- 18 -
fearful of not acceding to his will; respondent portrays Mr.
Johnson as forcing Lancaster into feigning threats of
condemnation so petitioners could be accorded section 1033
treatment. Respondent contends that when Mr. Johnson rejected
the Palmdale deal, "he had Lancaster exactly where he wanted."
It is from this viewpoint that respondent argues that Mr.
Johnson could not believe the threats of condemnation were likely
to be carried out because Mr. Johnson forced Lancaster to pretend
to threaten him. Furthermore, respondent contends that if
Lancaster repeatedly threatened Mr. Johnson with condemnation and
then took no action, a reasonable person would not believe the
threats.
We disagree. Lancaster and Mr. Johnson were involved in
bitter, antagonistic, contentious, and hostile negotiations.
There was a sense of mutual mistrust between Mr. Johnson and
Lancaster officials. Mr. Asturias testified as follows:
Every time Mr. Johnson tried to renegotiate the deal,
we just ratcheted down harder and harder on the terms
of the deal. I think that--I did not come up with this
idea. The idea was--came up from my boss, Mr. Dukett.
I thought it was a very good idea.
Mr. Rodio testified that he made it a point to make sure that Mr.
Johnson did not get everything that Mr. Johnson wanted. He also
testified that Mr. Johnson was "a hard negotiator" and "a
predator".
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011