about a willful failure of any elected official and so forth to discharge a duty imposed by the ordinance of the act. there are actually sixteen places in the city charter where there can be a finding of official misconduct. there's this one plus fifteen others. at some point you are going to need regulations on how to handle that. admittingly the charter provisions are a mess. once you move away from what the mayor can do and the mayor cannot do but you still need the regulations. the other problems i have obviously the artificial statute of limitations one year from the date the records were asked for. it makes no sense and i think it's probably too restrictive to stand up to the constitutional requirement of how you interpret laws affecting public access. there's also a provision that the notes of the investigative individuals on investigating individuals are to be kept confidential until the decision is made. there's no basis for keeping any of those records confidential. that's been established. i think the quick case i filed a couple year

how can it be official misconduct when the man was not officially conducted into the city services.orn in, period. so therefore, you cannot stay it's officialut)a misconduct. violence. i was a direct victim of abuse and violence husband. i was holding my infant baby in my arms, and he shoved me. only because i woke him up for dinner. that's violence. how can you sit here and say a tug of the arm is violence. it's ridiculous. the man didn't beat her up. he didn't physically harm her,)y cutting her up, or have effectively bleeding, or whatever. so, you know, let's be reasonable and use some common sense here. grabbing an arm is not violence. how -- the mayor, willie brown, he was in office, officially at the time when he was an adulterer, a father of an illegitimate child, not a slap on the wrist. gavin newsom, drunk, violent, on drugs, and an adulterer with the chief of staff's wife and not a slap on the wrist. upon so how do you define this as justice. come on. this is not fair. the punishment does not fit the crime. you have to do this properly, and let this man be reinstated. it

6u purporting to perform your official duties.on the standard, and this isuú0zp where it got stickier for me is where is the standard for each electw7< official. is there one standard or multiple standards and i completely und colleagues came to the conclusion that there are multiple. if i agree withíymh that then i think the sheriff is held to a higher standard that actually there are things that he can:c3d do. but when i look at the simple language, it says a ívz standard and it says one that is impliedly required oÌ6xw all public officials. and so i think the standard to which we hold the sheriff is a standard that we z ñ to all elected officials, whether you are supervisor, or districtb attorney or treasurer. sokúo4r on the sustained charges that have come before us, i wasn't convinced, eitherç#Ñ(z by the majority or by the mayor's office that counts four and five then fit under this dxdi of official misconduct. i think that ituqó wasn't shown that when the sheriff grabbed his wife, that it was4rú% done under the color of the

officials had a chance to nab him, they did.n his journey at an airport in osaka, japan, flew from there to korea. from there to l.a.x., and he was planning to fly on to his home in boston. he is a u.s. citizen. that is where his permanent residence is. u.s. officials say that they have questioned him at length. he's not being particularly cooperative, but they do not believe he's a terrorist. they do obviously, though, bill have a great deal of questions that they would like this young man, 28 years old, to answer. >> bill: i bet they do. did he actually do anything illegal? could we say that? >> the smoke grenade that was in his checked baggage, yes, it is illegal to carry that kind of device, even in your checked baggage. oddly, though, it is not illegal to wear a bullet proof vest and flame resistant pants. it is not illegal to have in your checked baggage a full face respirator, various knives, a hatchet, body bags, biohazard suit, various masks, duct tape, batteries, cooking tongs, plastic cuffs and device to repel dogs. w

be official misconduct. and i was confused by that answer because my understanding of your argument is that depending on whether or not the the -- they use or leverage their authority in thattest that they could be engaging in official misconduct by your own analysis. am i incorrect in -- >> no. i think you're absolutely correct. if the power of the office is used in some way to facilitate a crime or any other misconduct, that could be construed as official misconduct. >> supervisor campos: i wanted to clarify that because the answer left me with a different impression. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you. colleagues, any final questions to sheriff's counsel? supervisor farrell. >> supervisor farrell: thanks. so just to be clear, on the timing issue, we've talked about this, ability and i know it's cn the briefs, your position is that mr. mirkarimi had no responsibilities towards the sheriff's department at all prior to the swearing in day. is that correct? >> i think the -- it's not necessarily that he

guest: election officials count all the absentee ballots. any vote that has been cast early is counted on election day with all the other boats. your vote will be counted. as far as the accuracy of the account, this is very important. if you are going to vote early especially by mail, it is in port and for everyone to follow precisely the procedure is listed by your state that came with your ballot. in 2008, election officials reported to the federal government that over 400,000 ballots were discarded by election officials because voters did not follow proper procedures. sometimes people think they are doing a favor to election officials to put two ballots on one envelope. that invalid's both those ballots. election officials need to track each individual ballot in an individual envelope. you look at our rules and procedures veteran place, they are it there for a good reason. don't second-guess them. follow them precisely and make sure all the signatures required are on the outside of the envelope. make sure you probably fill out the ballot

now it's officially over.moon invited fellow south korea to dance the super sonic concord jet made final passenger flight. the british and french developed the thick. it could travel from new york to london in less than four hours. but the speed and luxury came at a price. about 9 grand for a round tripper. folks who lived under the flight or under the flight path, at least, complained about all the noise and in the year 2000 an air france jet crashed after takeoff from paris and killed 113. officials grounded all the concord flights for more than a year after that crash. they reduced -- the reduced ticket sales sparked the fleet's permanent retirement. but it took one last flight across the pond nine years ago today. wasn't cavuto on one of those things. i think cavuto took one of those flights. he is fine though. now you know the news for this wednesday, october the 24th, 2012. i'm shepard smith. we'll see you back here tomorrow. the o'reilly factor is coming right up. >> hey, this is joe buck from san franc

what is official. here's the definition ofr@ official.n office. that means they have to have the power of the office. they can't be pract/1r(mz%Ñ getting ready for it or preparing for it. they have to have the authority of the office. either we.zj83 are a country o, tierney is what is being offered here. and theygtç8o offer that -- i hd from the attorney for the mayor this morning saying that there was a triparti system that was going to save this from being tyrannical. what if a political machine, per chance, had control of the san francisco. how -- what solace could any voter take in that very skimpy protection that she offers. we have only one thing, the rule of law. >> presidenlaw. >> hello. my name is josh wolf, and when i found myself subpoenaed by a federal grand jury ross mirkarimi put forward a

et heotfmbdo rice's false statement. >> if any admintration official, including any career official, were on television on sunday, september 16, they would have said what ambassador rice said >> tonight the lateson the search forwe uspageus bringing one heck of an arsenal onto a flight to the u.s a grenade, a hatchet, gas mask, body bags, and that is just the beginning ar a y o b dro i a crash. >> these are counterfeit air bags perpetrated and created by criminals. >> tonight what the feds say drivers need to know. i'm bill hemmern srd it b wusn equate security at the libyan consulate where gunmen killed four americans including our ambassador. the former head of a u.s. military teain libya was among those ho testified before ngre, litena cel ewd ng o em11e cla ha n had enough security to protect the diplomats who worked there. >> the security in benghazi was a struggle and remained a struggle throughout my time there. the situation remained uncertain and reports fm some libyans diatecemdt w. inprhe was only one u.s. diplomatic security agent stationed there. >> a former rional secur

may have also have wrongly claimed that the california evidence code 1040, and its definition of official information, may have been misquoted and she may have incorrectly relied on deputy city attorney improper letter to the sunshine ordinance task force in which he wrongly combined two or three of dr. derek kurr's complaints under one ball of wax wrongly. he made a mistake when he did that. in section 1040 is not whether disclosure is permitted, it is whether disclosure is forbidden. jerry made that lettering error. how a deputy city attorney can confound forbidden can permitted and then, deputy city attorney herrick fell into the same mix is really disturbing. >> let me ask you about that mr. hau. because c3-699-13, appears to use the term to the extent permitted by state law. >> i draw your attention, commissioner hur to section 1040 b. i'm assuming that state law takes precedence over 699-13. i would assume, sir, that you would know that 1040 should take precedence over the city charters or this particular government conduct code which is not even at the city charter level, if i am r

>>reporter: an official initially blamed a protest against the film.>shepard: thank you, wendell, from the white house. now to www.realclearpolitic www.realclearpolitics.com. we know the mails went out and there is a massive coverup or screw up but it will be difficult. >>guest: their whole line has been we have told you everything we know at the time we have known it so this opened up a window for republicans. this is an election year of course. it opens the window for critics to say this is what you said you knew and it is not the case from where we have seen it and we have seen people like john mccain and others addressing the president and ask him to come forward and to tell the american people exactly what happened. thought is not the best optics for the white house. >>shepard: but you would have to assume that they knew in advance about this. that they thought with 400 people getting the e-mails that word would leak to anyone about the e-mails that seems implausible. >>guest: that is something they are going to have to explain. we heard jake carn

official confirming that to fox news.ack happened saturday afghan intelligence officer in kandahar. witnesses say it was a suicide bombing and it killed four afghan officials and two americans. one of the dead identified as 24-year-old britney gordon who was assigned to marital intelligence company from joint based lewis mccord in washington. the other american apparently was an operative working for the cia. this the latest example of so-called green on blue attacks carried out by somebody in afghan uniform. such attacks have killed 55 u.s. and allied troops this year alone. elsewhere in afghanistan today a suicide bomber blew up a vehicle right near a u.s. combat outpost in the eastern part of the country. officials say at least 10 afghan soldiers were hurt but nobody died. new amateur video shows blowing a helicopter right out of the sky. we cannot confirm whether that video is authentic but we have no reason to doubt it. it comes as a syrian government shatters hopes of a potential cease-fire even before it can begin.

transit officials released this video tonight.an with a record breaking 13-foot sturgeon. storm surge. this is the worst damage since it started running a century ago. it could take four or five days before the system is partially up and running. jamie colby live tonight in lower manhattan for us. how are things looking tonight? i know it's chilly. >> well, shepard, good evening to you. clearly this is the weather incident of unprecedented proportions. and it really remains so today. the people who lost power, 8 million in total, you know, 3 million in new jersey and the 1 million nearly on long island learned today they could wait 10 days to be reinsayed the -- reinstated. the only good news manhattan and brooklyn will wait four days. it take a look behind me at the water here at the base of the brooklyn battery tunnel which is the connector between new york and brooklyn. con ed and the army core of engineers have been here trying to get access because a the love the electrical that con ed needs to restore is now under water. you