For a decade or more Dave Eyster had been striding along nicely, doing well, sitting pretty, operating his local Inmate Prison Assembly Line with great efficiency, if not much compassion.
But who wants a compassionate District Attorney anyway?
Enough that he maintains a brisk pace packing local criminals off to lockdown duty, and keeping his office scandal free.
Then, after many years hiking in the general direction of retirement, Dave Eyster stepped in a messy pile of manure of his own making. Yes, he’d dropped a load, then turned back and stepped in it, stepped in it again, then stomped up and down on it and finally laid down and rolled like a dog in his own stinking mess.
Not exactly unprecedented: It happens.
The sense I get around Ukiah, and maybe around the county, is that Dave Eyster stinks and we ought to get rid of him, There’s news of a recall. There’s talk of the county being on the hook for, potentially, hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, in legal fees, lawsuit settlements and the like.
What there is not, and never has been, is any sort of explanation from Dave Eyster about this mess he’s made and that has brought him to the point of loathing, disrespect and getting tossed out of office.
But I have always thought Dave, a master at the art of Opening Statements and Closing Arguments, could explain things in public. He could mount the county courthouse steps some sunny morning and offer a succinct, plausible and perhaps even sympathetic explanation for all this.
Suppose he were to draw our collective attention back to the bad old days of marijuana prosecutions in Mendocino County. The rules, regulations, laws and practices were confusing, stupid, punitive and forever changing.
Mendocino County District Attorneys going back to Joe Allen and up through Vivian Rackauckas, Susan Massini, Norm Vroman and Meredith Lintott had grappled with approaches to weed prosecution sanity, and all had failed.
Then came Dave Eyster, and he might remind us while speaking from those courthouse steps, how he had simply wiped the cobwebs and confusion aside, and offered simple solutions to those arrested on a marijuana offense: Face jail time or pay a hefty fine.
What did these defendants all do? Why, they paid fees ranging from big to gigantic. This resulted in many things, all of them good. It reduced the jail population, it reduced the headaches the judges were experiencing, it stuffed many hundreds of thousands of dollars into county coffers, and remind me—what was the downside?
Dave might have said all that, but of course in a more persuasive manner. He might have pointed out that, given the marijuana money he brought into the county coffers, it was petulant to scold him for spending nickels and dimes on annual DA Christmas fiestas at The Broiler.
And la affaire Cubbison, he could add, would not have been possible without the enthusiastic participation of county administrators eager to mesh county offices and consolidate power. Nor should we forget it was the county Board of Supervisors who terminated an elected official (by a vote of 5-0) then ran for cover when the manure hit the fan. They let Eyster take the fall.
Or words similar. Had Dave provided a thoughtful response it might have defused the rising tide of grumbles. It might have lanced the boil before it became a tumor.
Or Dave might have tried for sympathy, positioning himself as the victim of cheap journalistic shots. He could have pointed out that every news story in all the local media came from one disgruntled former DA office employee. Dave might add that the vendetta began even earlier, during the prosecution of a Ukiah police officer accused of crimes, with coverage by the same former journalist.
Yes Dave Eyster could have made strenuous arguments on his own behalf but that would have forced him to look weak, like a criminal defendant seeking a plea bargain while not admitting guilt. That’s just never been Dave Eyster’s style or mindset.
And perhaps ultimately he knows he orchestrated the mess of his own making and rather than blame someone else or try to mitigate his responsibility he’ll stand tall and face the consequences.
For more than a year he’s remained aloof in his corner office, perhaps thinking he’s above criticism and need not stoop to respond.
But silence seems suspicious, and citizens certainly have plenty of reasons for suspicion.
Mike Geniella:
As is often the case these days, Tom Hine gets it wrong.
- I was never an “employee” of the District Attorney’s Office. I worked part-time under contract as a media consultant. I received no county benefits.
- I quit. I called the DA on an incident involving local media, and then submitted a 30-day notice to terminate our contract. It was my choice, and my action. I have not spoken to Eyster since.
- Eyster approved a negotiated plea settlement to drop serious sex charges against a former Ukiah Police Sergeant, and a possession of methamphetamine charge stemming from what Officer Kevin Murphy had kept in his police locker. The DA’s then-chief investigator made the discovery during a search at the Ukiah Police Department. Nevertheless, Eyster, in return for a no contest plea to felony dissuading or intimidating a witness and a misdemeanor charge of false imprisonment, allowed Murphy to avoid a prison sentence.
- I never accused anyone of a conspiracy. The DA supported the Murray plea deal that was presented to Judge Ann Moorman by the attorneys involved.
- Hine, in his assessment from afar, overlooks a three-page document entered into the criminal trial of Cubbison. It shows Eyster communicated to retired County Supervisor Glenn McGourty a secret three-step plan to oust the embattled County Auditor and form a new County Department of Finance more favorable to board oversight instead of an elected, independent Auditor. Eyster publicly denounced Cubbison, blocked her interim appointment, and then ordered an internal follow up by his squad of investigators to lukewarm sheriff investigation conclusions into her alleged felony misconduct. It took the DA nearly a year to formally charge Cubbison.
I stand with Dave.
Quoting from a press release from the Mendocino County District Attorney’s Office, dated August 27:
“UKIAH: DA EYSTER RATED AS AN ‘AV PREEMINENT’ ATTORNEY … AGAIN.
“Mendocino County District Attorney David Eyster has been recognized for yet another year (2025) as an “AV Preeminent” attorney, a professional rating that only a limited few attorneys are able to achieve in their professional careers.
“Since 1887, Martindale-Hubbell has been maintaining this peer-review rating system for lawyers, a rating system where practicing attorneys in all 50 states are reviewed by other attorneys and judges.
“This distinguished honor (“AV Preeminent”) represents the highest possible Martindale rating for legal ability and ethical standards. It is one of the most respected distinctions in the legal field.
“Attorneys who receive this particular recognition are evaluated by their peers — fellow lawyers and members of the judiciary — on two critical factors:
1. Legal Ability (A): Includes proficiency in legal knowledge, analytical capabilities, judgment, communication skills, and legal experience.
2. Ethics (V): Reflects the attorney’s professional standards, adherence to rules of conduct, and commitment to fairness.
“In a separate rating system (AVVO), DA Eyster continues to also receive a “Superb” professional rating, receiving the top rating of 10 out of a possible 10.”