Prop 34, Anti-Death Penalty Measure, Continues to Pick Up Big La Jolla and L.A. Crime TV Money

Already backed by once-imprisoned La Jolla super-lawyer Bill Lerach and San Diego's ACLU, Proposition 34, the measure on the November ballot to substitute life in prison without parole for capital punishment, has landed even more financial support here.

According to a disclosure filed this morning and posted online by the California Secretary of State's Office, downtown criminal defense attorney Eugene Iredale, who has handled many high-profile murder and bribery cases, gave $5,000 on July 31. That was three days after the celebrity fundraising bash for Prop 34 thrown by Lerach at his La Jolla mansion.

Physician Paul Teirstein, chief of cardiology at La Jolla's Scripps Clinic as well as medical director of the Scripps Prebys Cardiovascular Institute, is also down for $5,000.

$10,000 each was given by La Jolla attorney Eric Isaacson of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, a descendent of Lerach's old outfit, and the San Diego law firm of Hulett Harper Stewart.

Harvard-trained TV producer Ed Redlich, who produced Without a Trace, the CBS crime series, and Shark, the CBS series in which James Woods played a Deputy District attorney, gave $25,000 on August 2.

Redlich, who lives in Los Angeles, is currently executive producer of Unforgettable, the CBS series about a female detective with a unique visual memory.

His father is former NYU Law professor and dean Norman Redlich.

Redlich's wife, Sarah Timberman, a writer and producer who is currently working on a Sherlock Holmes series featuring Lucy Liu as a female Watson, also gave $25,000.

San Diego's ACLU chapter gave $100,000 to the measure last month.

More like this:


The arguments in support of the ballot measure to abolish the death penalty are exaggerated at best and, in most cases, misleading and erroneous. Proposition 34 is being funded primarily by a wealthy, left-wing company out of Chicago, the ACLU, and similarly-oriented trust funds. It includes provisions that would only make our prisons less safe for both other prisoners and prison officials and significantly increase the costs to taxpayers due to life-time medical costs, the increased security required to coerce former death-row inmates to work, etc. The amount “saved” in order to help fund law enforcement is negligible and only for a short period of time. Bottom line, the “SAFE” Act is an attempt by those who are responsible for the high costs and lack of executions to now persuade voters to abandon it on those grounds. Obviously, these arguments would disappear if the death penalty was carried forth in accordance with the law. Get the facts at and supporting evidence at and

LOL @"the facts". The facts are simple, it costs 2-3 times to put a person to death in CA vs life in prison w/o parole. In addition to the costs the fact is the death penalty is not applied in an even handed manner violating the equal protection clause, rich or connected people are NEVER charged with the death penalty-only the poor. Ask OJ. Lets not forget that the state only pays $75 an hour for lawyers working death penalty appeals for the accused.

  • "provisions that would only make our prisons less safe for both other prisoners and prison officials"

What would do that?

  • "significantly increase the costs to taxpayers due to life-time medical costs"

It has been proven again and again that housing a prisoner costs much less than executing them.

Also, way to suggest biased sources to top it off.

Log in to comment

Skip Ad