Is Doug Chaffee Under Investigation?

Fullerton can be a funny town with funny stories.

Earlier this week, we asked you to consider a version of Fullerton where Doug (Chaffee), (Acting Chief) Dunn & (City Manager) Domer had come to an agreement. That agreement included a plan to protect Pilfering Paulette Marshall Chaffee and to minimize damage to Mayor Doug Chaffee’s campaign for Orange County Supervisor.

Shortly after publishing our leak hypothetical, the City issued a press release stating that the case had been handed over to the District Attorney.  A couple things are curiously absent from the City’s Press Release.

There’s no indication of who is being investigated, what is being investigated, how it is being investigated, or when the investigation will be completed. No mention of Paulette, Doug, any citation to the penal code, the investigator or department assigned, all missing.

Why is that?

Is Doug Chaffee under investigation for receiving stolen property?

California Penal Code Section 496:

(a) Every person who buys or receives any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, knowing the property to be so stolen or obtained, or who conceals, sells, withholds, or aids in concealing, selling, or withholding any property from the owner, knowing the property to be so stolen or obtained, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. However, if the value of the property does not exceed nine hundred fifty dollars ($950), the offense shall be a misdemeanor, punishable only by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, if such person has no prior convictions for an offense specified in clause (iv) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 667 or for an offense requiring registration pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290.

We know that a White Jeep was used in one pilfering episode. We know a identical or nearly identical white Jeep was in the Chaffee driveway (where Doug still is registered to vote) the day after the sign theft accusations came to light.

We know that a Silver Lexus was used in another pilfering episode. Here’s a picture of the same Chaffee residence from Google Street View showing both a White Jeep and a Silver Lexus.

We know Doug may have had access to shockingly similar vehicles used in the sign theft. We know those vehicles have been at the Chaffee residence in the recent past.  This may mean Doug had the opportunity and means to access property that may have been stolen.

We know Doug may have had motive to assist in removing signs from his property. At a minimum, evidence of Pilfering Paulette’s activities found on the Chaffee estate would sink his campaign. In a more extreme case, Doug may have actively assisted in removing the subject signs for the same reason, they embarrassed his campaign for Supervisor.

In fact, according to Paulette’s campaign statements about residency in the 5th District of Fullerton it begs the question of who orchestrated the sign thefts being that the vehicles in question, to this day, have reportedly been seen at Doug’s, and not Paulette’s, residence.

Opportunity, means, and motive.  Basic elements of a crime satisfied?

Here are the jury instructions for PC 496.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant (bought/received/sold/aided in selling/concealed or withheld from its owner/aided in concealing or withholding from its owner) property that had been (stolen/obtained by extortion);
Did Doug Chaffee purposely not return signs to their rightful owner?
[AND]
2. When the defendant (bought/received/sold/aided in selling/concealed or withheld/aided in concealing or withholding) the property, (he/she) knew that the property had been (stolen/obtained by extortion)
Did Doug Chaffee know or should have known the signs were stolen?
[AND
3. The defendant actually knew of the presence of the property.] [Property is stolen if it was obtained by any type of theft, or by burglary or robbery. [Theft includes obtaining property by larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, or trick.]]
[To receive property means to take possession and control of it. Mere presence near or access to the property is not enough.] [Two or more people can possess the property at the same time.] [A person does not have to actually hold or touch something to possess it. It is enough if the person has [control over it] [or] [the right to control it], either personally or through another person.]
This one is a big one.

 

Did Doug Chaffee own any of the property used to conceal stolen property? This would necessarily include any vehicles he owns and any home he owns.

Did he know stolen signs were on or in his property at any time?

These are questions that need answers. It seems at least plausible, based on what we actually do know, that Doug might be under an active criminal investigation concerning his involvement in his wife’s activities.

Absentee ballots are in the mail right now. People are voting for Doug Chaffee for Supervisor right now.  We have a right to know if Doug Chaffee is being investigated for committing a crime and we have a right to know right now.

Yet, over a week after his wife’s activities were exposed and he was de facto implicated, we have absolutely no comment from Doug Chaffee.  This is wrong.

The Residents of Orange County’s 4th Supervisory District deserve to know what’s happening with their vote.

We call on the Orange County District Attorney, the City of Fullerton, Doug Chaffee, Paulette Marshall Chaffee, and the Democratic Party of Orange County (DPOC) to immediately disclose what Doug Chaffee knew, when he knew it, and if he is in fact under criminal investigation.

Behind Closed Doors Carpetbaggery Doug Chaffee OC's Fourth District

21 thoughts on “Is Doug Chaffee Under Investigation?

  1. Bahhaha, these two are thick as theives. Throw them both in the can! They think they are so clever and above the law, that Fullerton is “theirs” and they are king and queen.

    Fourth District is finally seeing the real Chaffees and everyone in the county is laughing.

  2. This post makes VERY good points. And both of these miscreants are “offices of the court.” The should both be disbarred.

    1. Good point! The Bar Association needs to have the evidence and both should have their Esq. taken, then shamed in public.

  3. Like all things, the cover up is worse than the crime.

    Pretty shameful that Democrats are just going to let this happen. All that moaning over process in Washington, but when it comes to an ENDORSED MEMBER OF THEIR PARTY potentially being involved in a criminal conspiracy to affect a local election?

    Silence.

    How about Sharon Quirk-Silva? Josh Newman? Jesus Silva? Loretta Sanchez?

    Will some honest Democrats please stand up?

  4. the KTLA article yesterday said that they reached out to the DA and they stated they had not received anything.

    1. The Voice of OC has reported that the DA’s office received the case on Oct. 12, and the case is under review, said DA Spikespersin Rebecca Fakhartousi.

  5. Hold your horses cowboys. It could have been Russians spies disguised as Paulette. Or Bots taking control of Bushala’s cameras.

  6. Space Control to Major Doug. Return to your home planet immediately before the humans discover your blood is green.

  7. I love the driveway pic…from Google Street View no less! Pretty much removes all doubt about the thief’s identity. Time for another batch of popcorn!

    1. Not only is the car parked in her driveway, the license plate can be clearly read in the second video. Shouldn’t be that difficult for the DA to locate the owner of the car.

      Or is Paulette going to claim that she was kidnapped by aliens and the person driving her car was really a clone of herself, made in the aliens flying saucer?

  8. Who the FUCK put NO DISPARAGEMENT in his contract? He is a PUBLIC Employee taking a six figure salary. The city manager needs to GO! –

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.