Innocent until proven guilty? That’s not always the case in Dan Dow’s world | Opinion

CORRECTION: A previous version of this story included an inaccurate depiction about a thread of comments on Dan Dow’s Facebook post. Dow did not delete any comments, he confirmed to The Tribune. It appears the comments may have disappeared and reappeared due to a Facebook glitch.

Corrected Feb 12, 2025

So much for innocent until proven guilty — at least in San Luis Obispo County, where the district attorney just declared an accused woman had definitively committed crimes before she had even entered a plea.

In a Facebook post on Feb. 7, District Attorney Dan Dow turned responsible jurisprudence on its head when he passed judgment on Fallyn Rollins, a former county probation officer suspected of embezzling more than $100,000 from an employee union.

“When she embezzled the money she was a San Luis Obispo peace officer who breached the trust of her fellow probation officers and stole their money,” Dow wrote on Facebook.

Note the wording: Dow didn’t say “allegedly.” He didn’t describe the defendant as a suspect. He didn’t say she was accused of committing a crime.

He straight up said, “She embezzled money.”

And he didn’t stop there.

He also called out the judge who reduced the bail amount and insinuated that there was some sort of conspiracy afoot to provide Rollins with special treatment because she avoided booking at the jail thanks to savvy lawyering.

“The Judge let her leave court today without even being booked on her felony warrant,” Dow whined.

As if that weren’t enough, he then fired off this cheap shot.

“Her lawyer’s wife is a judge in our court also.”

All of this is beyond inappropriate from our county’s top prosecutor.

Rollins’ lawyer, Robert Sanger, filed a legitimate motion to get her case on the court calendar and skip booking. It’s not an unusual thing.

And why even bring up Sanger and his wife, San Luis Obispo County Judge Catherine Swysen?

Was it Dow’s way of implying there are ethical concerns — even though Swysen has nothing to do with the case?

Sanger declined to comment to The Tribune, but on Tuesday he filed a motion for a gag order, alleging Dow’s comments were prejudicial against Rollins.

‘She is so remorseful about what she has done’

Though Rollins has not yet entered a plea — that’s expected to occur at her next hearing on Feb. 24 — there are indications that she will assume responsibility for the financial loss.

Family members and friends submitted written statements to the court that pointed to her guilt.

“She is so remorseful about what she has done and is so sorry,” family friend Ramona Reed wrote in a declaration arguing for her release on bail. “She regrets not making better choices.”

Rollins’ mother wrote that she and her daughter plan to refinance the family home to raise funds for restitution.

But none of that excuses Dow’s rush to judgment.

He has done exactly what attorneys often accuse the media of doing — trying her in the court of public opinion, in this case, on Facebook.

He should have let the case run its course before making any pejorative comments. Instead, Dow went out of his way to shame both Rollins and the judge.

“Unfortunately, retired Judge (and former DA Barry T. LaBarbera) reduced the bail amount from $1.1 million to $100k and allowed her to get out of custody from Court without ever being booked … In doing so, the Judge seemingly treated her different than the Court would typically treat a ‘regular’ citizen.”

We could say the same about the district attorney.

In singling her out on his Facebook page at this early stage in the proceeding, he certainly isn’t treating her as a “regular” citizen.

Instead, it appears he’s trying to extract extra punishment right from the get-go because Fallyn Rollins was a member of the law enforcement community who allegedly violated her oath.

$1.1 million bail is ridiculous

So was Rollins given special treatment, either in booking procedures or the setting of bail?

That would be no.

Patrick Fisher, a private attorney in San Luis Obispo, told Tribune reporter Chloe Jones that defendants are often arraigned without first being arrested and booked.

“It’s completely normal,” he said. “There’s nothing unusual about it.”

Here’s one example: In 2019, Sherry Gong, the wife of former County Clerk Tommy Gong, was accused of embezzling $32,000 from the Atascadero High School band’s booster club.

She was allowed to post bail prior to be being booked. And her bail was set at just $25,000.

The facts of the cases are different; $32,000 is considerably less than the “more than $100,000” that Rollins is accused of embezzling. And given her position of authority in county government, Rollins’ case is more serious.

But $1.1 million bail is a ridiculous ask that’s meant to exact revenge — not to ensure that she doesn’t flee.

And keep in mind, in addition to setting bail at $100,000, LaBarbera also imposed conditions on Rollins, including that she wear a GPS tracking monitor.

The judge did nothing wrong.

We cannot say the same for District Attorney Dan Dow.

It’s shocking that our district attorney shows such little regard for professionalism and respect for time-honored judicial practices, especially when he is all too ready to lecture others about constitutional principles.

Consider another of his comments on social media, when he was taking a victory lap celebrating the appointment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was publicly accused of sexual assault, alcohol abuse and financial mismanagement of two nonprofit veterans organizations.

“Don’t forget in our country, under a fair justice system that applies the U.S. Constitution, when it’s not used as a political weapon, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty,” Dow wrote on Facebook.

If you want a bright and shiny example of hypocrisy, that’s it.

Instead of trying to burnish his reputation as a conservative, law-and-order prosecutor by undermining the rights of defendants and insulting judges, Dan Dow would do well to follow his own admonishment.

Don’t forget that in our country, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty — and that applies to all people, not just the ones you like or agree with politically.

This story was originally published February 12, 2025 at 5:00 AM.