Since I'm one of those from the blogosphere you are referring to, I want to clarify that based on what we know about the accusations against Adam at this time, I would have no problem whatsoever with a greatly reduced sentence. I would hate to see him receive a harsh sentence just to further someone's political career or to feed the public's taste for blood. Child molesters and drunk drivers do not face the possible sentence that Adam is facing and that is wrong.

As to his court dates being stretched out, there's no conspiracy there. The court calendars are jammed and very little justice is meted out swiftly these days. On the other hand do I believe a plea is being timed perfectly for political reasons? Absolutely.

I think he should be prosecuted, and if convicted serve his full sentence for the crimes he's accused of. Unless he's willing to "Sing" in order to make a plea agreement. Altering public documents to mislead a Grand Jury investigation is a serious offense.

Serious? Absolutely.

Metaphorically speaking, Adam Aleman was pulled over for driving 85 miles per hour on the highway. Does he deserve a ticket? He broke the law, so yes. But thousands, likely millions, of drivers violate the speed limit on a daily basis. How many are cited? Relatively few.

Nearly every political office (particularly in San Bernardino County) does inappropriate things. Every single one--and Postmus' is likely not even the worst. He's just the worst when it comes to not getting caught.

Adam Aleman has been targeted because he was hated, and because his boss was hated.

If justice were done, Aleman would serve his 18 years, Postmus would be forced out of office, and many, many other offices in San Bernardino County would be vacated, along with their staff.

True justice is rarely achieved. Aleman can do no more harm. His career is over. It will be next to impossible for Postmus to be reelected.

It's funny, I write, "Aleman can do no more harm." What harm was really done? Yes, he broke the law, but he didn't achieve his goal of misleading the Grand Jury. He tried, and failed. And even if he had succeeded, what would he have accomplished? Would it have really damaged the County in a meaningful way if he had accomplished his goal? He would have succeeded in justifying a $49,000 contract, within the Assessor's Office's roughly $20 million budget. That's less than 0.25% of the Assessor's overall budget, and less than .001% of the County's overall budget of $4.3 billion (assuming my math is correct).

Come to think of it, it would have been far better for the County of San Bernardino from at least a press perspective if this investigation had never started. The County has been damaged and embarrassed by this incident.

I want to make it clear: I am not attempting to excuse Aleman or Postmus. But this is like stopping a car on the highway for driving 85 miles per hour, in such a way that traffic is jammed for miles. Was it really worth it . . . for justice?

Everyone has some validity in their opinion on this one.

However- at the end of the day- justice at all costs. If that means we need to clean out a few more offices- by all means let's do so. I think many agree Adam was targeted...and to think this sort of taxpayer abuse was only happening in the Assessor's Office is absurd. If we are going to take on corruption, let's go all out on this one. Come on Watson...

A high-level public servant altering and destroying evidence demanded under subpoena by the Grand jury is hardly comparable to exceeding the speed limit by driving 85mph. Adam and Bill have broken the law and been caught. I contend they should be prosecuted and severely punished as an example for others either doing or contemplating the same kinds of abuse of office as these two.

Really?

Their careers in politics are over. They have lost every bit of respect and prestige they once had. They can never again take advantage of a public office, and it will be next to impossible for them to get a position of similar stature in the private sector.

That sounds like a pretty serious deterrent to anyone contemplating the modification of an official document.

Let me say it again: Adam Aleman can do no more harm (if any harm was truly done to begin with). Adam Aleman lost his job and his salary. Adam Aleman has few, if any, high level career prospects. And all of this for changing 5 or 6 words within several dozen documents and for removing a hard drive from a computer.

The punishment should fit the crime. Aleman's career and, really, a large part of his life is over at 25. He should be given a short sentence in jail--30 or 60 days, perhaps--and be allowed to go on his way.

Look at it this way: If you put Adam Aleman in prison for 18 years, that means he'll cost the taxpayers $540,000 (at the approximate cost per prisoner of $30,000 yearly). Is it really worth $540,000 to incarcerate Adam Aleman, when even some serious criminals are freed?

We can all talk from our ivory towers. Yes, Adam Aleman should go to jail for 18 years. Yes, hundreds of other elected officials from across this country should be similarly charged, convicted, and sentenced. All child molesters and rapists should get life in prison. Murderers should get life without parole, and perhaps the death penalty.

But it is impractical to expect that sort of a world. We must weigh each case on its merits, and choose the appropriate course of action. That's why we have judges and juries, and prosecutors to make recommendations, and defense attorneys to lobby on behalf of defendants. If Aleman's record modifications or hard drive removal had cost the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, or had resulted in a death of injury, that might be an appropriate reason to sentence him to 18 years. But you just can't justify it in this case.

There comes a point when we must step back from a pure "law and order" mentality and instead look at what course of action would serve the greatest good. It would not serve the greatest good to sentence Aleman to 18 years in state prison.

I don't favor imprisoning Adam Aleman for 18 years, but a 30-60 day sentence is hardly a deterrence for others either doing or contemplating similar crimes. If convicted, he should do some hard time, out of respect for all of us who serve with honesty and integrity in public office.

2-3 years would be acceptable, 18 years is draconian, 30-60 days is letting him go free if he's declared guilty. Most of us across the political spectrum all agree 18 years is a waste of taxpayer money and excessive for the crimes allegedly committed.