Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley was assured of another four years in office today when no one filed papers to challenge her in the June 8 election.
A group of about 30 prosecutors from her office who joined her at the Registrar of Voters office in the basement of the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse cheered O'Malley when the 5 p.m. filing deadline passed.
O'Malley, 56, became Alameda County's first woman district attorney under controversial circumstances last Sept. 15 when the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to appoint her to fill the last 15 months of Tom Orloff's term. Orloff had suddenly announced his retirement after 15 years of heading the office.
Two of the five board members, Keith Carson and Nate Miley, abstained from voting for O'Malley, saying at a contentious three-and-a-half hour hearing that they thought the board should take more time and get more public input before making an appointment.
Several board members said San Francisco Chief Assistant District Attorney Russ Giuntini, who was an Alameda County prosecutor for many years and headed one of its branch officers, had contacted them seeking to be appointed and it wouldn't surprise them if he ran against O'Malley this year.
But San Francisco district attorney spokesman Brian Buckelew said today that Giuntini has decided not to seek election to the Alameda County post at this time. He said Giuntini was unavailable to comment today because he's busy dealing with problems with the San Francisco Police Department's crime lab, which are forcing his office to drop charges against many drug suspects.
O'Malley, who lives in the city of Alameda, has been in the Alameda County District Attorney's Office for 25 years and served as Orloff's top assistant for the last 10 years of his tenure.
She comes from a prominent legal family. Her father, Bill O'Malley, served as Contra Costa County's district attorney for 15 years and later was a judge there.
Her brother, Bill O'Malley, a former prosecutor and judge, is running to be Contra Costa County's next district attorney in the election in June.
And Contra Costa County Presiding Judge Mary Ann O'Malley is Bill O'Malley's wife and Nancy O'Malley's sister-in-law.
O'Malley said, "I'm thrilled" and said the fact that no one will run against her in the election "takes a lot of weight off of me."
O'Malley said she can now focus on running the District Attorney's office but she will still spend time meeting with the public.
When she filed for the office on Monday, O'Malley said, "I have worked tirelessly on behalf of the victims of crime" and is proud to be a nationally recognized expert on the advancement of victims' rights.
She said she helped create the Alameda County Family Justice Center, which is a one-stop shop for the victims of family violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, child abuse and the sexual exploitation of minors.
Comments
Amador Estates
on Mar 13, 2010 at 8:51 am
on Mar 13, 2010 at 8:51 am
She needs a makeover. New makeup and a new hairstyle.
Livermore
on Mar 13, 2010 at 7:55 pm
on Mar 13, 2010 at 7:55 pm
I think that she's cute just the way she is!
Foothill Place
on Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04 am
on Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04 am
I agree with Anonymous. Cholo, the internet is no place for positive or supportive posts, particularly not the P-town Weekly forum.
Anonymous was simply trying to make a cheap, hurtful remark based solely on someone's appearance. Quite right, too!
Amador Estates
on Mar 14, 2010 at 2:06 pm
on Mar 14, 2010 at 2:06 pm
I wouldn't say that my comment was "cheap" or "hurtful". The new DA is obviously talented, but could use an updated look. This reminds me of a quote I heard on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", where the Boston Red Sox were featured in one of the episodes. The guy who does hair said to one of the players: "You are a world class ball player, but this is not world class hair".
She could use an updated hairstyle and suit that are as powerful as what she will be doing in the legal system in this area.
another community
on Mar 15, 2010 at 9:34 am
on Mar 15, 2010 at 9:34 am
Dear anon--
Have the courage to use you name the next time you decide to go the cheap route and bash someone on the basis of the superficial qualities you apparently expect from a leader in the legal community--I would rather have Nancy just the way she is than some fashion queen who has no clue on what she is doing.We already have a few of those on the national level. I can assure you that the Alameda County DA's office is in good hands--even if in your eyes she needs a redo!
Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 15, 2010 at 9:49 am
on Mar 15, 2010 at 9:49 am
I wonder? If the new District Attorney were a man, would any comments be posted about his appearance? Anonymous, if you really do live in Alameda County which Nancy will be charged to protect, it seems to me that you would be more concerned about her long running history of being tough on the bad guys and her advocacy for victims rights rather than on her appearance.
Amador Estates
on Mar 15, 2010 at 10:10 am
on Mar 15, 2010 at 10:10 am
to "Baseball mom":
Nope. She needs a look that will be as powerful as the work she is going to be doing. See my previous comments. If you had really read what I wrote, there wouldn't have been a need for half of what you said.
Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 15, 2010 at 3:51 pm
on Mar 15, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Anonymous, I really do pray that neither you nor your loved ones are ever in a situation to find out how “powerful” she really is. Enough said.
Amador Estates
on Mar 16, 2010 at 12:15 am
on Mar 16, 2010 at 12:15 am
That would be incorrect "Baseball mom". You are clearly upset about what I said. It is not insulting nor insensitive. Please see me original post (as well as the others).
Downtown
on May 6, 2010 at 3:12 pm
on May 6, 2010 at 3:12 pm
this ladys office gives sweetheart deals to people who shoot people.she gives them deals where they dont even see a Day in prison! ! !RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL RECALL