Monthly Archives: February 2022

Daly City Resident David Khan in Court 2/28/2022

By Michael Stogner

Case number 21NF002249A 10:00 AM Courtroom 2A Time 10:00 AM

David Khan has been trying to get his property back and be able to bail out since he was arrested.

  • 01/06/2022 Non-case party present: Comment
    Justin Goodwin as advisory counsel to defendant
  • 01/06/2022 Arguments presented. Evidence submitted to court for ruling.
  • 01/06/2022 Motion denied. Comment
    Moving party:Defense Motion title: Motion for return of property
  • 01/06/2022 Motion Comment
    Bail motion
  • 02/03/2022 Motion for Return of Property filed Comment
    REQUEST TO RETURN PROPERTY
  • 02/03/2022 Motion to Dismiss filed Comment
    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS FOR INTEREST OF JUSTICE
  • 02/03/2022 Motion to Compel filed Comment
    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
  • 02/28/2022 Motion to Compel Judicial Officer
    Hill, Elizabeth M. Hearing Time
    10:00 AM Comment
    +Motion to dismiss+Request for return of property

Leave a comment

Filed under 21-NF-002249-A | The People of the State of California vs. DAVID KHAN , City of Daly City Manager Shawnna Maltbie, Daly City Police Chief Patrick Hensley, Daly City Police Department, David Khan of Daly City

Judyrecords.com in the News, Thank You

By Michael G. Stogner

If you have ever reported or tried to report a dishonest Attorney or Judge in California you have no doubt been in contact with the State Bar of California. If you ever just wanted to check on the record of an Attorney of Judge to see if anyone else has ever filed a complaint good luck with that.

Judyrecords has made that information available to the public and look how quick the State Bar acted.

About judyrecords

judyrecords is a 100% free nationwide search engine that lets you instantly search hundreds of millions of United States court cases and lawsuits. judyrecords has over 100x more cases than Google Scholar and 10x more cases than PACER, the official case management system of the United States federal judiciary.As of Dec 2021, judyrecords now features free full-text search of all United States patents from 1/1/1976 to 11/10/2021 — over 7.9 million patents in total.

Original Note: judyrecords was recently mentioned in this press release (2/26), which was found after this article was published. After seeing this, CA State Bar disciplinary records have already been removed from the index, including those intended to have been published as well.These records were all (confidential & non-confidential) previously publicly available at https://discipline.calbar.ca.gov (now offline). Additionally, I reached out directly to the email in the press release to address the issue and offered to help as appropriate. After checking, I have neither been attempted to be contacted directly or indirectly about this matter yet, although issue was mentioned as being discovered on the 24th. It’s possible efforts to contact have been made, but I haven’t seen any yet.Update (2/26 11:50PM CT): I also contacted web host to inform them of the issue and ask about if/what time they have received any communication about this issue.Update (2/27 1:22AM CT): Web host responded that after verification, no such issues have been reported.Update (2/27 11:30AM CT): CA State Bar updated their press release to indicate the removal of the records as noted above. Update (2/27 4:45PM CT): CA State Bar has reached out in writing to discuss the issue.Update (2/27 11:05PM CT): Accepted an invite to discuss the issue. Tentatively, the number of affected cases is less than 1,000.

Today’s LATIMES Article

Private State Bar records are posted online
The organization says it is investigating how thousands of attorney discipline documents showed up on website.
By Alejandra Reyes-Velarde
The State Bar of California is investigating a data breach after learning that a website published confidential information about 260,000 attorney discipline cases in California and other jurisdictions.
State Bar officials learned about the posted records on Feb. 24.
As of Saturday night, all the confidential information that had been published on the website judyrecords.com — which included case numbers, file dates, information about the types of cases and their statuses, respondent and complaining witnesses names — had been removed, officials said.
“We apologize to anyone who is affected by the website’s unlawful display of nonpublic data,” State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson said in a statement. “We take our obligations to protect confidential data with the utmost seriousness, and we are doing everything we can to ensure that we resolve this issue quickly and prevent any such breaches from recurring.”
Full case records were not published. Officials said they don’t know whether the published information was the result of a hacking incident. Judyrecords.com is a website that aggregates nationwide court case records.
The State Bar website allows the public to search for case information, but the information on the discipline cases posted by judyrecords .com is not supposed to be available to the public.
That information was stored in the State Bar’s Odyssey case management system, which is provided by vendor Tyler Technologies.
In accordance with the California Business and Professions Code, disciplinary investigations are confidential until formal charges are filed.
As a result of the data breach, the State Bar notified law enforcement and hired a team of information technology forensics experts to investigate. Tyler Technologies is assisting in the investigation.

Leave a comment

Filed under State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson, State Bar of California is investigating a data breach, State Bar’s Odyssey case management system, Tyler Technologies

San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, Explain This.

By Michael G. Stogner

This could have easily been avoided, Kaylan Charles Freeman was served on April 3, 2014 at the same El Granada home with an Emergency Protective Order and Notice to Appear in Court.

On April 3, 2014 at 11:25 AM San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Ceferino Gonzales served Kaylan Charles Freeman with a Temporary Restraining Order and Notice to Appear in San Mateo County Superior Court on April 17, 2014 in Honorable Judge Joseph Scott’s Courtroom.

San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Ceferino Gonzales did NOT sign the Proof of Service until after the April 17, 2014 court date had passed. Why?

SMC Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, Sheriff Sergeant Ceferino Gonzales and the FIVE Supervisors should explain to the residents of San Mateo County How did that happen?

False Sheriff’s Office Press Release

Kaylan C. Freeman is in Court Monday February 28, 2022 1:30 PM 2A Pretrial Conference.

Charges FREEMAN, KAYLAN CHARLES
  DescriptionStatuteLevelDate
001PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony05/01/2012
001PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement05/01/2012
001PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement05/01/2012
002PC207(b)-FEL-Kidnapping For Child Molesting207(b)Felony10/01/2013
002PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement10/01/2013
003PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape-Child Victim Under 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony10/01/2013
003PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement10/01/2013
003PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement10/01/2013
003PC667.61(j)(1)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes Aggravating Circumstances667.61(j)(1)Enhancement10/01/2013
003PC667.61(j)(2)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes Aggravating Circumstances667.61(j)(2)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC288(b)(1)-FEL-Forcible Lewd Act Upon Child288(b)(1)Felony10/01/2013
004PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC667.61(j)(1)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes Aggravating Circumstances667.61(j)(1)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC667.61(j)(2)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes Aggravating Circumstances667.61(j)(2)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement10/01/2013
004PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony667.5(c)Enhancement10/01/2013
005PC209(b)(1)-FEL-Kidnapping To Commit Another Crime209(b)(1)Felony01/11/2014
005PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement01/11/2014
005PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement01/11/2014
005PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony667.5(c)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony01/11/2014
006PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC667.61(l)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crime Aggravating Circumstances Victim Under 18667.61(l)Enhancement01/11/2014
006PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony01/11/2014
007PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC667.61(l)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crime Aggravating Circumstances Victim Under 18667.61(l)Enhancement01/11/2014
007PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony01/11/2014
008PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC667.61(l)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crime Aggravating Circumstances Victim Under 18667.61(l)Enhancement01/11/2014
008PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony01/11/2014
009PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC667.61(l)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crime Aggravating Circumstances Victim Under 18667.61(l)Enhancement01/11/2014
009PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement01/11/2014
010PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony06/24/2014
010PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement06/24/2014
010PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement06/24/2014
011PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony06/24/2014
011PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement06/24/2014
011PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement06/24/2014
012PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony08/01/2014
012PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement08/01/2014
012PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement08/01/2014
013PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony08/01/2014
013PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement08/01/2014
013PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement08/01/2014
014PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony09/01/2014
014PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement09/01/2014
014PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement09/01/2014
015PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony04/01/2015
015PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement04/01/2015
015PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement04/01/2015
016PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony04/01/2015
016PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement04/01/2015
016PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement04/01/2015
017PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony01/01/2014
017PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/01/2014
017PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement01/01/2014
017PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement01/01/2014
018PC261(a)(3)-FEL-Rape By Use Of Drugs261(a)(3)Felony01/01/2014
018PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement01/01/2014
019PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape261(a)(2)Felony03/18/2014
019PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement03/18/2014
019PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement03/18/2014
019PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement03/18/2014
019PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony667.5(c)Enhancement03/18/2014
020PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape261(a)(2)Felony03/18/2014
020PC784.7(a)-ENH-Offenses Committed in More Than One Jurisdiction784.7(a)Enhancement03/18/2014
020PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement03/18/2014
020PC1192.7(c)-ENH-Serious Felony1192.7(c)Enhancement03/18/2014
020PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony667.5(c)Enhancement03/18/2014
021PC261(a)(2)-FEL-Forcible Rape – Child Victim Over 14 Years261(a)(2)Felony11/01/2012
021PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement11/01/2012
021PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement11/01/2012
022PC288a(c)(2)(C)-FEL-Forcible Oral Copulation-Victim Over 14 Years288a(c)(2)(C)Felony11/01/2012
022PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement11/01/2012
022PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement11/01/2012
023PC289(a)(1)(c)-FEL-Sexual Penetration By Foreign Object-Minor Victim Over 14289(a)(1)(c)Felony11/01/2012
023PC667.61(b)/(e)-ENH-Special Allegation-Sex Crimes-Aggravated Circumstances667.61(b)-(e)Enhancement11/01/2012
023PC667.61(m)-ENH-Special Allegation – Sex Crimes – Aggravated Circumstances Victim 14 Years of Age or667.61(m)Enhancement11/01/2012
023PC801.1(b)-ENH-Ten Year Limitation for Specified Sex Offenses801.1(b)Enhancement11/01/2012

Leave a comment

Filed under 21-SF-001757-A | The People of the State of California vs. KAYLAN CHARLES FREEMAN , Candidate for Re-Election to Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, El Granada California, Hon. Judge Joseph Scott, San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMCSO PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, SMCSO Sergeant Ceferino J. Gonzales

Salinas Police Officer Jorge David Alvarado R.I.P.

By Michael G. Stogner

SPD Officer Jorge D. Alvardo R.I.P.

Salinas Police Officer Jorge David Alvarado R.I.P. was 30 years old and a 5 year veteran of the department. He was shot and killed during a traffic stop at 10:45 p.m. Friday February 25, 2022,

Location: Market Street and Griffin Street

This is a sad reminder of that no traffic stops are routine.

Thoughts and Prayers are with the Alvarado Family and the Salinas Police Department.

Leave a comment

Filed under #newsbreak, Michael G. Stogner, Newsbreakapp.com, newsbreezer.com, Salinas Mayor Kimbley Craig, Salinas Police Chief Roberto Filice, Salinas Police Officer Jorge David Alvarado R.I.P., San Mateo County News.com, SiliconValley.com, Uncategorized, Victim's Advocate

Broadmoor Police and a Ghost Employee. “They were lining their pockets for years.”

By Michael G. Stogner

This article below is from the SacBee and it’s mostly about the reporting to CalPERS. Steve Landi also called the San Mateo County Whistleblower Hotline to report this in 2017. Who in San Mateo County handled that complaint? That would be a good question for the 5 Supervisors to answer.

CalPERS double-dip audit came too late

MANNY CRISOSTOMO SPECIAL TO THE BEE

Retired police officer Steve Landi stands in front of the Broadmoor Police Department in Daly City in January. Landi complained to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System in 2016 that Police Chief David Parenti was working full time, earning thousands a month, while illegally collecting retirement benefits. A CalPERS audit team determined that Parenti was one of three police chiefs and a top commander in the department who defrauded the pension system for a decade, together collecting as much as $2 million.

BY RANDY DIAMOND

RDIAMOND@SACBEE.COM

Retired police officer Steve Landi complained to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System back in 2016 that his police chief was working full-time earning thousands a month while illegally collecting retirement benefits.

A CalPERS audit team finally arrived in May 2021. Last month, it said that, sure enough, Landi’s boss, Broodmoor Police Chief David Parenti was one of three police chiefs and a top commander in the department that defrauded the pension system for a decade, together collecting as much as $2 million.

It was one of the largest abuses of retirement benefits in years — so egregious that the local district attorney is considering criminal charges.

It also raises a question for Landi as well as Parenti’s two successors: Why did it take CalPERS so long to figure it out and take action?

“They were lining their pockets for years,” said Landi, who joined the department in 2015 after retiring from the San Francisco Police Department. “It’s corruption at its finest.”

CalPERS is a retirement system like no other in the U.S. It covers state employees but also the workers at some 3,000 municipalities, school districts, authorities and other governmental entities. More than 650,000 retirees and another 1 million or so current employees are covered by CalPERS. 

A FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE

Broadmoor was under scrutiny by CalPERS for failing to enroll some officers in the pension fund at the time, but not for the chief’s double dipping. That suggests to former insiders such as J.J. Jelinic that the CalPERS division that monitors employee enrollment issues has little coordination with another unit assigned to examine double-dipping and other violations of state retirement law.

“The right hand doesn’t know know what the left is doing,” said Jelinic, a former CalPERS investment staffer and board member 

Consider this irony: Landi said he and other police officers in Broadmoor were told by Parenti that the small 11-person department, two miles from the San Francisco line, couldn’t afford to enroll them in the CalPERS retirement program.

“He said the police department was going broke and we were encouraged to quit our jobs,” Landi said.

CALPERS RESPONSE

CalPERS officials insist they only learned or the double-dipping last year, but in 2017 they started requiring that Broadmoor enroll Landi and other members of the police force into CalPERS

Landi said in the same November 2016 email that he complained about Parenti. He also detailed how other members of the Broadmoor department were not enrolled in the retirement system.

CalPERS officials say they never received the complaint about Parenti. But they also say the membership division, which receives complaints about members not being enrolled in CalPERS is separate from the audit division, which examines issues like double-dipping — employees illegally receiving retirement benefits and working full-time.

Records show that Broadmoor repaid around $200,000 in back pension contributions to CalPERS for seven Broadmoor employees, including Landi, between 2017 and 2019, who were never enrolled in the pension’s system.

CalPERS spokeswoman Amy Morgan said a CalPERS employee not enrolling its workers in a pension system won’t necessarily automatically trigger an audit.

“The complaint was about membership enrollment issues, while the audit focused on working after retirement,” she said.

Morgan said CalPERS uses its own risk metrics, which she won’t specify, and complaints, to determine which of CalPERS 3,0000 employees to monitor. Around 240 audits are done a year. On that schedule, it would take more than 12 years for every CalPERS agency to be reviewed.

A ‘RED FLAG’ IS MISSED

Former Broadmoor Police Chief Mike Connolly, who was not charged with wrongdoing in connection with the CalPERS audit, said the back retirement payments Broadmoor was forced to make to CalPERS was a sign that there were larger problems.

“It should have been a red flag,” said Connolly, who had served as the third highest ranking police officer in the San Francisco Police Department before retiring and joining Broadmoor in 2019.

CalPERS rules prevent double-dipping at agencies that participate in the retirement program. Once retired, pensioners can only work part-time.

Broadmoor’s current chief Mark Melville is also perplexed on why an audit was not done on the police department earlier since CalPERS became aware of issues back in 2017 with employees not being enrolled in the pension system. 

“They should have done a lot of things back in 2017 that they didn’t do,” he said of CalPERS.

RESULT OF THE AUDIT

The CalPERS audit found that Parenti improperly increased his yearly pension retirement from $93,000 a year to $152,292 a year by coming out of retirement in December 2012, working for 13 months and then retiring again. Even then, the audit said Parenti was never actually retired, continuing to collect more than $6,000 in salary per two week-pay period.

The audit said while continuing to work, Parenti also received a more than $100,000 disability payment from CalPERS, which shielded his retirement income from taxes. The disability payment under state law should have ended his work career at the Broadmoor Police Department.

Parenti joined Broadmoor in 2005 after serving as an investigator for the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office. One of his assignments was providing security for the then District Attorney Kamala Harris, now the vice president.

The CalPERS audit detailed how Parenti’s predecessor, Chief Greg Love also collected worked full-time while receiving retirement benefits and also received a disability payment of more than $100,000 but continued working.

POSSIBLE CRIMINAL CHARGES

San Mateo County District Attorney Steven Wagstaffe said he has launched a criminal probe that is examining whether Parenti and Love should be charged criminally.

Broadmoor is the last police department of its kind in California. It’s formally called the Broadmoor Police District. There is no Broadmoor City Hall. The police district taxes the approximate 4,000 residents of the unincorporated area of San Mateo County, covering an area of about 1.8 square miles, to fund its approximate $2 million budget.

It is surrounded by Daly City — population 107,000 — on three sides, and Colma — population, 1,500 — on another.

Connolly was present when the audit team arrived on May 10, 2021 at Broadmoor. He was eager to provide some new information about a Broadmoor “ghost employee” who was receiving CalPERS benefits.

“They said that’s for another day, they weren’t looking at those issues,” Connolly said.

The police chief said he also tried to tell the audit team that up to another 20 former Broadmoor employees dating back two decades had worked at Broodmoor , some for as little as a few months, and might be eligible for CalPERS benefits. Connolly said audit team members said that was an issue for the another team, the membership team. 

A ‘GHOST EMPLOYEE’?

Connolly and Broadmoor’s current chief Mark Melville both say that the “ghost employee,” police officer Alan Johnson, never worked for the department, though police department records have him on the payroll from around 2003 to 2005.

Johnson had worked at the San Mateo County Sheriffs Office and other police agencies before his name started appearing on the Broadmoor payroll. 

Melville said some records are missing but it’s likely that Johnson was loaned to a federal drug task force with Broadmoor footing the bill.

Yet, he said it would be “very unusual” for a small 11-person department, the size of Broadmoor, to be loaning an officer to another police agency.

“You wouldn’t see a department that small doing that,” he said.

Johnson has been receiving a monthly CalPERS retirement benefit of $4,538.16 a month for his reported Broadmoor work and from time at two other agencies that pay CalPERS benefits, show pension system records. 

CalPERS spokeswoman Amy Morgan said CalPERS doesn’t plan a review of Johnson pension because a former Broadmoor employer, commander Ralph Cole, certified that Johnson had worked for and retired from the police agency back in 2005.

“If there is any other information that we should look at that says otherwise, please provide and we will review,” Morgan said.

Cole and Johnson were unable to be reached for comment.

The 2021 audit review came after the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office forwarded an anonymous 2021 letter to the pension plan, citing the double-dipping at the police district. CalPERS officials also said they were planning the audit because of other information, which they won’t disclose.

CalPERS officials said its membership division, which handles complaints about workers not being enrolled in the retirement system, is separate from the audit division.

It is that separation and the resulting lack of communication that concerns Jelincic, the former CalPERS board member.

Jelincic said the problem is especially troubling with CalPERS underfunded by tens of billions of dollars, and more than 2 million people dependent on the pension system for the retirement,

“How many other employers are defrauding the system?” he asked.

CalPERS officials deny and say while audits can discover errors in pay classifications and other matters affecting retirement benefits, most aren’t intentional and are resolved.

Love also continued in his chief’s job after receiving his CalPERS pension and also received a disability award of more than $100,000 but that did not stop his Broadmoor paychecks.

CalPERs General Counsel Matt Jacobs rejects the assertions that it took CalPERS too many years to do the audit of Broadmoor. 

“The claims by Broadmoor officials are like the criminals saying we should have caught them sooner,” he said in a statement. 

A VOW TO DO THINGS PROPERLY

Melville who became Broadmoor police chief on Dec. 14, had worked for several California police agencies and was retired receiving CalPERS benefits.

He said he came out of retirement to fully comply with California law while working at Broadmoor and plans to make sure that everything is done properly at the police department.

“Broadmoor was mismanaged in the past,” he said 

He said he also welcomes a late December CalPERS request for the payroll records of all current 11 employees saying the police department wants to follow all pension system rules.

Randy Diamond: 916-321-1145

Video of retired Police Officer and Taxpayer Steve Landi

1 Comment

Filed under “It should have been a red flag,”, Board of Supervisors President Don Horsley, Broadmoor's Ghost employee Alan Johnson, California Public Employees’ Retirement System in 2016, CalPERS Fraud, CalPERs General Counsel Matt Jacobs, Candidate for Re-Election to Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, County of San Mateo Whistleblower Program, Criminal Probe is a Red Flag, David Canepa Candidate for Congress, Retired Broadmoor police officer Steve Landi

Candidate for Re-Election Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos

By Michael G. Stogner

Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos

San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos doesn’t like to answer simple questions. He also doesn’t like to provide the Public with information that the public has a right to know.

Yesterday I asked him to confirm the identity of one George Ismael who was booked into San Mateo County Jail on December 24, 2021. The reason I was asking was that Carlos G. Bolanos has a very bad habit of witholding the Booking Photos, Names of “Those Who Matter” who happen to get arrested from the Daily Press/News Releases. It’s as if they never got arrested.

One of the very basic jobs the Sheriff’s Office does is Book people into the jail who are arrested by any law enforcement agency in San Mateo County. They keep a daily record and of course that information belongs to the public. The reason Carlos G. Bolanos does as he pleases is because the 5 County Supervisors couldn’t care less. It’s sort of their little secret, how Government really works.

George Ismael Arrested December 24, 2021

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>

To: Carlos Bolanos, sheriffs_pio@smcgov.org

Cc: Don Horsley, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, Carole Groom, Warren Slocum

Wed, Feb 23 at 8:18 AM

Good morning Sheriff Bolanos

Can you please tell me if the George Ismael who was arrested and booked into San Mateo County Jail on December 24, 2021 is the same George Ismael who was arrested with Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez in 2014 for Smuggling 2 cellphones and Drugs to a Hells Angel Gang Member who was an Inmate in Maguire Jail?

This is another perfect example of why I recommend ALL Booking Photos be released everyday. I wouldn’t have to bother you from your important work for this Public Information.

That You

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

As it turns out this is the same George Ismael that was arrested and Charged for Smuggling 2 Cellphones and Drugs to a Hells Angel Gang Member in the San Mateo County Jail the same jail he was just booked into. Also Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos and his management TEAM probably thought it would be better to not inform the Voters that George Ismael used to work for Sheriff Bolanos as a Correctional Officer.

You might remember that San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez was Falsely Charged with the exact same crime at the same time in 2014 even though all Investigators knew there was ZERO EVIDENCE connecting him to the crime. They didn’t care they thought it was funny.

2 Comments

Filed under # SupervisorsToSupervise, #2americas, #corruptionmatters, #DrugDealBusted, #EqualJusticeMatters, 22-SF-001696-A | The People of the State of California vs. GEORGE ISMAEL, Adam Alberti Editor of Climaterwc, Board of Supervisors, Board of Supervisors President Don Horsley, San Mateo County News.com

“Worst kept secret in San Mateo County”

By Michael G. Stogner

Former Broadmoor Police Officer and Taxpayer Steve Landi

Video by SacBee

“I made notifications to the County Supervisors on their website”.

That would be the San Mateo County Whistleblower website.

How did that work out San Mateo County?

3 Comments

Filed under Broadmoor Police Chief Mark Melville, Former Broadmoor Police Chief Michael Connolly, Former Broadmoor Police Officer Steve Landi

Why would the Scott Peterson case be more important than Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez case?

By Michael G. Stogner

Remember this is NOT a San Mateo County case.

Why would any one case be more important than any other case. Why is this case more important than the George Ismael or Aldon Smith cases.

Here is what San Mateo County Superior Court is doing for this one case.

home»sc055500a

INFORMATION REGARDING THE CASE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. SCOTT LEE PETERSON, CASE SC055500A

FUTURE HEARING DATES:

Evidentiary Hearing:

Date: February 25, 2022 – March 4, 2022
Time: 10:00 a.m. – 3:45 p.m. 
Location
400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063
Hall of Justice, 2nd Floor, Courtroom 2K
Stream Audio of HearingClick to view Information (no video stream will be available)

MEDIA REQUESTS TO RECORD AUDIO/VIDEO OR FOR STILL PHOTOGRAPHY:

By order of the judge, audio and video recording of the proceedings is not permitted. In addition, recording and rebroadcasting of the audio of the proceedings is not permitted. Violation of this order of the Court is punishable as contempt pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1209.

The Court will permit the sketch artist to be present in the courtroom. The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on who/what may be sketched. 

  • Sketch Artist – Vicki Behringer (Media outlets need to contract with her individually)

The Court will permit one pool photographer to be in the courtroom. The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on who/what may be photographed.

To submit your request to be the pool photographer you must email slind@sanmateocourt.org by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday February 23, 2022. The pool photographer will be selected at random from the names received by the Court. The Court will post the pool photographer selection to the Court’s website by 12:00 p.m. (noon) on Thursday February 24, 2022. 

* The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to whether or not counsel and witnesses will have to wear a mask while speaking throughout the proceedings. 

PARKING ON FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022:

You may park your car for free in the public parking structure located at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA in any spot labeled as Jury Parking. The spots for Jury Parking are labeled with purple signs

You may park your Electronic News Gathering vans/Satellite News Gathering vans in the surface lot located at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA behind the Regional Emergency Operations Center. You may only park where the signs say ‘Contractor Parking’ or ‘Boards and Commissions’. Please note that the surface lot is only accessible from Winslow Street. 

MEDIA ACCESS TO THE FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022 HEARING:

There will be a live audio stream of the proceedings made available (link above). There will be no live video stream of the proceedings. 

There will be two seats in the jury box dedicated to the media each day of the hearing. To request a seat, you must appear outside of the entrance to the courthouse between 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. to enter your name for a seat raffle. At 9:15 a.m. each day, the Court will announce from the courthouse steps who has been selected for the two seats. Note: Members of the media may coordinate amongst themselves to rotate who sits in the seats after the selection has been made. That will be left to your discretion. If there will be any rotation throughout the day, you will need to alert Sarah Lind so that the alternative person(s) may be provided a wristband in order to enter the courtroom. 

* Members of the media may also enter the public seat raffle. 

For those in the courtroom, please note: There is no audio or video recording allowed in the courtroom.  The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on use of electronic devices to live Tweet, etc.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022 HEARING:

There will be 6-8 seats dedicated to the public each day of the hearing. To request a seat, you must appear outside of the entrance to the courthouse between 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. to enter your name for a seat raffle. At 9:15 a.m. each day, the Court will announce from the courthouse steps who has been selected for the seats. 

For those in the courtroom, please note:  There is no audio or video recording allowed in the courtroom.

ACCESS TO CASE INFORMATION ON THE COURT’S PORTAL:

The Presiding Judge issued Standing Order 21-160 that allows remote access to public case information in the matter of The People of the State of California vs. Scott Lee Peterson, Case Number SC055500A.  What this means is that you may now access through our online Odyssey Public Portal any public records that have been filed on this case.

To access the portal:

  • Start here: http://www.sanmateocourt.org/online_services/online_case_access.php
  • Accept the Disclaimer
  • Select Odyssey Portals
  • Select Odyssey Public Portal (no registration required)
  • Select Proceed to the Odyssey Public Portal
  • Select Smart Search
  • Enter the Case Number, SC055500A
  • Select Submit
  • Select the Case Number on the left; you are now in the case
  • To go directly to the documents, select Documents from the list of options on the right (see screenshot below)
  • All events and documents are in order of oldest to newest

CONTACT

For questions, please contact:
Sarah Lind, Deputy Court Executive Officer
slind@sanmateocourt.org
650-261-5690

Leave a comment

Filed under #newsbreak, #SanMateoCountyNews.com, 21-SM-014538-A | The People of the State of California vs. Aldon Jacarus Ramon Smith, 22-SF-001696-A | The People of the State of California vs. GEORGE ISMAEL, Newsbreakapp.com, People vs. Juan Pablo Lopez case NF433910A, SacBee, San Mateo County Superior Court, San Mateo County Superior Court Excutive Officer Neal Taniguchi, Scott Peterson case, SiliconValley.com, Superior Court of California San Mateo County Presiding Judge Leland Davis III

George Ismael in Court Today 9:00 AM 7A

By Michael G. Stogner

Update: 9:10 AM Next court date is set for March 22, 2022 at 2 PM

22-SF-001696-A | The People of the State of California vs. GEORGE ISMAEL

He was arrested December 24, 2021 for Felony DUI Hit & Run

San Mateo County Sheriff and Candidate for Re-Election Carlos G. Bolanos did NOT provide a Booking Photo of issue at Press/News Release. Why?

At this moment the only thing I can report is a George Ismael was arrested on December 24, 2021 and booked into San Mateo County Jail. He is out on $150,000 bond.

I can not say this is the same George Ismael that was arrested in November 2014 with Sheriff Deputy for Smuggling two Cell Phones and Drugs to a Hells Angel Gang member in the Redwood City Jail.

As everyone in San Mateo County should know by now those charges against Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez were completely FALSE.

Leave a comment

Filed under 22-SF-001696-A | The People of the State of California vs. GEORGE ISMAEL, Candidate for Re-Election to Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SF395377C | The People of the State of California vs. GEORGE ISMAEL, SMCSO should release all booking photos everyday

Aldon Smith a “Those Who Matter” case in court today.

By Michael G. Stogner

Time 2:00 PM Courtroom 7B

Case number 21SM014538A

Remember Sheriff Bolanos did not release a Booking Photo, or Press Release and his whereabouts for over 5 hours is still a mystery.

SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino DUI Arrest by RWCPD

The same thing happened when San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Lou Aquino was arrested, NO BOOKING Photo or Press Release by Sheriff Carlos Bolanos. San Mateo County News.com was the first News and Information source to report it.

Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos is now a Candidate for Re-Election in the June 7, 2022 Election.

This would be the perfect time for the Public to ask him why does he protect certain people who get arrested in San Mateo County?

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, the Defense Attorney for both of these gentleman was/is Joshua Bentley.

Leave a comment

Filed under Attorney Josh Bentley, Candidate for Re-Election to Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino, SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino Refused Field Sobriety Test., Uncategorized