Press "Enter" to skip to content

Vargo Helping Review Evidence Against Ravnsborg

Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg killed Joe Boever eleven days ago. Hyde County deputy state’s attorney Emily Sovell is in charge of evaluating the evidence and deciding what charges, if any, to file against Ravnsborg for this crime.

While worries run rampant that the SDGOP machine will manipulate the investigation and try to protect its deadly political hack, my faith in the process gets a boost from knowing that Sovell has called on other state’s attorneys to help review the case, including one of the smartest lawyers in South Dakota, Pennington County state’s attorney Mark Vargo:

“She’s asked us to come assist her in the evaluation of the case,” Vargo said. “Just like I would on any case, I’m trying to evaluate the evidence, hold it up in light of these statutes, and see where we’re at.”

Vargo said his office often brings together multiple attorneys to help evaluate a case.

“It is a daily occurrence for us to take a case and bring a number of attorneys in and say what do you think,” he said.

…He said Crystal Johnson and Michael Moore, respective state’s attorneys for Minnehaha and Beadle counties, will also help Sovell.

Vargo said he agreed to this arrangement on Monday so he’s yet to see any evidence. He said he’s not sure if the group will meet in person or over the phone or Zoom [Arielle Zionts, “Pennington County State’s Attorney Vargo to Help with Ravnsborg Case,” Rapid City Journal, 2020.09.21].

Last year Vargo publicly questioned Ravnsborg’s hard-line assessment of the prosecutability of CBD possession. That’s one sign that Vargo is not afraid to put an honest reading of the law ahead of the Attorney General’s claims. Vargo probably won’t make public statements about his read of evidence in another state’s attorney’s case, but I would love to hear this thoughts on the evidence and the legal price Ravnsborg should pay for killing a South Dakotan.

58 Comments

  1. mike from iowa 2020-09-23 08:00

    I’m trying to evaluate the evidence, hold it up in light of these statutes, and see where we’re at.”

    Sounds a bit backwards to me. I’d gather all the evidence, decide what charges are appropriate, and, then lower the boom on him.

  2. cibvet 2020-09-23 16:23

    Just how many people does it take to decide if this incident can be covered up without the “fake news” publishing the facts of what actually happened or if hanging the taxpayers with a wrongful death suit will be politically acceptable.

  3. Bob Newland 2020-09-23 19:21

    Just remember, Vargo, as US Attorney, colluded with Federal Judge Richard Battey, to deny Alex White Plume a trial. He issued an injunction which would have condemned White Plume to prison without trial (contempt of court) for 18 months if he even thought about hemp. This was in 2002.

    He and Battey did this because they knew they could not win a jury trial against White Plume.

    Times change, people learn. Perhaps Vargo has changed and learned, but he still did what he did, only 20 years ago.

  4. jerry 2020-09-23 19:32

    Battey was a real piece of work

  5. Bob Newland 2020-09-23 20:05

    Battey died. May he rest in torment.

  6. jerry 2020-09-23 20:30

    Cold man, but “It is what it is” as some say. Truth is, I don’t trust any of them, all of them are only as good as what your bank account will allow. As my mother used to say “They are reckless with the truth”.

  7. Debbo 2020-09-23 20:42

    I don’t feel any guilt for distrusting the SDGOP and expecting a cover up. They have spent a couple decades and more earning that cynicism.

  8. JW 2020-09-23 20:43

    Just convene a Grand Jury, call all of the investigators and witnesses that provided interviews, reconstruct the event with the forensic evidence from the vehicle, cell phones, etc. and let a group of citizens decide what violations occurred and what statutes should be applied.

  9. grudznick 2020-09-23 21:50

    My good friend Bob and I are in lock step here. He is just a more coiffed fellow when elaborating it.

  10. bearcreekbat 2020-09-24 10:15

    While theoretically grand juries were once supposed to act as a buffer to protect individuals from government overreach in prosecutions, as a practical matter they no longer serve that purpose. This is because:

    – Only the prosecutor is permitted to present information and evidence to a grand jury. In general there is no requirement that the prosecutor disclose any exculpatory evidence, nor any other meaningful control or limitations on what evidence the prosecutor can present to the grand jury. If a prosecutor wants an indictment, he or she just keeps out all exculpatory evidence, but if a prosecutor doesn’t want an indictment, but wants to blame to the grand jury, the prosecutor merely presents and emphasizes all exculpatory evidence available. In other words, the prosecutor can fashion a story in whatever way that best suits his or her goal of getting an indictment or avoiding responsibility for not wanting to prosecute.

    – Hearsay evidence is admissible and victim testimony is unnecessary. A police officer can tell the victim’s story in whatever way the officer or the prosecution desires. While members of the grand jury may ask questions, there is no effective means of ferreting out false or misleading hearsay statements by a police officer.

    – The “probable cause” standard is toothless and there is no effective appellate review of a grand jury indictment based on the evidence presented to it. A trial or appellate court usually will not review a grand jury indictment until after trial and conviction, and then usually rules that a conviction eliminates the prior need for a probable cause determination, so any grand jury error would be harmless.

    – The proceedings are secret, and the defense has no ability to question the jurors for bias or prejudice.

    So I respectfully disagree with Cory’s conclusion that “a grand jury could help remove the decision from government officials who might be subject to party pressure.” The above characteristics of our modern grand juries suggest that in most cases the decision whether to indict essentially remains with the government official( i.e. prosecutor), and that official’s practical ability to manipulate a grand jury will lead it to make whatever finding the official desires.

  11. Jake 2020-09-24 10:35

    Yesterday’s Kentucky grand jury in Breonna Taylor’s death is a very good example of what BCB is saying. Like a democracy, a grand jury can be no better than the people in it. Led by someone with nefarious, self-centered aims, the result is what we currently see unfolding in the US under Trump. Democracy and rule of law is an on-going experiment-limited only by those involved for good or bad. Time for America to look at itself in a mirror and reflect on what it sees there.

  12. leslie 2020-09-24 11:08

    The whole judicial system favors Republican “law and order” cops and cronies, from the beginning. America must be revised to survive.

  13. leslie 2020-09-24 11:19

    Just imagine crusty white western sod busters on stolen land in the sand hills creating a state judicial system during/after the Indian wars in Nebraska. What a mess of hate and discrimination. Imagine how glorious Jefferson’s “ideals” fit imprisoning Indians to protect the whites. The constitution is aspirational and must not be literally used to pick and choose as the GOP does today. Read https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/08/decline-gop/614983/

  14. Steve 2020-09-24 16:18

    And yet another blog post of intellectual dishonesty. Innocent until proven guilty? Nah, not if C doesn’t like your politicals or party. Oh and this, “to file against Ravnsborg for this crime.” If it ends up being a true accident how is that a crime? How can you call it a crime in your blog?

  15. mike from iowa 2020-09-24 16:36

    A certain someone got out of the wrong side of the manger, again.

  16. Anne 2020-09-24 16:40

    Or someone stepped on his rock before he could crawl out from under it.

  17. bearcreekbat 2020-09-24 17:17

    Steve overlooks the reality that virtually every negligent homicide is an accident. For example, Bill Janklow never intended to kill or hurt anyone with his car, yet he was criminally prosecuted and incarcerated for killing someone.

    In reviewing Cory’s post, I would agree that calling this a “crime” at this point wasn’t the best choice of words. Rather it is a “homicide” and the issue is whether it was excusable or justifiable under SD law. If Ravnsborg accomplished this killing of another person while doing “lawful act, with usual and ordinary caution,” then it is classified as excusable. Trouble is we don’t see many people killing other people with a car while doing a “lawful act” or by exercising “usual and ordinary caution.”

    In any event, other than the single use of this term “crime” I saw nothing on Cory’s post, nor in the comments so far, stating that Ravnsborg should be convicted of a crime prior to a full investigation. Rather the opinions I have read so far in this thread primarily question whether Republican officials will conduct a full and fair investigation and report on what exactly happened or simply cover it all up as they have appeared to do in the recent past.

    It appears Steve may have projected his own belief in Ravnsborg’s guilt since neither Cory nor and of the other commenters stated that they think Ravnsborg should be declared guilty with no further need for an investigation. Funny how the Trump characteristic of projecting his own beliefs and behavior on people he sees as enemies has caught on with some folks. Who knew Trumpist projection was contagious?.

  18. Jake 2020-09-24 18:12

    Steve; accidental manslaughter is still manslaughter in anyone’s book.

  19. Debbo 2020-09-24 18:35

    Cult members adore their leader and try to emulate his every sniveling action and word. Hence, Steve, our most simian* commenter. 😄 😄 😄

    (*Refers to Steve “aping” his hero.)

  20. JW 2020-09-25 09:06

    I”ve presented evidence in front of a Grand Jury and found no such experience as mentioned. I understand the skepticism but, I think it over stretched. If anything, in this case, I’d worry about local bias against the state’s Top Cop. We shouldn’t forget that the Grand Jury has the authority to call it’s own witnesses and do it’s own questioning so I’d challenge the notion that the presiding attorney is fully able to taylor the outcome of a grand jury decision. There is enough commentary in the public forum that has already identified numerous sources of physical and testimonial evidence that any Grand Jury would notice if it is being left out of the deliberation. And, should a prosecutor decide to exclude exculpatory evidence from Grand Jury inquiry, he risks embarrassment in front of the court. Any attorney, worth his salt, considers oppositional arguments equal to that of his own in favor of prosecution.

    At the moment, we’re dealing with at least three prosecuting attorney’s collaborating with what is likely a highly inexperienced prosecutor. To think that that prosecutor isn’t susceptible to local political pressure or “intimidation” from state level partisan politicians is a bit naive in my estimation. The proceedings of a grand jury are completed in private but the product of their deliberations are open to the light of day in court or when the promised government transparency causes public probes. Does anyone honestly think that a Hyde County Grand Jury would not want to hear directly from Nick Nemec? Does anyone honestly think that jurors wouldn’t question why the Hyde County Sheriff wasn’t called to testify before them? I would also argue that the Kentucky Grand Jury is the perfect example of equity in a decision not to prosecute officers for criminal homocide. It is clear that that Grand Jury had no choice except to look at the Castle Doctrine in the light most favorable to the police and they came up with the best solution possible given complexity and variability in law. Kentucky’s AG did a remarkable job of explanation of the legal and policy conflicts involved and it purely shows that the Grand Jury did hear all available evidence and testimony to include that testimony most favorable to Breona Taylor.

  21. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 09:43

    JW, isn’t it a fact that only the prosecution is allowed at a grand jury and not the defense? And aren’t grand jurors allowed to consider only those facts proposed by said prosecutor?

    Asking for a friend who is always willing to be educated by lawyers.

  22. jerry 2020-09-25 11:06

    In Taylor’s case though, police have every right to break into a sleeping innocent person’s home with guns blazing…as long as the victims are Black. Got it.

  23. JW 2020-09-25 11:24

    That was not the issue Jerry and you know it. Taylors boy friend fired at the officers first and from there, the issue of the Castle Doctrine application becomes highly compromised. The greater problem with the police response was the number of rounds fired. That was a huge hang up for the grand jury and is the very reason the single officer was indicted for charges other than unjustifiable homocide.

    Every Grand Jury I’ve been a part of has the opportunity to call it’s own witnesses if they choose. Just because the prosecutor chooses not to include them or their testimony in his presentation doesn’t mean that they aren’t available. If you’ve ever been part of any law enforcement investigation, you’d know that Law Enforcement does the heavy lifting in any investigation and they talk to all potential witnesses and connections to the case that the investigation produces. All of that information is written into investigative reports and are a part of the official record. If a prosecutor omits any of that in front of a Grand Jury, he compromises his own case before it gets started. Lastly, before any court trial can proceed, there is a process of discovery that is required in law where the prosecutor must share any and all evidence and testimony with the defense. If that same information was not shared with the Grand Jury, the prosecutor runs legal risk for malicious prosecution. A court slapping an attorney with that sort of problem pretty much ruins his career and his credibility.

  24. bearcreekbat 2020-09-25 12:41

    JW, your statement that

    . . . all evidence and testimony with the defense. If that same information was not shared with the Grand Jury, the prosecutor runs legal risk for malicious prosecution . . .

    is totally inconsistent with my personal experience and appears contrary to the law around “malicious prosecution.”

    Most states allow recovery for claims based on civil suits as long as the plaintiff (the defendant in the original case) is able to prove malicious intent and lack of probable cause.

    https://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/malicious-prosecution.html

    In the federal system and in most states there is simply no obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence to a grand jury because such evidence is not a factor in the determination of probable cause:

    . . . In 1992, the United States Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Williams that the federal courts do not have the supervisory power to require prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. Prior to this decision, several federal circuit courts and district courts recognized a duty on the part of the prosecutor to introduce exculpatory evidence, but now according to Williams, this duty no longer exists in the federal grand jury system. However, states are not bound by the federal court decision of Williams. In many jurisdictions, statutes require a prosecutor to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.6 In addition, some state courts have held that prosecutors must present evidence if the evidence negates a defendant’s guilt, if the evidence is substantially exculpatory, or if the evidence is clearly exculpatory.7 [some footnotes omitted]

    https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1468&context=clevstlrev

    South Dakota is not one of the states identified in footnotes 6 (Connecticut; Nevada; Oklahoma; Oregon and Colorado) and 7 (California; Arizona; and New York) that require a prosecutor to disclose exculpatory evidence to a grand jury. I would be interested in you can point readers to any examples of a successful claim against a prosecutor for malicious prosecution, or any other sanction by a court or otherwise, In South Dakota or the federal system for the failure to present clear exculpatory evidence to a grand jury? My guess is no such case examples can be found, but I will try to keep an open mind.

    As for disclosing evidence, although the disclosure of exculpatory evidence to the defense prior to trial is required by the Constitution and the rules of criminal procedure, no such disclosure is required prior to seeking an indictment from the grand jury. (And there is no requirement to disclose the prosecution’s inculpatory evidence to the defense even prior to trial).

    And even though the grand jury may theoretically call witnesses, grand juries are not made up of lawyers or defense attorneys, but of every day people who theoretically know nothing about the cases they hear other than what the prosecutor and his or her carefully selected witnesses tell the members of the jury. Likewise, jurors typically have no familiarity with either the rules of evidence or potential defenses to a crime. Hence, the chance of a grand jury calling some witness that might offer exculpatory evidence seems to be from slim to none. I imagine in a rare case a grand juror might decide to request a witness with exculpatory evidence and know how to form questions necessary to elicit that evidence. That mere possibility seems a weak shield against the limited information a prosecutor chooses to present to the grand jury in an effort to control the outcome of the proceeding, whether seeking and indictment or looking to avoid an indictment.

  25. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 13:20

    I have always heard grand juries only duty was to indict ham sandwiches because the evidence is one sided. :)

    bcb how about us commenters appoint you South Dakota’s next AG and break the familial ties that bind and gag wingnut pols to the Pierre cabal of ruffians?

  26. JW 2020-09-25 13:20

    BCB; Youre quotation proves my point. There is no such thing as absolutes.

  27. jerry 2020-09-25 14:49

    JW, they busted down the damn door without knocking. The dude didn’t know if they were police or not, so he shot. I would too and so would you. The police opened fire and didn’t even hit the guy that was protecting himself. They murdered that young innocent Black woman.

    JW, if your sweety was sleeping in her own bed and someone broke down your door, without saying who they were, you would shoot. I know it and you know it. On top of it all, the police had the wrong address. Those boys are guilty of killing that Black woman.

  28. cibvet 2020-09-25 15:01

    I hardly think that the police behavior can be excused as “collateral damage” for Brannia Taylor’s death and I would think an investigation should have included the judge who signed off on the warrant. False info provided by the police or a judge who will sign anything placed in front of him.

    I repeat: Just how many people does it take to decide if this incident can be covered up without the “fake news” publishing the facts of what actually happened or if hanging the taxpayers with a wrongful death suit will be politically acceptable.

  29. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 15:24

    13 of Taylor’s neighbors were asked if they heard the police knock. One said he night have.

    One other thing, the cops were to execute warrants at the same time. They knew exactly where to find the prime suspect in another location and had him corralled before he was notified Taylor was shot. Then the police altered the time on the report to match up with Taylor’s raid.

    According to Louisville Courier Journal fact check.

  30. Debbo 2020-09-25 15:36

    Breonna Taylor was shot dead by the cops for the crime of sleeping in her own bed while her partner tried to protect them from intruders. The intruders are now criminals and should pay, like any criminal.

  31. Debbo 2020-09-25 15:37

    But back to Ravsbutt killing Joe for the crime of walking on the side of the road.

  32. Debbo 2020-09-25 16:29

    Okay, one more thing on Breonna Taylor.

    “This is part of a larger pattern, and if we don’t interrupt the pattern, we’re going to be in this position again and again and again,” Ms. Ritchie said. “The system that killed Breonna Taylor is not set up to provide justice or reparations for the killing of Breonna Taylor.”

    NY Times piece gives data on cop’s killings and results.
    is.gd/cw5yYI

  33. JW 2020-09-25 18:11

    I’m going strictly by the public announcement by the Kentucky State Attorney General which I watched and listened to intently. The AG specifically stated that the Night Time, No Knock Search Warrant the officers had was legitimate and legally obtained. He also specifically stated that even though the officers were not required to, they did in fact announce their presence at the door of the home and knocked prior to forced entry. A no nock warrant permits the forced entry and a judge authorized the no nock. They are common place in narcotics cases which this was.
    The Supreme Court has ruled that, in order to get a no-knock warrant, law-enforcement officers must show evidence that the suspect poses a risk either to the safety of police officers or of disposing the evidence if the police were to knock and announce before entering the suspect’s residence.

    There has been no discovery that the warrant served was obtained surriptitiously or based on falsified evidence. If you believe that, produce the investigative facts to prove it. And once again, if you don’t comprehend or understand the language and intent of the Castle Doctrine, you’re not fully informed on the complexities of this issue. Nobody, including me, is defending the police in this case. But I am defending the law and judicial process that produced this unfortunate mess. If you’re going to villify police officers for errors made that were largely out of their control, you have no understanding of police work or the extreme conditions under which they must make instantaneous decisions that are sometimes regretable. If you want infallible police, sign up and try your hand at it but quit the speculation and arm chair quarterbacking. If you’ve never served a drug related search warrant, you can second guess all you want but you’d be wrong. All this will be clarified and sorted out in civil litigation that plays out over the next two or three years. No question in my mind that mitigating details and facts will emerge in that process that will further shutter all this speculative banter about official wrong doing. The process has already spoken, We aren’t going to change anything.

  34. JW 2020-09-25 18:23

    Read and digest Hudson versus Michigan.

  35. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 18:34

    Cops shot up an adjacent apartment with three people inside. Was that apartment listed on the warrant? If the alleged defendant was right in front of the cops how did the cops miss him and shoot her numerous times and the adjacent apartment?

  36. jerry 2020-09-25 18:44

    Police can do whatever they want to do if it involves people of color or the disabled.
    So they probably shot up the wrong place because they were wrong. It really doesn’t take much to figure this out. The police made a mistake and then they will walk for the murder of an innocent working woman that was asleep. Like I said JW, if you had the same thing happen, you would have fired your weapon as well and you know it. Even as a white person, you’re not safe from these steroid pumped up gunslingers.

  37. Debbo 2020-09-25 18:46

    “Qualified immunity” must end. Let each person be held responsible for their actions. It’s the American Way.

  38. jerry 2020-09-25 18:48

    We’ll see how this investigation goes in Hyde County, but my guess is that they will all compare notes and decide that the party is the most important element in this equation. The only recourse will probably be the OJ Simpson one where you get your day in civil court, but the victim is still dead at the hands of the Attorney General, which is exactly the outcome of the Taylor murder.

  39. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 19:19

    Couple corrections, Jerry, the warrant was for Taylor’s apt., had her name and SS number on it and the address was correct. Taylor went with her bf towards the door and she was riddled with bullets in the hall.

    Whether the warrant was necessary is another question. The detective that went to the judge and obtained it claimed he had seen Taylor’s ex pickup a package at her apt. He has been reassigned amid the investigation of the raid.

    Since the LMPD had Taylor’s ex located at another residence around 10 miles away, they were expecting her to be alone not knowing her new bf was there and was legally armed.

  40. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 20:07

    Plea deal was a desperate cop shop trying to save face because they know they royally did the pooch.

  41. mike from iowa 2020-09-25 20:10

    I believe the city agreed to pay Taylor’s family 12 million and institute police reforms.

    Humblest apologies for getting way off topic.

  42. o 2020-09-25 21:08

    It feels like, especially in our black and brown communities, that the level of violence has been ratcheted up disproportionately to the crimes we are addressing. On face, when did drug possession, public intoxication, failure to show identification . . . become capital offenses? Why are we, on-face, accepting this level of policing for these offenses? Certainly the racial disparity in the application of deadly force needs addressing, but the acceptance of this EVER keeps that door open for abuse.

  43. JW 2020-09-25 21:46

    Mike From Iowa:
    Bullets travel through walls………. And bullets don’t need search warrants to do what they do either intentionally or by accident.

  44. jerry 2020-09-25 22:18

    So why does the Attorney General travel all through the state for these late night meetings when he ain’t even running for office? Who pays for that and how lucrative is it? I read that the night before he was in Rapid City until late and then drove to Pierre and then to Redfield, that’s a lot of driving that we know of, why is that and who pays for it? The trump tax law prohibits the writing off of miles, so there is that.

  45. mike from iowa 2020-09-26 07:51

    JW sounds like you just indicted Louisville police for felony reckless endangerment.

  46. Debbo 2020-09-26 20:21

    And we should trust cops why? 🤬 🤬 🤬 🤬 🤬 🤬 🤬

  47. jerry 2020-09-27 09:12

    Don’t forget that Moscow Mitch’s houseboy is the Attorney General of Kentucky. Moscow Mitch mentored this fellow and he seemed to mold nicely.

  48. cibvet 2020-09-27 13:42

    Question?? If there are so many good cops out there, why don’t they use their skills to weed out the bad cops and then start policing the public? My thought is that they are being paid to enforce the laws even in their own ranks.

  49. mike from iowa 2020-09-27 15:31

    Chances are union arbitrators protect bad cops from losing their livelihoods, cibvet. From what I have been reading it is almost impossible to fire a bad cop for most any crime.

  50. Debbo 2020-09-27 18:34

    This is a collection of photos from the recent protests in Louisville. It’s heartbreaking.

    is.gd/X3RysW

  51. mike from iowa 2020-09-27 19:01

    Thanks for the photos, Debbo. Leaven it up to clewless wingnuts to wonder why Blacks and other conscientious citizens march against police brutality. This isn’t against the rule of law, although it seems the wrong side is the main perps of law breaking, not protesters.

  52. jerry 2020-09-27 19:14

    As long as there are crooked Attorney Generals and police unions, there will be crooked cops. Take a look at Billy Barr, the head crook now of our police in the entire United States. So this deal with our Attorney General really shouldn’t surprise anyone as he follows the mold of his predecessor in the dealings with EB5 and several other crooked deals. Here, I hope the grieving family gets honest justice, but I wonder if it will turn out like what the agony we see in Louisville.

  53. jerry 2020-09-29 15:51

    More stench from Kentucky’s Attorney General’s failures. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/9/29/1981574/-More-On-The-Duplicity-of-Kentucky-State-Attorney-General-Daniel-Cameron-Regarding-The-Grand-Jury?utm_campaign=trending

    The more you know, the more that 12 million was not enough and certainly not enough to let these police able to walk without trial.

    Coming up on 3 weeks since the killing by our own Attorney General and nothing, not a damn thing. Doesn’t matter if Vargo is on the case or not. Looks like this will get Benda’d.

Comments are closed.