By Michael G. Stogner
SMCDA Inspector Jordan Boyd is the lead investigator in the x Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez NF433910 case which is in court this morning after 6.5 years.
A Brady Officer is someone who is dishonest. The hope and goal is to have honest people in Law Enforcement everybody wants that.
In August 2014 Jordan Boyd asked Deputy Juan P. Lopez to provide him with his California Drivers License, as soon as Juan complied and gave Jordan the license he informed Juan that it was Suspended out of the Los Angeles area, he kept it and then he and others followed Juan to his car to make sure he did not drive home. Juan Lopez did not drive for the next 3 or 4 months. COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES
A reasonable person would ask How did Jordan Boyd know about Juan P. Lopez’s CDL without looking at a computer database? How many other CDL’s has Jordan Boyd removed from Law Enforcement Officers. District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe informed me that his office does not handle any DMV issues.
SMCDA Inspector Jordan Boyd has admitted under oath that he started his own Investigation of Juan P. Lopez. Why?
A reasonable person would ask, In Jordan Boyd’s entire career how many criminal investigations has he just started on his own? He would have known that his Supervisor William Massey also a Brady Officer based simply on his own actions causing COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES when he twice tried to get Juan’s girlfriend fired. That’s really not what a high ranking Law Enforcement Officer is supposed to do. That is Dishonest.
The normal way is somebody would have filed a criminal complaint with a Law Enforcement Agency, that agency would decide if it should be referred to the District Attorney’s Office for prosecution, If the D.A.’s office thought it should be investigated they would assign it to Jordan Boyd or someone in his position.
That did not happen in the Juan P. Lopez case.
San Mateo County Deputy District Attorney Kimberly Perrotti filed a 24 page Motion in Limine last week. I was struck by item 4, EXCLUDE REFERENCE TO COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES EXPERIENCED BY DEFENDANT AS A RESULT OF THE INVESTIGATION, EXECUTION OF SEARCH WARRANTS, ARREST, AND SUBSEQUENT COURT PROCEEDINGS.
The people request exclusion of any collateral consequences defendant has experienced as a result of the investigation, excution of search warrants, arrest, and subsequent court proceedings in this case. This would include but is not limited to, any employment or employability consequences; embarrassment or shame, or any other effects resulting from members of the community learning of the investigation and prosecution. Evidence of or reference to these topics is irrelevant under Evidence code 350 and should be excluded.
When you read the word defendant replace it with Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez.
I’ve always wondered how a person who has sworn an Oath to enforce the law could do just the opposite. This is not the first DDA who has continued to produce a False case in San Mateo County. I’ve written about DDA Melissa McKowen several times in the past.
San Mateo County Deputy District Attorney Kimberly Perrotti also doesn’t want the Jury to hear the words Prosecutorial Misconduct, I don’t blame her for that this case is FULL of Prosecutorial Misconduct. You wouldn’t want the Jury to be aware of it if your goal continue to cause harm.
I have had the privilege of serving on a jury in San Mateo County, I was the jury foreperson in a trial where the District Attorney charged a young Marine with a DUI case. The DDA knew she had NO EVIDENCE to prove her case but that didn’t stop her and it made No impact on her when the young Marine was found Not Guilty. I offered to meet with the DDA if she wished to find out why she lost that case. She had No interest in learning where she missed.
From that day on I always wondered how many other cases in San Mateo County are defendants Falsely Charged?
You can Listen Today at 9:00 AM Phone 1-206-279-9591 Code 631595
San Mateo County News 