A Deep Look at Candidate for Humboldt County DA, Stacey Eads
Today, we’ll meet Eads and later, we’ll introduce Kamada.
Eads is quick to highlight her love for this area. “I’m from Humboldt,” she told us. “Humboldt is the place that has my heart…I returned here after law school.” She says that she loves being able to enjoy the natural beauty of Humboldt County which provides the “tremendous quality of life we have here.”Eads is also very proud of her relationship with the current District Attorney, Maggie Fleming. She noted that when she came to the District Attorney’s Office, Maggie was there before her and very supportive. “I will forever be grateful for the mentorship and guidance that Maggie has given me.” She said the two of them bonded in part because both of them were juggling the job of being a parent with their work. She explained, “There were other parents that were District Attorney’s, but Maggie was the only mom.”
She added though that their personalities meshed as well. “We’re both a bit shy if you will,” she explained. She noted that for both she and DA Fleming “putting ourselves out into the public light isn’t easy.” She told us that although entering the public melee is difficult, “ I’m not doing it for myself, I’m doing it for the community and for the office. The community is being very well served by the office and I want that service to continue.”

District Attorney Maggie Fleming and Deputy DA Stacey Eads. [Image from the Stacey Eads for DA campaign page]
Some of the work she is proudest of revolves around her prosecution of child abuse cases. She is the current leader of the DA’s Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Crimes prosecution team. When asked what case she was proudest of her work on, she told us, “I have taken a number of cases to trial. I’ve worked with a number of victims. I don’t think it is fair to say [one particular case].”
But she went on to mention two cases. The first Eads spoke of was the Seng Yang case involved a 16-year-old* girl alleging that her father had been sexually abusing her and videotaping and selling the tape. Eads said the case had a “lot of challenges” including language barriers and a deaf witness, but Eads was able to get a conviction. “Her father will spend his life in jail,” she said proudly.
Eads is happy that the siblings were not just given justice but also found a new home. “Ultimately after that trial, the children were able to stay together when one of the teachers of one of her siblings took all of the siblings into their home,” she said.
In another case Eads spoke about which highlighted her ability to bring justice to victims was the Barry Sanford case where she successfully prosecuted the abuser of an autistic youth. In both cases, she credited the courage and strength of the victims for the victory. “My greatest accomplishment is supporting victims through the system,” she told us. “Empowerment of the victims.”
Two high profile cases Eads prosecuted were the Marci Kitchen case, where a mother struck and killed her daughter and her daughter’s friend then fled the scene, and the Gary Bullock case where a Southern Humboldt man was convicted of the New Year’s Day murder of Father Eric Freed.
One of the aspects of being District Attorney that Eads says she’ll find most difficult is the staff “must follow the law and apply the facts that are presented to us.–we are not always able to prosecute cases even when we believe the victim. That is one of the greatest challenges.” She noted, “I think sometimes the public doesn’t always understand about the limitations we have. One of the biggest challenges is to educate the public on what the restraints are and when [it is] appropriate to seek changes of the law.”
She noted, “One other tremendous challenge is to maintain an office of ethical prosecutors. I think we have a well-staffed office of qualified prosecutors.” But she said, she will be continuously working to make sure this continues.
Eads said that “one of the primary changes” she will make “will be on recruitment and retention.” She says that she hopes to go “to law schools and let them know we are looking. That could also diversify the office in terms of viewpoints.”
In addition, she points out that there is “a strong need for a retention of our support staff.” She hopes to “have them receive pay that is representative of the work that they do…We are very reliant on a strong support staff.” And, she says the support staff are underpaid. “They could apply for jobs in the fast food industry at the entry level and receive comparable pay,” she told us.
Eads says she wants to continue to have the same prosecutor, in child and elder abuse as well as sexual abuse cases, “take a case from the beginning and work it all the way to the end. She feels there is a lot of value in having the same person “involved in early stages like child victim interviews” and carrying that through “to sentencing and beyond.” She explained how important that can be to the victims. “I’m still in touch with many of the families who have gone through sentencing and appeal,” she said. “I still have interactions with them.”
Then, when we asked her what she thinks will be her favorite part of the job, Eads answered, “The people. I find that serving the people is by far the most rewarding part of the job.” But, she added with a wry sound to her voice, “Sometimes the most rewarding is also the most challenging.”
When asked about what the other candidate, Adrian Kamada, characterized as “a string of acquittals” last fall, Eads denied there was such a thing. “I disagree that there have been a string of acquittals,” she told us. She said that there have been five felony trials in 2022. Four of them received guilty verdicts and the other one resulted in a hung jury. She brought up the David Dues case saying that it “was an example of a challenging sexual assault case that fully warranted proceeding to trial. His case had multiple charges, including an assault w/ intent to commit rape charge. The assault to commit rape didn’t result in conviction, however, the jury did convict on felony false imprisonment. The case was very important to take to the jury for their decision regarding the intent of Mr. Dues, who has a documented history of sexual deviance, at the time he assaulted the survivor while she worked alone at a laundromat.***
She pointed out that the job of the DA’s office wasn’t necessarily to get convictions but instead to make sure that the facts were determined accurately. “I don’t think the success of an office rests on the number of convictions,” she told us. “We represent the people as a whole and are finders of truth.”
When asked about transparency and communication–about getting information to the media and through them to the public, she responded that she would use “press releases, conversations, and try to have as much accessibility as possible.” But she said that it wasn’t possible to release information on every case. “With the volume of cases, releasing information on every case would be absolutely impossible,” she told us. But that she hoped to release information on “the majority of cases that do go to trial…It is important to keep folks well informed.”
Eads denied that there was a backlog of cases in Humboldt County. She told us, “There was a really large backlog when Maggie first came into office [and] there is some backlog in light of COVID.” But, she said, “Our office was open through COVID. I personally handled two trials through the pandemic. We could have had a much more significant backlog [if the DA’s Office hadn’t been so active].”
When we asked her how she planned to address the frustration that law enforcement is not keeping up with environmentally harmful marijuana grows, she told us, “Those cases, if there are environmental crimes, if it rises to the level of criminal in nature, those are crimes I would prosecute.”
Why does Eads think people should vote for her and not her opponent? “One of the advantages [I have is] working with the DA and having an extensive amount of experience that goes well beyond what he has.”
She says that she has more experience “in terms of management, working with people, serving the public, [and] trials.”
She summed this up as “experience, integrity and ability.” Then added, “I have a strong reputation for my professionalism and my ethics. I’m very upfront and fair. I think I have a very strong sense of justice and compassion. I’m open and I appreciate input from others. I’m very thoughtful.”
If you are interesting in learning more about Stacey Eads, her website is www.staceyeads4da.com
*Please note: We incorrectly reported the age of the victim. We also incorrectly understood that the victim was awarded victim of the year. Instead, that was another abuse victim.
***Ms Eads wanted to clarify that she was speaking of the 2022 trials. We’ve updated this paragraph substantially.
Note: That the original article didn’t mention Michael Acosta was also running for DA. We apologize for that oversight.
![Stacey Eads [Photo provided by Eads]](https://kymkemp.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/unnamed-50.jpg)

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
I’m not sure I understand her comment about it not being the responsibility of the DA’s office to get convictions. It would seem that if the office decided there was enough cause for a trial, they should darn well want to validate that decision by getting a conviction. Otherwise the charges should not have been made in the first place.
I believe what she was trying to say was that the DA’s office also makes the charging decisions and even after making the charging decision sometimes info might come to light which would cause them to drop charges. But that’s my interpretation of what she was saying.
They don’t make the charges. They prosecute.
Responsibility is truth. Not points
That apparently is incorrect. “2. The prosecutor then decides whether to file charges and, if so, what charges to file. The prosecutor decides whether to charge the crime as a felony or a misdemeanor. The prosecutor can file charges on all of the crimes for which the police arrested the defendant or can decide to file fewer charges or more charges than were included in the arrest report.”
https://www.courts.ca.gov/1069.htm
That marci kitchen got 6 years in prison the same amount of time drug dealers get it was really sad that she isnt doing closer to 20 years that case had some real bad facts. Also what about michael acosta your not going to put him in the article that’s not fair he has some really good points to make about the system and how it works but whatever. I used to think you were hella cool kym but now I’m not so sure.
You don’t like me because Marci Kitchen didn’t get the amount of time in jail you think she should… ? I am unsure how that is my fault. And why would I put Acosta in a story about who is running for DA?
My apologies. I missed Acosta was running for DA. I’ll have to ask him for an interview.
Because he is running for DA also and I was talking about stacey Ed’s and her saying that the marci kitchen case was one of her big cases.
Sometimes we have to back up a bit. There are a lot of us, myself included, who never knew Marci Kitchen, or the victims. We talk about her like she wronged US. She owes us this or that, she needs to be punished this long, or that long. But what happened? She killed her own daughter, and her daughters friend. It exceeds a Shakespearean tragedy. I think she’s living a punishment, no matter how long in jail, or out.
That assumes those feelings of horror are shared of the guilty party. That is not always true. And yes, the criminal death of someone not personally known does wrong us. All of us.
Great interview! Please vote for Eads! She is by far the most qualified candidate!
She has been there along time and I would agree she is qualified but there are things that need to change in the DAs office that she will most likely not change and I hope that after this is all over and done she has the good judgement to change. Because the way the office is ran now is not good and very corrupt. And she being so close to maggie will just keep it running the way it does. And that would be just sad.
I have to agree with you 100% the DAs office is poorly ran. I don’t want to go into details but I can say that there is a murder suspect that is also a assault suspect that the DAs is doing nothing about. He Is still walking free in southern Humboldt…..
She sounds very nice. But who cares?! We need a DA who will press charges and give long sentences to violent assholes. It’s nice she got the guy molesting his daughter put away forever. But she brings up the Marci Kitchen miscarriage of justice as her case?!! She should be ashamed of that case. And just based on that case alone I would never vote for her. Sorry- not sorry!
The DA isn’t in charge of sentencing decisions. That would be the judiciary
The DA is in charge of charging. Should have charged her with murder straight off. She ran over the kids and left one of them still alive yet dying in the road while she drove home to hide her car.
Then when the judge granted Marci Kitchen to travel to South America (to obviously do more piles of blow) while she was out on bail WE were all crying murder but not a peep out of the DA’s office.
Look- we all know that Marci’s mega-grower boyfriend was related to a long-time local and connected lawyer and that’s how all the sleaze happened. Favors for old favors and such. But anybody connected to that pile of injustice should not be promoted to the higher office. I do hold the DA’s office partly responsible. And if she was prosecuting the case then she followed orders from Maggie but that is no excuse. I do not want more of the same…
Sounds like you want someone unethical to run the office if you want murder to be charged in that case. Terrible, disgusting thing kitchen did but no ethical lawyer could charge murder
That is flat-out wrong. Murder requires that the person act with malice, but malice can either be express or implied. And malice may be implied where “no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.” Those are the Penal Code’s words – not mine.
And there is a long history of cases supporting murder convictions for drunk driving. In those cases, the defendant typically had one or more prior DUIs. I am not sure what Marci Kitchen’s record was like, but she had a special (legal and moral) duty to her daughter. Rather than rendering aid or rushing her daughter to the nearby hospital, Marci Kitchen let her daughter die in the road while she went home and tried to cover-up her crime.
I doubt that any group of twelve strangers would have had a hard time convicting her of murder.
That seems like you’re reaching for a lot of facts there. No way you would be able to ethically charge murder, even implied malice as you say if there was no evidence Of intent.
You say people charged with murder for dui usually have priors…. Don’t you think any prosecutor would have loved to go after this lady for murder if they could have?? Saying otherwise is just silly.
Jocelyn, I have quoted you the exact language of Penal Code section 188, which defines the malice requirement for murder in California.
I would also refer you to Calcrim 520, which is the instruction that the judge gives to the jury. This instruction defines the crime of murder. The elements it lays out are:
(1) The defendant had a legal duty to help/care fore/rescue the victim, and the defendant failed to perform that duty and that failure caused the death of another person.
(2) The defendant acted, or failed to act, with malice aforethought.
The instruction then lays out what implied malice means as follows:
(1) The defendant intentionally committed the act or failed to act;
(2) The natural and probable consequences of the act or failure to act were dangerous to human life; and
(3) At the time of the act or omission, the defendant knew that the act or omission was dangerous to human life.
So you can judge for yourself whether a mother who got drunk, ran over her kid, fled the scene without rendering aid, and then tried to cover up the crime could at least be charged with murder.
As for myself, it’s pretty clear to me that she could. Conservatively, I’ve made hundreds of charging decisions and have yet to get a phone call from the state bar about any of them.
As for whether any and all prosecutors would have loved to after her for murder? I can hardly hope to speak for all of them, but I would note that district attorneys have significant discretion about how and whether to charge cases.
In other words, even if a district attorney believes that a charge is supported by the evidence, the district attorney has absolutely no duty to bring the most serious charge possible.
Soooo your theory is DRUNK Marci is driving down the road…RECOGNIZES ITS HER DAUGHTER…. intentionally runs her down… and leaves.
Good luck proving that. ??
I want Marci to be in prison for much longer too but no prosecutor in California would charge that as murder .
No. That’s not the standard. Read the elements of the jury instruction.
Drunk Marci unintentionally hits her daughter. Drunk Marci doesn’t stop to render aid. Drunk Marci has a legal duty to her minor daughter. Because Drunk Marci doesn’t fulfill her legal obligation to her daughter, her daughter dies. QED.
I did read it. You are replacing the acts to suit your narrative. Two separate acts: 1) the drunk driving hitting her 2) leaving her
It also says intentionally failed to act… and says malice aforethought is a state of mind that must be formed before the act that causes the death is committed.
If the facts were as I stated above then yes murder. But you are wrong about your scenario
By your boss, do you mean former elected DA of Del Norte Co? Not really comparable
I’ve never worked in Del Norte County. The most I know about it is that there’s a fairly large prison and an Aztec Grill in the Chevron.
Marci Kitchen pled to the sheet. That is 8 years for a woman who had no felony record. That means that some of the best criminal defense attorneys in our county (Patrik Griego and later Megan O’Connell) could not get Stacey Eads to dismiss even one of the charges.
When a person is driving under the influence and people die, there are specific Vehicle Codes, NOT Penal Codes, which address it. Stacey would have had to prove that Marci deliberately wanted to kill her child and her child’s friend when she struck them.
As a criminal trial attorney in this county for 15 years, I know Stacey’s reputation as fair but firm. She has no problem taking, and winning, when she takes cases to trial. That is why she is assigned the most difficult cases. In other words, the ones that the DA will not compromise on because the act is so heinous.
Only the best prosecutors get assigned these cases. She is the best.
Fair enough. I agree that being a part of the current and recent DAs office isn’t very compelling evidence that you’re the best choice to lead the next DAs office
There is so much that you don’t understand. This isn’t CSI.
The DA is only not in charge of sentencing if the defendant enters a guilty plea to all charges and sentencing enhancements or is found guilty at trial. But if the conviction results from a plea bargain in which the DA dismisses a charge or sentencing enhancement (as happens in most cases), the DA can dictate the terms of the sentence. (See People v. Segura (2008) 44 Cal.4th 921.) The most the judge can do is approve or reject the plea deal.
Dang, the plot thickens , getting into politics is like petting a three headed dog.
I’m sorry to hear that you 2 prosecuted the case of the mother that killed her child they’re child I don’t know why you didn’t go for a much longer sentence she killed her own child and another one she should spend the rest of her life in prison
The problem with over charging is that it can have the opposite effect. If murder was not a conclusion a jury would agree with, then there’s a chance she might have been exonerated. I don’t think a DA can charge “worst case murder” then have a jury change the charges on their own down to “worst case negligent manslaughter”. I’m pretty sure murder is tied in to intent. The truth is you all wouldn’t even remember this post Rodeo drunk driving tragedy if the girls were killed while riding IN the car during a wreck.
Actually, the jury can do just that. The judge is typically required to instruct the jury on all “lesser-included offenses” supported by the evidence, and may also instruct on “lesser-related offenses.” In the case of murder, these categories usually include several different varieties of manslaughter.
So a jury that hangs or acquits on murder can still convict of manslaughter or DUI causing great bodily injury.
I looked at your calcrim 520 and it says that gross vehicular manslaughter while intox is not a lesser included offense of murder.
Them I’m sure you read my comment carefully enough to also see that there are both lesser included and lesser related offenses.
As it happens, PC 191.5(a) is a lesser related offense for murder. (People v. Alvarez (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 781.) Thus, the prosecutor may ask the judge to instruct the jury on it.
Experience? Simply having more years of it has always been overrated—and certainly seems to be the case here. That her campaign leans on it so heavily reflects a shallowness of thought, an irrelevant argument for addressing a dynamic set of challenges that our county faces.
Here are much better metrics: solid performance, demonstrated excellence in judgment, integrity, toughness with fairness and respect, problems solved (not excuses presented), a clear sense of what created current situations AND the vision to find the best way forward, the breadth and depth of meaningful experience.
Using that scale, for me, Mr. Kamada is the clear choice. It seems that Ms. Eads’s experience is 20 years of…. what? Now she has enough experience to campaign in Fleming’s shadow?
From what I seen and read, Mr. Kamada’s experience has given him perspectives, training and relationships that will allow him to shift priorities toward more efficient and effective prosecutions, to work with other offices and organizations to tackle entrenched problems with a broader mindset (like he did with prosecution of environmental crimes at bad-actor weed grows), to stand up and be forthright when discussing cases and their outcomes, to listen to and support the deputy DAs. In a word — to lead.
Here’s how Mr. Kamada described his own experience when asked why he left Fleming’s office (as did several other Deputy DAs): https://lostcoastoutpost.com/elections/question/339/
You only know what you know, but there is so much more.
Stacey is a true prosecutor- she’s served the community for 20 years…. We’ve already done the thing where we put a defense attorney in as DA and our county has suffered for it. All the judges are already former defense attorneys …. Make the DA a defense attorney and see how bad things really get
Spot on!
The District Attorney in Mendocino County worked as a prosecutor and a defense attorney before getting elected. If you want to compare statistics over the last eight years, I’d put his office’s against Humboldt’s any day of the week.
But you might have a hard time doing that. His statistics are available on his website. Good luck finding Humboldt’s.
“One other tremendous challenge is to maintain an office of ethical prosecutors. I think we have a well-staffed office of qualified prosecutors.” This confuses me. Is she throwing some attorneys down for ethics? Have there been unethical attorneys in the DA’s office recently? It shouldn’t be a challenge to retain ethical attorneys – if they are unethical kick them to the curb and, if it’s appropriate, prosecute them. Can someone help me understand that quote?
When asked about Kamada referencing a “string of acquittals last fall” she responded about stats from 2022. That’s a non-answer answer.
She said she hoped to release information on “the majority of cases that go to trial”. I’m curious how many trials the office does in a year, and why basic information on every trial can’t be released to the people to whom the office is accountable.
She’s running on experience – Maggie Flemings experience. She owes her ADA job to Maggie and I wonder if there’s going to be a part-time job in her office for a recently former DA? With her “experience” I’d like to hear more about real concrete plans on what she’ll do with the office – everything she says in the article is really vague, and her website doesn’t help. She seems to be in lockstep with Maggie and from where I stand the last 8 years have not been impressive. “The community is being very well served by the office and I want that service to continue.” If that’s the standpoint she has I’m not interested.
she has been a prosecutor for 20 years. We’ve already had a DA tht was a defense attorney … our community suffered… the judges all act like defense attorneys… if the other guy who left the office to become a defense attorney gets put in… it’s going to be bad again.
OK Trolls and Commenters, Listen up! Don’t speculate or pontificate. Just go attend the Candidate Forum at the Mattole Grange, Tuesday April 5th, 7-9pm Ask the real questions to the actual candidates and not their supporters or surrogates. Listen to the answers and don’t let anyone off the hook if you think they need poking.
There is going to be a debate in petrolia really is that right need to know please ?
yes-what more do you need to know? Mattole Grange, April 5th, 7pm – midway between Honeydew and Petrolia
How does the Asst. DA not knowing what is going on in her own office?
12/7/21: Steven Johnson– assault with a deadly weapon – AQUITTAL
12/28/21: William German–assault with a deadly weapon – AQUITTAL
12/29/21: R. Ludford & M. Carson –robbery– AQUITTAL
1/3/22: Fatu Tuitasi — D.U.I. – JUDGE DISMISSED FOR D.A.’s VIOLATION OF DEFENDANT RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL
2/25/22: David Dues — AQUITTED OF MOST SERIOUS CHARGE (the defense attorney told the jury Dues was guilty of the other charges. In other words, the resources used for the trial were unnecessary.)
March-2022 Thomas Grzmyski – HUNG JURY with 9 of 12 jurors voting not guilty.
Are you the opposing candidate for the office or just a supporter?
Jury. Jury. Jury. Judge. Jury. Jury. I’m sure you’ve always showed up for your jury summons, right? Or is this an argument for plea deals, since going to trial obviously means you could lose?
Jury, jury, jury – you’re making the opposite point of the one you’re trying to make. You’re blaming the jury when it’s the responsibility of the People to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt before a jury of your peers, which apparently isn’t happening. Taking a case to trial by jury shouldn’t be a role of the dice because you hope the jury will go your way. THOSE are the cases where a plea deal might be appropriate.
Jury trials cost oodles of money and resources that you and I pay for – they are relatively rare and should be for cases where the DA’s office is darned sure they’ve got a winning case but the defendant is sticking to their innocence. Sometimes the defendant, in the face of overwhelming evidence, will hold out for a jury trial in the hopes that a last minute plea deal will be forthcoming, as Ryan Tanner just did. Those are the plea deals people get upset about, where the sentence most certainly does NOT fit the crime. Without plea deals the courts would grind to a halt very quickly but they shouldn’t be done for expediency when it means justice is not served.
Please don’t elect a defense attorney as our DA … not only is he a defense attorney but he doesn’t have the qualifications
As a prosecutor, Adrian tried and won a number of serious cases, including at least one murder. Additionally, he was named the statewide prosecutor of the year by the California Department of Fish & Game. How exactly is he not qualified?
I’m ok with the status quo, just don’t vote in a Chesa Boudin type DA here please.
Seems that Mr. Acosta omitted a fact or two from his resume. The State Bar of California lists MICHAEL PHILLIP ACOSTA #200443 as an active member, having been admitted on 1/15/1999. He has been suspended or inactive several times and his listing contains the following notice: * CONSUMER ALERT. This attorney has been charged with a felony.* Further investigation reveals that Mr. Acosta was arrested on 2/4/2020 on charges of POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES FOR SALES AND OWN, OPERATE, MAINTAIN KNOWN DRUG HOUSE. I was not able to locate any follow-up data.
He may not be the best candidate.