Posted by SF Voice on February 19, 1999 at 16:43:19:
TERENCE HALLINAN, according to the conventional wisdom, is in trouble. Having stepped on a number of toes in the last
four years - including, according to some, the Public’s - he’s seen as vulnerable in his bid for re-election this November. A
number of challengers have either shopped themselves around, or have been shopped around by others. The question is,
however, which ones can go the distance, and which one is capable of beating Hallinan.
The first formally declared challenger is MATT GONZALES, a deputy Public Defender with seven years in that office under
his belt, and like Hallinan, has lots of liberal activism in his past, but no prosecutorial experience. Gonzales is positioning himself
a “genuine” progressive who will honor the liberal campaign promises that he claims Hallinan has welched on - including
improving prosecution of domestic violence and hate crimes, prosecuting police and white collar misconduct, refraining from
use of the death penalty or the “Three Strikes” law, and advocating for the decriminalization of marijuana and certain classes of
prostitution.
An analysis of these claims is in order. It’s a matter of public record that Hallinan has made a great deal of public noise over
domestic violence prosecution, to the point of using that platform to convert misdemeanors into felonies, and to compel
testimony from reluctant victims in cases where the DA’s office has had to file charges in the absence of formal complaints.
Whether these public remonstrations have translated into effective deterrence of domestic violence or comprehensive help for
victims is still subject to debate. What is clear is that they were the first of a number of events which has brought the DA’s
office into direct conflict with the local Bench. During the 1998 judicial elections, Hallinan publicly singled out incumbent judges
who were up for re-election (and being challenged by his political allies) on grounds that they were soft on domestic violence.
Hallinan has also made a number of public remonstrations against Three Strikes and the State/Federal prosecution of
Medicinal Marijuana growers and distributors. His sponsorship of a highly effective local diversion program for subjects caught
soliciting prostitution has received favorable press.
But it is Hallinan’s lack of action with regard to police misconduct which continues to undermine his standing with progressives.
In a recent investigation into the police shooting of a young unarmed female passenger in a suspected getaway vehicle, Hallinan
was publicly quoted by LAURA IMPELLEZZERI of the SAN FRANCISCO DAILY JOURNAL as saying “if there’s a
conflict in testimony between a suspect and a cop, you always believe the cop.” To top it off, the DA’s office is pursuing felony
murder charges against the driver of the car, who was also unarmed (except perhaps with the car; the police claim that the
driver was attempting to back the car into one of the officers on scene, and that officers present fired into the car in
self-defense). As a result, both mainstream civil rights and radical anti-police organizations have pilloried Hallinan. Recently,
one of the later groups camped out on Hallinan’s lawn, prompting him to berate Police Chief FRED LAU over the phone.
According to some accounts of the call, Hallinan accused Lau of incompetence for not obtaining prior information about the
impromptu protest - in other words, he expected police to engage in the kind of intelligence gathering that he himself railed
against as both a defense lawyer and County Supervisor.
Hallinan has also been criticized by moderates for current felony conviction rates, which have dropped considerably since his
taking office. Hallinan’s term has coincided with both a national and regional drop in crime rates, but there is still a significant
disparity between conviction rates in San Francisco versus neighboring counties - as a recent article in the RECORDER has
documented. Hallinan and his allies counter this by pointing out that juries in San Francisco tend to be much more liberal than in
other jurisdictions.
So from a political and policy perspective, Hallinan’s record is a mixed bag. But for many observers, the most galling aspect of
Hallinan’s tenure is how he has allowed his personality to interfere with the proper priorities of his office. The most notable
example here has been his direct mishandling of the CUONG TRAN murder case. This case, which has been much covered in
the press, revolves around the Marina District killing of a Tenderloin gang boss. Within minutes of the gangster’s death,
DENNIS NATALI, a once prominent defense lawyer and longtime friend of Hallinan, was murdered as he was driving just a
few blocks away from the other shooting. Before his death, Natali represented many of the figures involved in the Tran case,
including the victim, which he did regular and significant work for. There are an number of other tenuous connections between
the two cases, none which merit mention in front of a jury in either case as of yet - and while suspects are on trial in the Tran
case, there has yet to be an official suspect in the Natali murder. Hallinan has consistently and publicly declared that the two
cases are connected, despite the lack of evidentiary grounds for doing so. Defense lawyers in the Tran case have capitalized
on these statements, and have succeeded in getting the case recused - at least temporarily - from the DA’s office. Without any
foundation for doing so, Hallinan impugned the presiding judge’s competence, and accused him of approving the defense’s
recusal motion for political reasons. These sorts of public outbursts have occurred throughout Hallinan’s term as District
Attorney, starting with a very public brawl with Residential Builder’s Association head JOE O’DONOGHUE at fundraising
dinner in 1996.
The Tran case has also put the spotlight on another, more credible, possible challenger to Hallinan - former Deputy DA BILL
FAZIO. A veteran homicide prosecutor with a good professional reputation, Fazio ran in the 1995 DA’s race against Hallinan
and his own then - boss, ARLO SMITH. Almost immediately after declaring his candidacy, Fazio was fired by Smith. Smith
lost out in the November election and endorsed Hallinan in a December runoff against Fazio. During that race, Fazio was
criticized for inappropriate communication with a defendant in a murder case, which subsequently ended in acquittal. The
defendant was North Beach fixture GIOVANNI TORACCA, who was later pinched in the Portofino Cafe Federal drug case.
Supporters of Hallinan - including the SAN FRANCISCO INDEPENDENT - portrayed the protocol lapse as if it were a
deliberate attempt to derail the trial, and played up accounts of Toracca’s connections to organized crime. Although the
Toracca matter appears to be an isolated incident in an otherwise sterling career as a prosecutor, Fazio has also been criticized
as having an aloof, “shoot-from-the hip” approach to policy and personnel matters.
Given the public withdrawal of Deputy City Attorney KATHERINE FEINSTEIN from the race for personal reasons, an
window of opportunity now exists for Fazio to run against Hallinan. Any references to the Toracca trial can easily be blunted
by drawing attention to Hallinan’s many gaffes and encumbrances. Natali is just one of those encumbrances; another is
NORMAN YOUNG, the Hallinan benefactor, muffler shop owner,
Chinatown-and-Police-Department-political-gossip-trader and drinking buddy of WARREN HINCKLE and JACK DAVIS.
In addition to all of these, Young is also something of a gun nut, and his sizable collection of legal, illegal, and quasi-legal
firearms and destructive devices has gotten him into several spots of trouble, particularly in concert with his probation status.
The field is further clouded by the presence of Gonzales, and even Arlo Smith, who up until now has occupied himself being
one of the less credible elements of the Reform Faction on the Democratic Central Committee, has made noises about running.
While many give odds to Hallinan and his connections to the Democratic Party establishment, the retch factor may very well
compel the public to seek out a fresh face.