Home > Uncategorized > Arkley goes free

Arkley goes free

The CA Attorney General’s office has declined to prosecute Eureka honcho Rob Arkley for his alleged shove against Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass.

The Times-Standard has the scoop.

  1. Andrew Bird
    February 7, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    It was to be expected. When you have money, you get away with a lot more. If I had shoved Councilman Mike Jones, for example, I would probably be posting this comment from that ugly building on Fifth Street.

  2. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Congrats. Paul. By punting this one another bully goes free.

  3. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 2:47 pm

    Injustice! Injustice I say! I am outraged that this shover isn’t doing jail time! This is an outrage I tell you! I cannot believe my eyes! My God is this what our country has become?! Shovers roam our streets free to shove again! I’m moving to Canada!

  4. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    Mr. Rob “Insufficient Evidence” Arkley lost this already by picking on the wrong person (finally). He will never be able to strike fear in others quite the same way again. Arkley has not gone to trial, so double jeopardy will not play, and next time…boom.

    Thanks, Larry. Good job.

  5. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    The Jell-O fruitcake was the real crime that night.

  6. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 2:53 pm

    Not to mention, Larry confronted the Beast and lived to tell about it. RPA is now BFD which means DOA to a bully!

  7. Carol
    February 7, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    Who is to say that if Andrew was in that ugly building on Fifth Street he would have access to the internet?

    Do prisoners have access to the internet?

  8. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 2:59 pm

    really? Jell-O fruitcake? or are you trying to distract us from this beautiful/horrible moment?

  9. Val Vincoeur
    February 7, 2008 at 3:05 pm

    Why, the sidewalks here in Vancouver are so wide that four morbidly obese people can walk shoulder-to-shoulder. Shoving is unheard of, a bygone crime as they say. Old timers spin yarns about the last shovers being shipped to Fort St. John around the turn of the century, without socks! That’s nineteen-aught-aught, mind you.

    I feel mighty sorry for you southerners living under the constant oppression of ruffled dinner jackets and the occasionally loose shirt button. Get yourself a constitution and sick the law on them scofflaws.

  10. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:06 pm

    beautiful/horrible moment?

    What part about having your claim rejected is beautiful?

  11. Andrew Bird
    February 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    I think it’s in the Constitution that inmates have the right to access the Internet, where they talk about prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment, the Eighth Amendment I believe.

  12. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    The beautiful part is that 70% of the population believes Glass anyway and this will just give him more sympathy with them.

    It’s politics, and the score is

    Arkley 0

    Glass 1

  13. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:21 pm

    The title is erroneous. Arkley goes free? He always was free. An accurate title would be: Glass’ allegation not pursued.

  14. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Turtle, it gives more sympathy? No. The sympathy people have for Glass remains at the same level. This is a net loss for him because, assuming the story is true, he lost a lot of potential sympathy from nonbelievers.

    Conversely, if the story was trumped up, then this is a net win for Glass because he benefits more from the truth not being known.

  15. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 3:25 pm

    More sympathy, same people, but it’s 70%. That’s the beautiful part. The horrible part: the other 30%. Welcome to Eureka.

  16. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Arkley loses politically simply from the allegation having been made. But loses among what audience? Progressives. So, no longterm damage done. Arkley supporters are still supporters. And when it comes down to it, the Marina Center project will be voted on based on its merits, whether the man behind it is a saint or a demon.

    At the end of the day, this is a win for Arkley because it means the incident will be mentioned in the media less and less. Glass’ moment in the spotlight is dimming.

  17. anymouse
    February 7, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    Insufficient evidence for criminal prosecution but what about the civil case? Isn’t Zachery Zwerdling representing Glass on that?

  18. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    What would Glass collect for? Emotional distress? Keep dreaming.

  19. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 3:58 pm

    Put another way, how is this *good* for Arkley?

    Better than a conviction, better than a sub-prime mortgage crisis, better than a Republican rout, but good?

    No. ‘Course, one will believe what one will. Too bad local Republicans don’t have a better example to follow.

  20. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 3:59 pm

    how is this *good* for Arkley?

    I expect it’s the outcome he was hoping for. Even if he’s innocent, he’s harmed more by the case going to trial.

  21. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 4:45 pm

    I’m curious: does this mean that all the testimony taken by the police is sealed, or does the testimony become public, or what? I think it would be pretty fascinating to see who said what to the police, especially since it’s clear that one side is not simply misunderstanding, but actively lying.

    And, if it turns out that the police investigation includes substantial evidence that an office holder was threatened, what recourse is there when the AG says it doesn’t care?

    Of course, it’s not surprising that Arnold’s administration isn’t interested in prosecuting a billionaire crony.

  22. quark
    February 7, 2008 at 4:49 pm

    “Of course, it’s not surprising that Arnold’s administration isn’t interested in prosecuting a billionaire crony.”

    But what does that imply about A.G. Brown? That he has no courage or clue?

  23. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 4:54 pm

    progs must be looking for a new crow recipe by now. can’t you losers see when your stupid ideas get out beyond the redwood curtain they fall flat on their faces. good thing the rest of the state isn’t so stupid.

  24. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    Quark, ol Moonbeam isn’t progressive enough on the Humboldt scale of progressivism. Right? No, not really. It’s simply more expedient for this gang to play fast and loose with reality by blaming the governor for a case that didn’t have a snowball’s chance.

  25. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 5:30 pm

    what recourse is there when the attoryney general says he doesn’t care?

    No recourse. Your hand has been slapped. If you put it back into the political cookie jar, you go from playing-the-victim to overt-milking-for-political-game. You can roll those dice, but you’ll lose.

  26. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    Urg. I meant gain, but game works just as well.

  27. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 5:35 pm

    I see SN is up and at ’em.

  28. Noel Adamson
    February 7, 2008 at 5:37 pm

    The AG didn’t say the case had no merit or was frivolous but that it was taken seriously and there was not enough evidence out of what we are told was a room full of witnesses. What does that say? It says the same thing as when the Mafia guns someone down on a crowded street and no one saw anything.

    Bullying a public official to vote a certain way is not a trivial matter as the arm chair tough guy Republicans and Arkley sycophants declare but, rather, their usual contempt for and assault on democracy.

  29. Clark
    February 7, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    Rob is a classic bully, and I know from firsthand experience. I was once nose to nose with him when he was spitting mad and he was the one who shivered and wilted away (without any physical contact.) He is a punk and a bitch and a coward when he feels ougunned.

  30. tad
    February 7, 2008 at 6:49 pm

    Peace be with you

    Which brings me back to my question concerning Arkley: How do you boycott someone who you all ready boycott? Arkley, the balloon track, or his manipulations to our county will not stop because a dozen people discuss the merits of it on a blog.

    Boycott all things Arkley!

    love eternal
    tad

  31. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 6:54 pm

    To the first poster here: If you had shoved Mike Jones, he would have given you a look so dirty, it would have stopped your heart.

    Hell, he does that to me just for saying Hello.

  32. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 7:06 pm

    I agree with you Tad. I’m on board. I am not going to sell my house and move into an Arkley development. I am not going to drive 30 minutes to shop at Home Depot. I will shop at the hardware store around the corner. I will not attend performances at the Arkley Center. No wait, that would be insane. I will attend performances at the Arkley Center because there’s bupkis to do in this county and we’re better off with the performances they attract even if it means I won’t be able to watch the V Chronicles for the fifteenth time.

  33. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    Noel and the rest of you fools. there were two versions of this story, remember? Innocent until proven guilty, remember? I guess you want people prosecuted on heresy?

  34. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 7:14 pm

    yes, boycott your mortgage payments. see where that gets you.

  35. Anon
    February 7, 2008 at 7:55 pm

    Or Adamson….there is another theory.

    Maybe nothing happened and there was truly no evidence and your conspiracy theory just doesn’t fly. Never did. I was there. Right there and it was a dust up no more. Told the det. that and if Wilson or anyone else claimed they saw something, they’re playing the same politically opportunistic tune as you

    Man you are tedious.

    Sometimes dude, truth has a moment.

    This was one of them.

  36. tad
    February 7, 2008 at 8:08 pm

    Peace be with you 7:06

    Are you being sarcastic? I can’t really tell if your being a sarcastic republican or an apathetic democrat.

    love eternal
    tad

  37. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 9:41 pm

    Silence is Golden, Tad.

  38. humboldturtle
    February 7, 2008 at 9:42 pm

    In this case, more like Yellow.

  39. February 7, 2008 at 9:58 pm

    It’s all over but the crying.

    -boy

  40. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 10:16 pm

    So, Paul, Tad,Yo, and Rob are all drinking at a bar in Oldtown when Rob starts to shove Tad around for being crappy. Tad calls bullshit and gets into a heated argument with Yo who thinks it’s no big deal. Just then a Cop arrives and shoots YO and Tad to you know protect and serve. Paul and Rob nod in a philosophical way and have another drink.

  41. Noel Adamson
    February 7, 2008 at 10:17 pm

    Anonymous at 7:12 pm said

    “Noel and the rest of you fools. there were two versions of this story, remember? Innocent until proven guilty, remember? I guess you want people prosecuted on heresy?”

    heresy? Or hearsay? If two versions supporting the two people were stated by eye and ear witnesses then there is evidence both that something happened and that some are lying or that some have distorted vision. If you think Mr. Glass is a heretic, I am not surprised.

    Anon at 7:55 pm said;

    “Or Adamson….there is another theory.

    Maybe nothing happened and there was truly no evidence and your conspiracy theory just doesn’t fly. Never did. I was there. Right there and it was a dust up no more. Told the det. that and if Wilson or anyone else claimed they saw something, they’re playing the same politically opportunistic tune as you

    Man you are tedious.

    Sometimes dude, truth has a moment.

    This was one of them.”

    Why would anyone believe an anonymous witness on a blog? If you feel I am tedious, or that reading my comments is tedium, why do you bother? Just scroll on past and trivialize someone else. Dude.

  42. Anonymous
    February 7, 2008 at 11:55 pm

    I am waiting for Rose to give some sort of paranoid schizophrenic comment on this one.

  43. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 12:17 am

    Thank you, I really needed an insult fix. The Herald always puts me into a state of ecstasy.

  44. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 12:19 am

    Tad, do you have relatives in Oregon we could call for you?

  45. Carol
    February 8, 2008 at 8:43 am

    I have heard many stories from different people about being bullied. Thank you, Larry Glass for standing up to bullies! You inspire people like me to stand up to bullies, too, without having to stoop to a bully’s behavior.

    :)

  46. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 8:45 am

    Oh please. It’s all political. Don’t turn Larry into some sort of saint.

  47. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 9:12 am

    which way to the St. Lawrence expression way?

  48. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 9:36 am

    There was not evidence to support Glass’s claim. Out of a full room of people? Sounds to me that Glass’s “claim” was meritless. If not meritless, it also seems that what he claimed was not a considered a crime by the AG.

    This was stupid from the start.

  49. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 9:36 am

    This comment, I believe, is NOT off-topic!

    Mike Huckabee just revealed what kind of patriot his beloved father was. “He would lay on the stripes, and his kids would see stars!”

    Huckabee advocates child abuse!

    And he not only walks free, he runs for President.

    I guess Baptists can get away with anything.

  50. tad
    February 8, 2008 at 9:40 am

    Peace be with you

    “Tad, do you have relatives in Oregon we could call for you?”

    No, but I have a whole bunch of homeless activist friends there and they are looking for a ride to Eureka. It would be great if you could go pick them up for me.

    love eternal
    tad

  51. February 8, 2008 at 9:43 am

    This has become “The Shove NOT seen around the room.”

    After all that has been written, said, and theorized, we can clearly see one thing. This event has truly polarized our community. Whichever side you are on, you will be suspicious of the other side’s motives.

    Well, this incident has accomplished something after all.

    -boy

  52. February 8, 2008 at 9:49 am

    This event has truly polarized our community.

    Don’t you think it was already polarized? This event simply embodied a rift that already existed.

    But things were accomplished, no argument there. Arkley’s handlers will keep him on a tighter leash from now on.

  53. February 8, 2008 at 10:08 am

    Hello Tad,

    According to Councilperson Leonard, the cuisine at St. Vincent’s is so divine that the homeless from all over seek it out, so your friends will no doubt find their way here, perhaps humbly afoot or with burros and donkeys, like pilgrims seeking the comfort of Bethlehem, Mecca, or Zion.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  54. tad
    February 8, 2008 at 10:11 am

    Peace be with you Heraldo

    “Arkley’s handlers will keep him on a tighter leash from now on.”

    I agree that outwardly Arkley will appear “nicer,” but on the inside others will start doing Arkley’s shoving for him. Don’t think for one second that Arkley doesn’t believe he has special “what ever it takes” rights.

    love eternal
    tad

  55. Carol
    February 8, 2008 at 10:12 am

    Agreed, Heraldo. The polarization was there before the Incident at the Avalon. There was even polarization between family members before this incident. It is part of the local culture.

    I prefer to see things in living color, rather than in black and white or one side versus the other side.

  56. tad
    February 8, 2008 at 10:13 am

    Peace be with you Bill

    My friends don’t eat FEMA food. Our health and our brains are too important to us to eat poison like St. Vinies serve.

    love eternal
    tad

  57. Carol
    February 8, 2008 at 10:17 am

    Hey, Bill, I help support St. Vincent de Paul. The food is nutrious and is free. There are volunteers that have given their time for years serving lunch to those in needed of a hot nutrious meal on a daily basis, 365 days a year.

  58. February 8, 2008 at 10:21 am

    Hello Tad,

    I admit it would be comforting to see the Mayor and the City Council chowing down at St. Vinnies once a month or so. It would inspire confidence in local government.

    Here’s a hint for the pols: It’s better (and less crowded) at the start of the month.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  59. February 8, 2008 at 10:23 am

    Carol,

    I am not overly critical of St. Vinnies. I eat there myself often and I appreciate it. I just need to point out that people DON’T MOVE HERE FOR THE FOOD.

    Thanks.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  60. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 10:43 am

    So was Leonard advocating St. Vincent’s offering less appealing food to discourage the homeless from coming here?

  61. February 8, 2008 at 10:57 am

    No. I honestly don’t know what Councilmember Leonard’s position is on homeless issues, but I hope to educated him. I just know that he is completely clueless about it. He is espousing the “Mecca Argument.” It is a discredited doctrine used to argue against increased services for poor people.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  62. tad
    February 8, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Peace be with you Bill

    When I was cooking for the Endeavor in Arcata I used to come to Eureka about twice a month to see homeless people who got run out of Arcata. I noticed that every time I went to st. vinies that there was a bigger per capita wing nut factor in Eureka. As I made it a point not to cook with FEMA food, I am very leery of GMO/chemically fortified “food stuffs.” I agree it is better than starving, but I will and have eaten dandelions and wild onions before I eat anything that comes out of a USDA can.

    Food, or more correctly lack of pure food, is probably the number one cause of all of todays health problems, and how can you turn down free food from the government.

    Carol is right. People who add the love to the food are the most wonderful people helping the poor. They usually still do out of love instead of profits like the modern day social-worker. It’s not their fault that the government dumps tons of GMO food on them, and they deserve our thanks.

    love eternal
    tad

  63. Neal Latt
    February 8, 2008 at 12:13 pm

    St. Vinnie’s and the Eka Rescue Mission both receive large amounts of seasonal fresh local organic produce donated by local farmers. From ’99 thru ’04 I donated roughly 6000 lbs. of organic produce to the Mission EACH YEAR.

    So quit yer bellyaching and start chowin’, chump.

  64. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 12:32 pm

    I agree with you Heraldo that this episode merely broadened a rift that was pre- existing. But you’re mistkaen if you think any of Arkley’s staff (or family) have enough spine to put a leash on him. The few times he’s allowed strong people into his realm, they were bannished toot sweet.

  65. tad
    February 8, 2008 at 12:36 pm

    Peace be with you Neal

    I know, as I’m sure your aware, that you and other kind hearted local farmers donate lots of good healthy local produce to the Endeavor and Food For People. For some reason canned food seems to be the staple in Eureka’s soup kitchens. When I cooked at the Endeavor and Food Not Bombs you and other farmers enabled me to very seldom need to open a can.

    I apologize for not mentioning the local farmers as “most wonderful people helping the poor,” because you are. As I am both a fruitarian and a localitarian you farmers are my heroes.

    love eternal
    tad

  66. February 8, 2008 at 12:47 pm

    OK, maybe what I was trying to point out was that the Incident at Avalon placed a HUGE neon sign on the rift, and those of us who were unaware of it were suddenly drawn in.

    -boy

  67. Babushka
    February 8, 2008 at 1:54 pm

    It also facilitated the largest gathering of deaf and blind people in the history of the county. Even more amazingly, they all seem to have recovered their sight and hearing in the interim.

  68. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 4:13 pm

    Don’t think this incident didn’t make a deep impression on Rob. He and Cherie were rocked by it. But I have my doubts it will have any lasting impact on him because I fear he’s well into the downaward spiral of rage that all Arkley men seem prone to.

  69. humboldturtle
    February 8, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    Recovered their sight and hearing?

    It’s a miracle, it’s a miracle!

    Surely this is in the Bible someplace.

  70. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    Hard to see things that don’t happen.

  71. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    The Chief of Police Garr Nielsen was there that night, wasn’t he? Rex Bohn was there too, right? Who else? Mayor Bass? Silence is golden.

  72. Theo
    February 8, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    Oh it happened alright and I saw it. I am ashamed to admit I approached one of his employess that I know and negotiated a deal to keep quiet. In my own pathetic way I am as bad as he is.

  73. humboldturtle
    February 8, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    Omigod. Theo is one of them.

  74. Carol
    February 8, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    Wow, Theo, are you confessing?

  75. Theo
    February 8, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    Nah, I just don’t want the billionaire and his henchman to claim exclusive rights to lying through yer teeth.

  76. Anonymous
    February 8, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    hehehe

  77. Ghost of Mabel
    February 9, 2008 at 7:57 am

    I was there hovering over the crowd.
    I did not see it.
    Does that mean it did not happen?
    No.
    Do some things happen at parties that no one sees but the participants?
    Sure.

  78. humboldturtle
    February 9, 2008 at 8:01 am

    What happened upstairs at Avalon that night?

  79. Jane Doe
    February 9, 2008 at 8:56 am

    Glass says that an ex-councilman was watching the whole thing but claimed he saw nothing. Who would that be? Worthen?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a comment