L.A. DA Gascón Suspends a Prosecutor for Misgendering a Child Molester and Accused Murderer

Bryan Chan/County of Los Angeles via AP

Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón embraces a special kind of evil. The Soros-backed prosecutor has A: sold whatever shreds remain of his soul, B: has had a lobotomy, or C: has just submersed himself completely in Leftist dogma. Of course, all of those things do somewhat dovetail, don’t they? So let’s go with D: all of the above.


You remember Hannah Tubbs, right? If not, click here for a quick refresher. To save you a little time, here is an excerpt from a piece I wrote about him last year. It might be helpful if you want a thumbnail sketch of the kind of man Tubbs is. Otherwise, feel free to skip ahead.

You may recall Hannah Tubbs, who by all appearances is most definitely a man, who calls himself a woman. Tubbs is a career criminal with drug, assault, and battery charges, some involving a weapon, and sex charges to his name. He is also facing a charge of murder. He was arrested in 2019 for sexually molesting a girl at a Los Angeles, Calif., Denny’s in 2014.

According to a story by Fox News, Tubbs grabbed the 10-year-old girl by the throat, shoved her into a bathroom stall, and shoved his hand down her pants. Under the aegis of District Attorney George Gascón, the attorney’s office declined to prosecute Tubbs as an adult since the Denny’s incident was committed while he was still underage. What’s more, because he decided to identify as female, he was given two years in a juvenile detention facility where he was locked up with his favorite prey.

Fox later obtained jailhouse tapes of Tubbs admitting that what he did was wrong, talking about how he was able to obtain a plea deal, and bragging that he would not have to register as a sex offender. There was also the possibility for an early release on that charge. Gascón’s office first reasserted that Tubbs should not be in an adult facility and then backpedaled, stating that if the office had known about Tubbs’s disregard for his crimes, the case would have been handled differently. But Fox also had evidence that Gascón’s office was well aware of the tapes before Tubbs was sentenced.


Tubbs is facing a new charge. He is accused of beating Michael Clark to death with a rock in Kern County in 2019. Tubbs was linked by DNA evidence to the cold case. Shea Sanna, who had been the lead prosecutor for part of the case, was suspended by Gascón. Why? For “misgendering” and “dead-naming” Tubbs.

According to Fox News, Sanna argued that during the prior case, Tubbs played the gender game in order to work the system in his favor and cited the above-mentioned jailhouse tapes as evidence. Not only can Tubbs be heard bragging about the assault, but he also talks about being housed with the “trannies” and getting a sex change operation.

Tubbs also tells his father to start referring to him using female pronouns. In the recordings, he made explicit comments about his young victim. On top of everything else, in 2013, Tubbs was accused of molesting a four-year-old girl in a California library while her mother was just a few yards away.

You would think that in a civilized society, even in California where civilization hangs by a thread, even someone as compromised as George Gascón would recognize that he has a hardened, irredeemable, violent sex offender on his hands who does not need to be coddled or placated. Tubbs is a very dangerous man, but Gascón suspended Sanna because he misgendered and dead-named Tubbs, which I guess is more important to Gascón than Tubbs’ crimes.

Apparently, Sanna’s tack made others in Gascón’s office feel uncomfortable. Good grief. They never take a day off from the propaganda, do they? Never mind the murder, molestation, and assaults. Just make sure you get the monster’s pronouns right. Gender always trumps justice.


Anything for a mistrial, huh, George?

One must wonder why others in the office and probably Gascón were uncomfortable. Did they A: decide that they were triggered by Sanna’s lack of gender sensitivity? Were they B: so deep into the movement that using the “wrong” gender was the worst thing a person could do? Or is it C: deep in their hearts, they are ashamed and embarrassed that in the name of gender and social justice, they were so arrogant and so progressive that they got played for fools by an evil man who should never breathe free air again? And they can’t admit they were wrong? My money is on C. Although D: all of the above may also apply.



Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member