One of those subjects was “Audit SMCC and Pay for the Edais Family Legal Fees.”
Why would Mark De Paula a San Mateo County resident make that suggestion?
He’s talking about this case 21-CIV-04737 | MUSTAFA EDAIS, et al vs. ROBERT FAUCRAULT, et al
He’s requesting an Audit of John Nibbelin, David Silberman and Brian Kulich at the SMCC.
Does anybody know or remember that Mark De Paula placed himself on the ballot of the June 2022 election at the very last moment as a Write-In Candidate for Coroner? Why would he do that when it was Impossible for him to when?
He did it because he had just heard about Munir Edais very suspicious death in his Daly City Apartment sometime between January 19-21, 2020. He said if he was Elected he would turn over all of the data the Coroner’s Office had on the Munir Edais case. He felt that was the least he could do as the Coroner of San Mateo County.
Oversight of the San Mateo County Counsel’s Office, What a Great Idea?
Rishi Kumar was the only politician that had the fortitude to not only stand up for me when the ridiculous accusations were made against me, but he actually showed up in the court room to demand the charges be dropped. If he’s willing to go that far to help a stranger in a far-off state, he’s going to work even harder for you, in yours. I believe in Rishi, and you should too. Mark Racop, licensed 1966 Batmobile replica seller and builder.
I hope this is helpful in your campaign.
To the Batmobile
Mark Racop, Owner Fiberglass Freaks
Did any other Elected Official or Candidate for any office bother to make a simple phone call to Mark Racop to express his/her outrage as to the Abuse of Power by San Mateo County Employees?
Your request (attached) has been forwarded to me for response. I have some questions regarding the scope of your request, but I am hoping they may turn out to be academic and not require resolution based on what I write below.
I received a similar request to yours (prior to yours) that has been narrowed down to:
Emails to or from each of the five Supervisors and Mike Callagy in the last three months that contain the terms: “Racop”, “Logansport”, “batmobile” or “Anagnostou”.
That requestor is also interested in emails between Steve Wagstaffe and Mike Callagy or the Board. Those will also be provided if they exist. The requestor was also interested in all emails to or from the Sheriff with those terms and I previously conducted an equivalent search and didn’t find any.
Because that Public Records Act request came to me first and underlaps with yours, I am going to work on that one first and then provide you with the same documents I provide that requestor. My hope is that, that search will provide you what you are seeking and/or help us work together to design any subsequent searches. So my proposal is that I do that and then you let me know after you have reviewed that material if you are seeking additional searches. Does that work?
I would observe that although they will be captured by my search, the other requestor is not interested in emails from members of the Public expressing their views of the case. If YOU WANT those emails I need to know NOW so I can flag them when I am conducting my review?
I will observe that communications with the County Attorney’s Office that exist (if any) would likely be exempt under Section 6254(k) of the Government Code and the attorney-client privilege as well as the work product doctrine. Further any emails with the District Attorney that reflect the investigation itself would be exempt under Section 6254(f). Both categories would be withheld from any production.
This is a civil, not a criminal matter, Everybody and their mother knows this.
We already know what did happen, the main question now is why is this case still ACTIVE?
22-SF-008723-A | The People of the State of California vs. MARK RACOP
001 PC532(a)-FEL-Obtaining Money, Labor Or Property By False Pretenses 532(a) Felony 08/01/2020
002 PC484B-FEL-Diversion Of Construction Funds 484B Felony 08/01/2020
I will be there in person because Mark Racop has to fly out from Indiana to say two words, Not Guilty in PERSON in San Mateo County County because a Judge has ordered him to appear in person. He is not allowed to appear on ZOOM for this arraignment hearing. Remember he lives and works in Indiana.
Some of you might have heard of this case since ABC 7 Investigative Reporter Dan Noyes broke the story of the July 19, 2022 Search Warrant being served on Mark Racop at his place of business in Indiana by a four man TEAM of San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office finest. The plan was to arrest Mark Racop and bring him all the way back to San Mateo County to TEACH HIM and others a lesson about the power of the Sheriff’s Office, District Attorney’s Office, Judges, County Counsel and the Supervisors of San Mateo County.
Mark Racop’s case has received worldwide attention because of the Batmobile replica that his company Fiberglass Freaks makes by hand.
The majority of the 22,000 comments made from the 10M VIEWS in 2 months have been similar.
Here are just 2 recent comments:
It’s hard to believe that the Sheriff double down on his stupid actions with a stupid statement that he would ask the same thing of investigators whenever a “Potential Crime” came to his attention. You don’t issue search and arrest warrants for potential crimes, you investigate and come up with some basic evidence to support what your buddy told you. How did a judge get conned into signing these warrants? Did the Sheriff use his friendship with the Judge to influence the warrants? Was the whole story disclosed to the judge? Assuming there was a contract, the purchaser was in breach of contract when he failed to make a timely payment. The consequence of the missed payment was not losing his money or his Batmobile, but merely losing his position in the queue. This is a civil, not a criminal matter.
The sad thing is this is probably the tip of the iceberg when it comes to this sheriff’s corruption. Given that county sheriffs are primarily responsible for property seizures and evictions, there should be an investigation to see if the sheriff misused his authority on behalf of his realtor friend. If so, this story instantly becomes something much bigger and something that should lead to prison sentences for both the sheriff and the realtor.
The Batmobile case has shinned a light on San Mateo County Government when no other case I’m aware of has done. The great news is nobody was Murdered or Executed by the Sheriff’s Office Employees this time.
This behavior is more the norm in San Mateo County, just look at the ret. Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez case and the Edais Family vs. Coroner Robert Foucralt case as current examples.
Please check back for updates as to the Status of this case and the Friday In-person hearing, I hope to see you there.
We are seeing the Rishi Kumar lawn signs. Since he is challenging Anna Eshoo for the 2nd straight general election, I decided to look into this candidate for Congress, after winning the June primary against six candidates. I recently went to his campaign kick-off event. Turns out he’s a mechanical engineer, tech executive, and a 2nd term Saratoga Councilmember who was elected with the highest votes in 64 years of his city. Why is Rishi doing so well against Anna Eshoo, at 79 years old, a 30 year incumbent with 48 years in public service, when she had routinely dominated her elections by 72%? The answer soon became obvious. He is not a career politician, but has pragmatic ideas to solve everyday problems. And he fights for the people. Watching the “Pass the Torch” video playing on Rishi Kumar’s home page—the consistent words that were used to describe Rishi—Energy, Getting Things Done, Integrity, People-Centric agenda. Looking at the polling results page, I find it interesting that Eshoo’s primary election percentage is almost always the same as her general election. Her June primary vote tally was only 48%, a big drop from 72%.
Rishi is not running for Congress to perpetuate the status quo. Far from it. He wants to apply his tech savvy to better serve the constituents in his district, which includes Silicon Valley. Eshoo was first elected to Congress in 1992, before the internet was a thing. She is part of the system that takes care of their own, receiving campaign money from Pharma lobbyists and defense weapons manufacturers. She never needed to run a real campaign or spend campaign money in the past, but she has spent $1.14 million in the recent June primary election to garner her career low 48%. In Rishi, she finally has a real challenger. The downward trend has continued, now at a mere 35% voter support based on polling conducted by Rishi Kumar’s team and Rishi her only November opponent with no Republicans on the ballot.
Rishi has outworked her, he and his team have knocked on some 200,000 doors, listening to residents from San Jose to Pacifica. Eshoo hasn’t stepped foot in some of these cities and towns for a long time, preferring to run her tele-conference calls for decades. She now finds herself in a position against a tenacious challenger—one she has never faced before.
Rishi is an elected leader and community activist who has a track record of getting things done, reducing burglaries by 50% in Saratoga, defeating several San Jose Water Company rate hikes, challenging PG&E’s gutting of California’s solar program, stopped a road repair tax, and is a good steward of the environment, both in the South Bay and the Coast. He is a supporter of Medicare for All and legislating Pro-Choice. He rejects special interest money and influence. He has a track record of fighting for seniors.
This November the choice is between a professional politician whose main accomplishment is longevity with few bills introduced and passed by Eshoo, or a dynamic, tech savvy candidate who is not part of the political machine, but rather a genuine force for change who is truly a representative of the people. His passion and activist roots are what we need. It’s time to pass the torch.
While Boston Mass has had the “Winter Hill Gang” and New York “the Five Families”, what should we call the boutique public corruption family of San Mateo County? Or does it deserve such a largesse label? Should members refer to one another, to distinguish themselves from the general public, as “friends of ours”? I know, in at least one instance, members had been referred to as “Those Who Matter”. But are there any others distinguishing terms members should use, to identify one another, such as “made man/woman”?
I submit, these things are important, in order for both residents & outsiders alike to fully appreciate both the scale and depth of what has taken root in San Mateo County. It is also necessary to recognize boundaries and expectations (expected conduct), when interacting with members & associates of the described group. You wouldn’t want to inadvertently run afoul of it and individual members, lest you suffer consequences.
How does one ask for a favor from this group? What is expected, in return?
Can one obtain insurance from it, in order to avoid problems? At what cost?
And, when so insured, can one expect favorable outcomes? How far do such outcomes extend-law enforcement, litigation/prosecutions, judicial decisions, etc.?
In order to be a successful enterprise, the group needs to clearly, either explicitly or implicitly, communicate these things. Or has it already done so, either by act or omission? Is the Batmobile Raid & Prosecution not just such an example?
ABC7 Investigative Reporter Dan Noyes did an excellent job, in bringing to light the Batmobile Raid and corruption involved, but he did not drill down into the obvious, that Sheriff Bolanos’ favor for Atherton Resident/Relator Sam Anagnostou was not possible, without District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe and his staff.
DA Wagstaffe was not only a witting participant, in the matter, he was an essential enabler! None of the search warrant affidavits and the arrest warrant request involved could have been presented to a judge, without first being reviewed and approved by DA Wagstaffe’s office. Furthermore, it was DA Wagstaffe’s Office which collaborated in the investigation and actually crafted & filed the criminal complaint, in the case!
The questions reporter Dan Noyes did not ask Wagstaffe, ones essential to obtain the truth of the matter, are what did he (Wagstaffe) know of the Batmobile investigation, when did he know it, what communications/discussions had he had with Sheriff Bolanos about the matter, when had such discussions occurred, and what communications had his office had with prosecutors, in Cass County, Indiana, and when?
DA Wagstaffe is known to be a hands-on manager, a person deeply involved in the day-to-day operations of his office, meaning for him to say he was unaware of the Batmobile Raid & Case is just not credible. One only has to look at who, at his office, is involved (executive staff members MarieMcLaughlin and Sean Gallagher, an Assistant and Chief District Attorney, respectively, versus line workers) to see DA Wagstaffe’s DNA & fingerprints, are all over the body of evidence.
Such as his having previously been detained by the FBI and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police, at a seedy human trafficking site, one with indentured sex slaves to include a minor & drugs, in Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada April 21, 2007 Operation Dollhouse.
In fact, Wagstaffe had actually consoled Bolanos, following his having been caught there. So, again, for DA Wagstaffe to portray himself as having been anything other than a willing participant (principal) in the Batmobile Investigation & Raid is just not believable.
This is the way things are done, in San Mateo County, and if you’re not a person that matters, forget about it
How many times has the (CRP) been activated since its creation in 2008?
Instead of Supervisor President Don Horsley and the 4 other Supervisors opening up who knows how many Looking Into/Report Back, The Attorney General Rob Bonta The Sheriff’s Office & The District Attorney’s Office sort of Investigate something request, and the hiring of a retired Judge Winifred Y. Smith at $650.00 per hour with a $75,000 contract to do Who Knows What.
San Mateo County Government, Just make the Affidavit PUBLIC.
The residents should ask, Who in the H–L, Hired Andrew Armando as a Captain at BPD.
I’m sure whoever hired him knew that and they didn’t care.
San Mateo County News.com has been writing about the San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez Criminal case for 8 years now. I’ve said many times that SMCSO Detective Andrew Armando is one of a group of Law Enforcement Officers who committed acts against Deputy Juan P. Lopez.
Civil Rights Attorney Tony Serra has filed documents with the court in San Mateo County in the Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez case NF-433910 stating that Andrew Armando has committed PERJURY to obtain a Search Warrant.
A simple Google Search by whoever is responsible for the hire would have showed that.
Congratulations Belmont, you now have a Captain on your Police Department who can not TESTIFY in any cases.
The timing of this hire is perfect more the 5,000,000 views and 21,000 comments on the San Mateo County Public Corruption cases thanks to the Batmobile Case Involving SMC Sheriff’s Office. San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office, San Mateo County Counsel’s Office, The 5 San Mateo County Supervisors and some Judges. About a month after San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos has his own Criminal Defense Attorney of course paid for by SMC TAXPAYERS.
Thanks goes out to ABC 7 I-TEAM Investigative Reporter Dan Noyes for Breaking the Abuse of Authority/Power and Public Corruption in San Mateo County and putting the Spotlight on SMC.
As many of my readers know I have said San Mateo County Courts should be CLOSED until the 5 Supervisors of San Mateo County can assure the Public of Fair and Honest Hearings. The Supervisors have REFUSED to do that they have ZERO interest in doing that. The results are predictable.
The Criminal Case against San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez is just 1 of the many cases I have reported on for 8 years now. Notice there are three case numbers, Why?
NF433910A | The People of the State of California vs. JUAN PABLO LOPEZ
15-SF-001819-E | The People of the State of California vs. JUAN PABLO LOPEZ
SF395377F | The People of the State of California vs. JUAN PABLO LOPEZ
Does anybody remember this?
The Criminal Charges against Juan P. Lopez a San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy were FALSE.
Let that FACT sink in for a few minutes.
San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Joseph Scott did not file for re-election. WHY?
Attorney Tony Serra said he Committed Perjury, I wonder if that had anything to do with it?
Attorney Tony Serra said San Mateo County Sheriff Office Detective Andrew Armando Committed Perjury.
If Tony Serra was wrong he would have been criminally charged and lost his License to Practice Law.
The question I have for all of the RESIDENTS of San Mateo County is, WHY are you OK with your Government Officials and the Judicial Branch Committing Felonies against a San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy.
If they can do it to a Sheriff Deputy, take a wild guess who else they can do it to, anytime they want.
San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Joseph Scott made the order that Juan P. Lopez’s case could NOT be observed on ZOOM right after he (Judge Scott) was accused of PERJURY.
Friday 9:00 AM Courtroom 2G IN PERSON ONLY
09/16/2022 Status Conference Judicial Officer Scott, Joseph C. Hearing Time 09:00 AM Comment Status of Jury Selection/proceeding to trial