As we all know, Tornow has been the kingpin of worthless legal defense against the city as a city attorney, losing case after case because of constitutionality. Rumor on the street is that he is no longer working for the city, but the details of that ‘release’ are not known. I guess the mayor will not comment. I will keep you posted.

27 Thoughts on “City attorney Shawn Tornow fired? About f’ing time!

  1. Ghost of Dude on September 9, 2010 at 8:53 am said:

    I’m sure he was let go for repeated dress code violations.

  2. Costner on September 9, 2010 at 8:55 am said:

    Now this is the type of post that PG SHOULD post on. He probably knows more about this guy than anyone.

    The only thing that concerns me is who might replace him.

  3. Angry Guy on September 9, 2010 at 9:10 am said:

    I’m with Costner.. Where the EFF is PG when you need him?
    I promise I won’t say anything negative… SRSLY.

  4. Kinda looks like Tornow doesn’t have many friends, read the comments at DWC about him when PP tries to turn his resignation into a partisan matter;

  5. RedRyder on September 10, 2010 at 6:51 am said:


    Apparently you are not aware that the b/ b (bitchers and bellyacres) tend to love to make negative comments. Look at your own life and tell me, do you hear more criticism from people than you do compliments? Best way I know to avoid criticism is to do nothing and then you will be criticized for “doing nothing”. Hard to win!

  6. So are you defending Tornow?

  7. RedRyder on September 10, 2010 at 2:23 pm said:

    Actually what I am saying is this: Based upon the negative comments (less than friends), how does one immediately and logically jump to the conclusion that he does not have many friends?

    Secondly, I am also saying that there is a mentality out there that is like the wolf pack. That is, when something is “down”, the entire pack comes in for the “kill”.

    Now, having said that, hopefully a conclusion can be drawn that fairness needs to be paramount. Is it?

  8. Oh, I think people are done with being ‘fair’ to Mr. Tornow.

  9. RedRyder on September 11, 2010 at 4:10 pm said:

    You gotta be kidding right? There are time limits on being “fair”? I can only assume that you either are not familiar with or choose not to follow the Golden Rule which, if that is the case, heck, let’s just “throw him under the bus”. With that being said, you would have made a great attorney but I certainly would not want to have been your client.

  10. Anyone who has no regard for the US Constitution should be barred from practicing law.

  11. RedRyder on September 12, 2010 at 4:35 pm said:

    If I recall correctly, the US Constitution has many parts. To which part of the US Constitution are you referring? Also, I believe that the US Constitution was written in such a manner as to be “fair”. If it had a deadline, I must have missed it, and if it didn’t, can people ever be done with being fair?

    To which part of the US Constitution are you referring how did “anyone” have no regard for it.

    Also, while I am writing this, it occurs to me that I have a question for you: How do you feel about the statement “Innocent until proven guilty”. Is the court of public opinion the final judge and jury?

    Hopefully, you will be able to answer my question.

    Opinions mean very little whether they are yours or mine. Facts mean something and are very difficult to refute.

  12. RR- I was unaware Mr. Tornow was being charged with a crime? Unless you know something I don’t know. It would seem to me he was let go for his repeated attempts at ignoring citizens 5th Amendment rights. But that is just my assumption.

  13. I could care less about the number of friends he has, but he has been a controversial figure for quite some time. But I have a bigger problem when I read silliness like how he must have been fired because he was a member of X party because his boss is a member of Y party…and then when idiocy is pointed out the originator of this tidbit says he never said that was the case. It was just “interesting”.

  14. PP should keep his nose out of SF politics, just like I keep my nose outta Brookings politics. Well, cuz, I don’t give a shit.

  15. RedRyder on September 13, 2010 at 5:56 am said:


    Did anyone say he was accused of a crime? If you are referring to the comment “Innocent until proven guilty”, please note that I previously mention the Court of Public Opinion.

    Sorry, but before making a comment like “ignoring citizens rights”, it would seem that some I would need more information/specifics. We all know that everything published in the newspaper is not necessarily true and or correct, judges are not always correct and people involved may very well present biased information.

    Once again, we seem to be dealing with opinions and not facts.

  16. RedRyder – you need to keep in mind the statements being made about Tornow are based upon years of interactions with the man, and dealing with the impact of some of his handiwork.

    There are several ongoing court cases directly tied to his ignorance of the Constitution, and the man felt he was more important than the citizens as he repeatedly violated the rights of those citizens in an effort to promote an agenda.

    I highly recommend you type “Tornow” into that little search box on the right and start reading. If after reviewing all the available information on the guy you still want to come out and defend him… be my guest.

  17. RedRyder on September 13, 2010 at 12:47 pm said:

    Cos: I have read about some articles on his cases and it would seem that the only b/b (loser) would complain. Have you ever heard of a “winner” complaining about the attorney that represented them? Me neither! It seems that ALL people dislike attorneys until they need one and when they do, they want the attorney to defend them EVEN IF THEY ARE WRONG and…….. WIN!

    If as you say (I believe you since apparently you must follow Tornow closely, “several ongoing court cases are directly tied to his ignorance”, then it would seem that the verdict is still out on them. Thus, is he not innocent until proven guilty, or are we back to the Court of Public opinion which as we both know has no more value than either of our opinions.

    Thanks for the suggestion about typing into the Search box but…….I would believe that those opinions do not have any more value that yours or mine. I will just wait to hear the verdict on the ongoing cases that you reference (still vague on specific cases) and withhold my judgment based upon the decision that is rendered and not on an opinion based on a substantial and noticeable lack of fact(s).

  18. Waiting for what verdicts? The verdicts are in on both cases against the city. Code enforcement and the red light cameras were found unconstitutional under Tornow’s reign.

  19. RR – as DL said, the verdicts in both cases are in and in both cases Tornow’s interpretation of the law was incorrect (using your terms, that would indicate he is ‘guilty’ although using that term could blur the situation since he himself was not on trial).

    However, the city has vowed to appeal both cases, so in some sense I suppose you can wait and see what happens in the end. Although I could easily argue the cases are settled, I suppose that is never the case until the appeals process runs up all the way to the SCOTUS if need be.

    In this case, I feel the appeal is merely a stall tactic so the city can figure out what their next move should be.

    Now as to the search box function – that was merely meant to give you some background on the cases that have led to such a *cough* high *cough* opinion of Mr. Tornow. You should be able to ignore the comments and editorialism and just focus upon the background story (as well as any links that point back to media outlets).

    All of this aside, don’t assume everyone hates all attorneys. Most of us just hate corrupt, or inept Constitution-ignoring types, ambulance chasers, or those which make a mockery of our judicial system. There are a lot of good lawyers, but for every one of them there is typically the opposite sitting on the other side of the courtroom.

  20. I’m starting to think RR is ST.

  21. RedRyder on September 14, 2010 at 10:02 am said:

    This was your statement, not mine: There are several ongoing court cases directly tied to his ignorance of the Constitution, and the man felt he was more important than the citizens as he repeatedly violated the rights of those citizens in an effort to promote an agenda.

    In regard to code enforcement and the red light situation, if my memory serves me correctly, both of these issues are City ordinances. Does it only seem logical to me that the City Attorney’s Office would defend these? Oh yes, as you stated, the a decision was made to appeal. I would believe that decision was made in the City Attorney’s Office and most logically after discussion at that level along with the Mayor.

    Looking back at many of the comments, there seems to be a theme running through them not necessarily defending Tornow but rather objecting to the “kill the messenger” mentality of public opinion.

    I was under the impression that we were having a good discussion here but now sarcasm has developed. To drop to that level tells me more than you know. If we resort to that, then there is no need to continue.

  22. You are worried about being sarcastic? Maybe you should worry about being so damn stupid.

  23. RedRyder on September 14, 2010 at 1:28 pm said:

    A new low for you. Your comment makes you sound like a disgruntled waiter from a downtown SF.

    Oh yes, just to clarify, I (RR) am not ST and once again your opinion is wrong and you are entitled to be that way.

    In regard to your last comment about being “damn stupid”, I will leave you with the following quote :

    Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
    Abraham Lincoln

  24. Well, I am glad to see that Tornow has at least one friend.

  25. anominous on September 17, 2010 at 12:27 am said:

    Two, if you count Abraham Lincoln!

  26. Miamigirl on August 16, 2013 at 12:09 pm said:

    I was a client, this attorney is useless and a fraud! Took our money and did nothing for us.

    We are filing a complaint with the Bar. This is one bad lawyer.

    Lied to us on all occasions!

Post Navigation