The politics of the ‘Big Lie” are alive and well in Morgan Hill. A recent letter to the editor by Karen Fitch attempted to portray Councilmember Yvonne Martinez Beltran’s recent loss of her Mayor Pro Tem status by a 4-1 city council vote as “old-school men’s club politics.” Ms. Fitch is apparently unaware that the city council is comprised of four women and one man, Mayor Mark Turner.
Having exhausted all legal and investigative avenues to pursue charges of battery against the mayor, Martinez Beltran and her supporters are now changing the narrative to continue their attack against Mayor Turner.
The Morgan Hill Police Department, the Santa Clara County District Attorney and an independent investigator hired by the city all reached the conclusion that Turner did not commit battery against Martinez Beltran. Having been denied the opportunity to pursue a criminal case against the mayor, Martinez Beltran and her cadre are now casting the attack along gender lines.
Last week, the city council met to consider an agenda item to remove Martinez Beltran from her position as Mayor Pro Tem. In the event the mayor is absent, Martinez Beltran was trusted with the position of acting as mayor in his place.
In light of recent events, Turner asked the council to vote to remove her as Mayor Pro Tem. In what must have been a stunning and embarrassing rebuke for Martinez Beltran, the council voted to remove her from this position.
How can this be “old-school men’s politics” when three of the four members who voted to remove Martinez Beltran are women? Two of the women who voted for removal are also Hispanic. It boggles the mind that the facts are so conveniently and easily ignored by the Martinez Beltran camp.
Is there no end to the manufacture of facts to support a political agenda? There was no punishment or retribution involved when the council removed Martinez Beltran from the Mayor Pro Tem position. Rather, it was an overwhelming indication that the council is both frustrated and fatigued by the constant drama and attention grabbing by Martinez Beltran.
If she were truly committed to the marginalized members of our community, they would be much better served if she paid more attention to city business and ceased the antics that have alienated her from the rest of the council.
This is clearly not an issue of gender or racial discrimination against Martinez Beltran by Mayor Turner. The vote by the city council last week is clear proof of that. It is also curious that no state or county elected officials have sprung to Martinez Beltran’s defense or have picked up her banner to rally against Mayor Turner. Assemblywoman Gail Pellerin, State Senator Dave Cortese and County Supervisor Sylvia Arenas have been uniformly silent on the charges filed by Martinez Beltran against Mayor Turner and the new media campaign against “old-school men’s politics.”
I applaud their unwillingness to step into the mess created by Martinez Beltran.
In the end, it is the community of Morgan Hill that is the victim in all of this. I’ve never witnessed anything like this in the 22 years I have lived in Morgan Hill.
Martinez Beltran is clearly unhappy with the outcome of last year’s mayoral race, which she lost decisively to Mayor Turner. In fact, Martinez Beltran failed to win her own district in that election. Instead of filing unsubstantiated charges against the mayor and attempting to deflect attention from her own shortcomings, Councilmember Martinez Beltran should get back to the business for which she was elected.
The facts simply do not support her case against the mayor or the emerging new narrative of gender discrimination. As the gifted lawyer and a founder of our great republic, John Adams, once wrote, “Facts are stubborn things.”
Martinez Beltran has crashed into the concrete wall of facts. It’s time for her personal and political offensive against the Mayor to end.
Margaret Graham
Morgan Hill
Margaret Graham‘s Letter: Facts are stubborn things is flawed and full of fallacies.
Ad Hominem
Ms. Graham criticizes Councilmember Martinez Beltran’s character and accuses her of attention-seeking behavior instead of addressing her arguments directly. This attempts to discredit Beltran personally rather than engaging with her claims.
Strawman
Ms. Graham oversimplifies the opposition’s argument by portraying it as simply “old-school men’s politics,” ignoring any nuanced concerns about power dynamics or possible procedural issues. This makes the position easier to attack but does not represent the full scope of the argument.
False Cause
It is implied that because other officials did not speak out, this means Beltran’s accusations are baseless. Lack of public support or outside involvement does not directly prove or disprove any claims.
Composition/Division Error
The letter claims that gender discrimination cannot exist because the majority who voted for removal were women, failing to acknowledge that individuals can act contrary to group stereotypes and that systemic issues aren’t negated by representation alone.
Additional Rhetorical Weaknesses
– Appeal to Authority: Quoting a famous historical figure is used to reinforce the writer’s opinion rather than providing actual evidence.
– Loaded Language: Words and phrases are chosen to create a negative impression, such as describing actions as “antics” or claiming Beltran “crashed into the concrete wall of facts.”
– Begging the Question: The letter assumes without proof that there was no punishment or retribution, while repeatedly treating this assumption as fact.
Facts, facts, facts! Yet another Turner supporter says.
But to misquote the famous movie line – you can’t handle the facts.
Margaret notes that an ‘independent’ investigator and the Morgan Hill Police Department all reached a conclusion. They reached several, didn’t they Margaret?
FACT: The lawyer hired by Don Larkin and Christina Turner came to the inescapable conclusion that none of the witnesses she was allowed to interview could be used to corroborate 𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 about what 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 during the break.
Why? That is a very troubling question Turner’s supporters are afraid to answer.
FACT: Unlike a video that the San Jose Mercury News and others first posted which 𝑤𝑎𝑠 altered, the City eventually released an unaltered version of the February 7th City Council meeting. While the City Manager frantically signals somebody to pause the video as soon as Mark Turner calls for a break, that isn’t what happened. The video didn’t stop when the City Manager wanted it to.
And, video doesn’t lie.
But City Manager Christina Turner, City Attorney Don Larkin, and council members Marilyn Liebers, Soraida Iwanaga, and Miriam Vega just make up outrageous stories about what they saw which the video unambiguously shows are 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐲, 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐢𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐛𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥 – 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭 𝐘𝐯𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐳 𝐁𝐞𝐥𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧?
Ms. Turner stays seated, tracks YMB as she gets up and walks behind her on the way to get a refreshment, sees Turner change his path to confront YMB, and is staring with eyes laser-locked directly at Turner and YMB when Turner initiates contact. But Christina Turner says she saw no physical contact. Until she sees the video.
Ms. Liebers is fixated on her cell phone, her head literally not moving whatsoever but claimed she was standing and able to see that Turner “lightly brushed her hand” but “denied seeing Turner touch Martínez Beltrán’s arm. She lied.
Ms. Vega “maintained that Turner barely tapped Martínez Beltrán to get her attention”. To get her attention! Vega “noted that she was standing with her back to the audience, facing the wall, and that C. Turner was standing nearby to the left of her. According to Vega, Iwanaga and Libers were also standing near them. There is almost NOTHING even remotely accurate about this statement.
Ms. Iwanaga can’t believe how arrogant Yvonne was to dare walk by Turner but hey everyone is entitled to an opinion. But why did she just make up what she saw?
Iwanaga “opined that Martínez Beltrán should have gone around the other side of the tables to the food table because there was more room to walk” and “advised that if Turner touched Martínez Beltrán, it would have been for a millisecond because she saw Martínez Beltrán walk towards him. She stated that she did not see exactly where Turner’s hands were in relation to Martínez Beltrán and did not see any physical contact between them. “
City Attorney Don Larkin “explained that he observed Turner extend his arm and hand as if he were going to tap Martínez Beltrán on the shoulder, but Larkin did not see Turner actually touch Martínez Beltrán.” But upon further thought, oh yeah wait a second. “Turner has tapped him on the shoulder before, in a reassuring manner” and so it “did not surprise him to see Turner do it to Martínez Beltrán.” So, Larkin didn’t see any ‘touch’, but he saw a ‘reassuring tap’ on the shoulder – which somehow does not show up on the video.
FACT: A MHPD officer reviewed did indeed review the video. This is exactly what the officer said about his review:
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑦𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑡𝑜𝑢𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑌𝑣𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑛 ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑒𝑓𝑡 𝑤𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑠 𝑠ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 ℎ𝑖𝑚. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑔𝑜 𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑘 𝑖𝑠 𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒.
𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑘’𝑠 𝑒𝑙𝑏𝑜𝑤𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑡𝑜 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑙𝑒𝑓𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝑎𝑡 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒. 𝑆ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑢𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑡𝑜 ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑖𝑡.
𝐴𝑡 𝑛𝑜 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑜𝑏𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ 𝑜𝑟 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛.
The video directly contradicts or calls into question some of these observations.
1) The physical contact that occurred was not on Yvonne’s right wrist. It was higher up on the forearm, closer to her elbow.
2) The video gives no indication whether the ‘touching’ was ‘light’. In the location the ‘touch’ occurred, just below the elbow, even a small amount of pressure does not feel “light”. Yvonne’s face is not visible in the video at the point in time where physical contact is made. There is no facial expression that would aid in an evaluation of ‘light’- or something very different.
But the officer’s summary is accurate: there was no 𝒐𝒃𝒗𝒊𝒐𝒖𝒔 signs of a push, especially if the video is viewed at normal speed and without magnification.
But a careful, frame-by-frame analysis of the unaltered video shows Turner changing the direction of his path and heading directly toward YMB. He raises his right hand and contacts Yvonne Martinez-Beltran on her left forearm slightly below the elbow 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐬𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬. The officer was wrong when he said Turner made contact at her wrist and this is not a trivial point. When contact is first made, she is almost completely orthogonal to Turner. If contact was at the wrist, any pressure would have simply resulted in Yvonne’s hand moving closer to her body as it pivoted about her elbow.
YMB is able to momentarily continue her normal stride, taking about a half-step with her left leg anchored on the ground and her right leg moving forward with her right foot off the ground in a normal walking gait. This is an extremely vulnerable position for anyone to be in !
Turner first leans his body weight to the left ‘following’ YMB’s path. Before YMB’s right foot hits the ground, her torso is twisted (her left shoulder rotates toward the camera) so that the front of her torso is almost facing directly toward Turner instead of being orthogonal to him.
To maintain contact as YMB proceeds from right to left across the camera image, Turner rotates his right foot and slightly twists his entire body. While his right elbow does not extend with obvious force as if he was trying to push a 200-pound man to the ground, neither his right elbow nor his upper torso remains stationary.
When someone is walking with a normal gait, and force is applied from a mostly orthogonal position, especially when one of their feet is not grounded, it does NOT take much force to constitute a push, enough to cause the orientation of the person’s torso to change and with near certainty causing a sense of imbalance and a step out of place. That is what the video shows. A push.
The fateful meeting started with Yvonne attempting to have the council consider an emergency meeting to address issues that are important to the immigrants that live in our City and make such important contributions. Maybe like Mark Turner, you don’t think the City Council has a place considering how City resources should be used to protect our immigrant community. Maybe you even agree with Turner’s belief that protocol in decision-making means “you just have to listen to what I’m saying” as he blurted out at Yvonne as he tried to cut off her discussion.
But the fact is, during the break, he lost control, confronted and pushed Yvonne Martinez-Beltran as she tried to walk by to get a refreshment. His behavior is inappropriate and unacceptable and he should resign.
Instead , he launched a retaliatory attack based on claims made by people who embarrassed and TOTALLY discredited themselves by lying about what they saw when they didn’t know a video had captured the incident and shows what actually happened.
To accurately quote the famous movie scene:
You want an answer?
I want the truth !
You can’t handle the truth!