{"id":4741,"date":"2025-05-22T17:36:21","date_gmt":"2025-05-23T00:36:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.newsmolo.com\/EDC\/2019\/?p=4741"},"modified":"2025-05-22T18:40:02","modified_gmt":"2025-05-23T01:40:02","slug":"dan-dellinger-and-cris-alarcon-found-not-guilty-on-all-charges","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.newsmolo.com\/EDC\/2019\/2025\/05\/22\/dan-dellinger-and-cris-alarcon-found-not-guilty-on-all-charges\/","title":{"rendered":"Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon Found Not Guilty on All Charges"},"content":{"rendered":"

 <\/p>\n

Lawfare in El Dorado County<\/p>\n

Jury Deliberates Just 47 Minutes in Case Marked by Allegations of Political Motivation,<\/h3>\n

Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon’s legal ordeal in El Dorado County centered around their consulting work for the Pioneer Fire Protection District (PFPD) in 2011.<\/span> They were contracted to assist the district with a parcel tax measure, Measure F, which ultimately passed with nearly 77% voter approval.<\/span><\/p>\n

The El Dorado County District Attorney’s Office, led by Vern Pierson, filed a civil lawsuit against Dellinger and Alarcon in July 2012.<\/span> The suit alleged that they had used taxpayer funds to advocate for the tax measure, a violation of California law prohibiting public agencies from spending public money on political campaigns<\/span> . Dellinger and Alarcon contended that their activities were informational and that any advocacy was funded through private donations to a separate campaign committee<\/span> .<\/p>\n

The case was seen by many as politically motivated, especially given Dellinger’s history of managing campaigns for candidates not favored by Pierson and Auditor-Controller Joe Harn<\/span> . After a three-day trial, the jury deliberated for just 47 minutes before returning a unanimous verdict of not guilty on all counts on May 14, 2014. [California Grand Jury News<\/a>] <\/span><\/p>\n

The swift acquittal was viewed by supporters as a vindication of Dellinger and Alarcon and a rebuke of what they perceived as politically driven prosecution.<\/span> The case also sparked broader discussions about the use of public funds, political influence, and the importance of impartiality in legal proceedings within El Dorado County.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Dellinger and Alarcon case could absolutely<\/em> fall under what many now refer to as “lawfare.”<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lawfare<\/strong> is a portmanteau of \u201claw\u201d and \u201cwarfare,\u201d describing the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent<\/strong>, often for political gain<\/strong>, rather than for the impartial pursuit of justice.<\/p>\n

In the case of Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon:<\/p>\n