As the sheriff of San Mateo County, I am dedicated to protecting public safety and the privacy of our residents. In response to a recent opinion article on automated license plate reader (ALPR) technology, I wanted to provide our county’s residents with the facts about the technology and how the data is used, shared and retained by law enforcement.California law enforcement agencies are required to have and post ALPR usage and privacy policies to ensure that the collection, use, maintenance, sharing and dissemination of the information is consistent with respect for individuals’ privacy and civil liberties.Law enforcement agencies use ALPR technology to automate manual processes that help identify stolen vehicles, vehicles used by wanted suspects, vehicles used by registered sex offenders, locating missing persons and, more importantly, to investigate criminal activity more efficiently. ALPR technology takes photos of license plates in public view and runs the scanned images through a list of plates sought by law enforcement. The system collects the photo of the vehicle, license plate number and the location data. The system does not collect personal identifying information, such as birth dates, names or criminal history. My office’s ALPR data is retained for a maximum of one year unless the information is from an ALPR that has been deployed within an area wherein the local government has requested a shorter retention period.Our data is not shared with unvetted third-party organizations. Only law enforcement personnel with a need and right to know the information may have access to the data. On the topic of ALPR data sharing and immigration enforcement, we do not share any ALPR data with “ICE to track undocumented immigrants, who have committed no offense other than trying to make a life for themselves in California without documentation,” as stated in the guest perspective “Why license plate privacy matters” authored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, in the April 7 edition of the Daily Journal. ALPR databases in California may not be accessed for the sole purpose of immigration enforcement as required by the California Values Act. Misuse of data by law enforcement personnel may be cause for administrative, civil and criminal penalties. Currently, Senate Bill 210 seeks to limit the retention of ALPR records to 24 hours. This would not improve privacy, but it would limit our ability to investigate violent crimes, serial criminal activity and any other crime that takes more than 24 hours to identify suspects, locate witnesses and locate victims. If the bill were passed into law, it would reduce or eliminate our ability to solve some of our most serious criminal offenses. In one example of the use of ALPR data, a suspect in Daly City exposed himself as he attempted to grab a 12-year-old female victim, who was fortunately able to escape the assault. The victim provided Daly City Police Department with a description of the suspect and his vehicle. After reviewing thousands of ALPR images, they found a match. The system was then used to locate the vehicle in San Francisco. The suspect was ultimately arrested in San Francisco for the assault on the child and for being in violation his sex offender registration. Under SB 210, the evidence that led to the identification and arrest of the suspect would have been destroyed before investigators had the opportunity to review the images.In another example, a robbery occurred at a shopping center in the city of San Mateo and witnesses provided San Mateo Police Department with the suspects’ license plate number. The car was registered in Madera, California. Historical ALPR records provided information that the vehicle had been parked multiple times in Redwood City at the same location. Redwood City police responded to the vehicle’s historical parking location and found the car with the suspects inside. San Mateo police transported the victim to the location in Redwood City, where the suspects were positively identified, and the stolen property was recovered. Historical ALPR data quickly located suspects that had no fear of harming the public and brought them to justice. Under SB 210, the historical ALPR data would have been destroyed and law enforcement would have been looking for suspects 150 miles away.I am deeply committed to public safety and the protection of privacy. I want the public to know that historical ALPR data helps us to focus our limited resources to solve crimes and save lives. I also wanted to clear up any misunderstanding regarding how we use this invaluable law enforcement tool in our community, while protecting privacy. Please visit our website to learn more about our ALPR policy and how we serve our community with pride, commitment, integrity, compassion and innovation.Carlos Bolanos is the San Mateo County sheriff.
Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos’ Opinion Piece above was sent to the San Mateo Daily Journal he chose not to publish it on the Sherif’s Office Website.
Some Residents of San Mateo County know that Carlos G. Bolanos was illegally appointed to the position of Sheriff on July 12, 2016 by the Supervisors of San Mateo County. It was not on the Agenda , Supervisor Don Horsley who was asked to recuse himself from that issue because his son is employed by the Sheriff’s Office lead the appointment through.
It’s telling that Sheriff Bolanos uses a minor female sexual assault victim as an example of why ALPR are great.
In one example of the use of ALPR data, a suspect in Daly City exposed himself as he attempted to grab a 12-year-old female victim, who was fortunately able to escape the assault. When on April 21, 2007 Carlos Bolanos was Detained in Las Vegas during the FBI Sting “Operation Dollhouse” He was caught inside the single family residence located at 3474 Eldon Street where a minor female was the victim of Human Trafficking of Sex Slaves.
So just go it’s Free. This event should be Video Live Streamed and then put on YouTube for the residents to view later.
Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos has personal knowledge of Human Trafficking of underaged Sex Slaves. Operation Dollhouse April 21, 2007, 3474 Eldon Street, Las Vegas Nevada. He was DETAINED as a customer. He is perfect to give the opening statement.
Please join us as the San Mateo County Human Trafficking Program hosts a public presentation at the City of San Mateo City Council Chambers. The presentation will include remarks by Sheriff Carlos Bolanos, Human Trafficking Program Coordinator John Vanek, and Human Trafficking Advocacy Coordinator Pamela Estes.
The evening will include a brief history of the response to human trafficking in California and San Mateo County, the current goals of the Human Trafficking Program, a question and answer period, and will also highlight anti-trafficking efforts by other County and private organizations.
A reasonable person would think that Criminal Charges would be filed against anyone or any group of people including Law Enforcement Employees if they caused a Homicide.
On December 31, 2018 San Mateo County Coroner’s Office determined Chinedu Okobi’s Death was a Homicide. “HOMICIDE PROTOCOL” 36-year old male involved in a physical altercation with San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies. Note: CSO Joseph Gonzales was also involved he is not a Deputy.
There were Six San Mateo County Sheriff Employees not Five. It’s irresponsible and against policy for Parking Enforcement Officer (Meter-Maid) to participate in the takedown and Homicide of Chinedu Okobi. Everybody in Law Enforcement knows that. CSO Joseph Gonzales is a civilian.
Nicole Basurto, A very good and concerned Citizen, Witness not found by Sheriff Office. She called in.“Thought it was odd the Deputies did not try to arrest Decedent Okobi when he was on the ground.”She was fairly certain that he died at the scene.” “A male deputy hit Okobi 3-4 times with a closed fist, seemed directed to his head.”
San Mateo County Deputy Coroner Heather Diaz #21 “I have determined the manner of Death to be Homicide.” December 31, 2018
San Mateo County Sheriff IT Technician Johnson Hang was unable to download Deputy Wang & Sergeant Weidner’s MAVVideo from patrol cars at the crime scene. Why?
Menlo Park Police Officer Joshua Russell unable to download his witness interviews he tried twice, Vie-Vu software owned by Axon.
San Mateo County Criminalist II Anthony Delmonico: District Attorney’s office requesting the Forensic Investigation of an “In-Custody Death.”
Caption in D.A.’s video at the 7:22 mark “ A deputy attempts to subdue Okobi with Pepper Spray, but mistakenly hits his fellow deputies and Sergeant.” Steve Wagstaffe does not identify the sprayer as Deputy Wang, Why? His Expert Jeffrey Martin says it was Deputy Wang. There is only one Deputy it could be and that is Wang. There is one other possibility and that might be why Wagstaffe chose not to identify Wang as the sprayer of Pepper Spray. “At the t 7:18 mark Civilian CSO Joseph Gonzales’s right hand can clearly be seen unholstering and discharging pepper spray.” He then puts it back in his belt and backs away.
Sergeant Weidner calls it a Crime Scene at 11:31 mark. Why is arresting a suspect a Crime Scene? It’s not, but killing an unarmed civilian who committed no crime is.
Sergeant Weidner 13:26 Mark on cellphone “Dude’s alive that’s all you need to know, We’re good.”
Sergeant Weidner 10/03/2018says Okobi was Pepper Sprayed changes story. Why?
14:35 mark says: “He’s been tasered several times and Peppered Sprayed.”
15:03 mark says: “ He’s been tased twice and Pepper Sprayed.”
Weidner Statement to Jamie Draper on 10/04/2018 prepared 10/12/2018
“He was told later it was Deputy Wang who deployed the pepper spray at that point in the struggle; however he did not see him do it.” Sergeant Weidner speculated the pepper spray was possibly directed upward at the subject’s face while he was in a somewhat prone position on the ground which caused the spray to miss the subject completely and instead strike Deputy Watt, Deputy Lorenzatti and Sergeant Weidner.
D.J. Wozniak President of the Deputy Sheriff Association, the Union calls Sgt. Weiner at the Crime Scene audio goes silent. 22:10 mark. Why is he calling Weidner?
Deputy De Martini to Jamie Draper (Sincere report)
“He said he felt a Pulse but said due to the fact he had just been struggling with Okobi he was no longer certain if he felt Okobi’s pulse or his own.”
Also said “ I kind of raised up his head a little bit.”
Deputy Watt to Jamie Draper (Sincere report.)
“Said he was speaking to Decedent Okobi, telling him to relax and breath, But he did not recall Okobi ever saying anything in response.
March 1, 2019 San Mateo County District Attorney held a Press Conference.
The members of the Public were not included.
As you watch this Presentation, remember Steve Wagstaffe knows it was a Homicide. See when he finally acknowledges it at 47:30 mark.
8:20 mark Steve Wagstaffe tells the reporters that the “Cause of Death was Cardiac Arrest.”
47:30 mark, KQED Reporter Julie Small asked “Do you know the manner of death?” Wagstaffe says “The Coroner of this County Labeled it a Homicide.” He went on to say Homicide occurring during interaction with that individual.”
Had Reporter Julie Small of KQED not ask that question Steve Wagstaffe was not going to mention Homicide
I, Michael G. Stogner Co-owner of San Mateo County News.Com asked Steve Wagstaffe @ 37:39 mark.
“After Mr. Okobi stopped breathing, You mentioned in your presentation somebody said get him in a seated position, can you identify which deputy said that?
Wagstaffe said, “It was Sgt Weidner, “He actually uses the words Positional Aphysixation watch for that, But he was breathing and he had a pulse.”
Q. By putting him in a seated position, Did his head not go forward and stop his breathing?” Note: Seated Position @ 10:27 mark
Wagstaffe said “It did not.””The belief was Not, that it did not occur.” “Because they continued to check for the breathing.” check head position at 10:27 mark it did go forward Mr. Wagstaffe.
Wagstaffe said, “But he was breathing and he had a pulse at the time.”“He actual uttered some words.” No Caption at time with words allegedly uttered
Wagstaffe said, “It was a couple of minutes, several minutes after he was turned over to the AMR people.” “Deputies are out of the picture then it’s over to the medical people.”
The video does not support Steve Wagstaffe’s statement.
Video shows AMR #37 Suzanne Holman @17:55 mark giving Sternum Rub, Checking for a Pulse, and tilting head back. If a Reasonable Person takes the meaning of several minutes to mean 3 minutes that would take you to the 20:55 mark.
Wagstaffe said, He was still breathing when the Sheriff Deputies turned him over to the ARM people.” Question, What time was Okobi turned over to the AMR people? Question, Who from the FOUR AMR people is District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe talking about? Here are the AMR people, Suzanne Holman #37, Forrest Uhland #37, Patrick Pham #94 & Ferdinand Retanubun #94
According to Daly City Police Officer Joshua McQuade who interviewed S. Holman on 10/04/2018
AMR #37 Suzanne Holman “She said she did not touch the decedent.”
AMR #37: Forrest Uhland “Did not render any medical aid to decedent Okobi personally.”
AMR #94 Ferdinand Retanubun said “His unit was assigned to treat the injured deputy who was bleeding from the face (Deputy Wang)
AMR #94 Partick Pham said he was assigned to attend to two (2) Sheriff’s Deputies whom he described as an Asian deputy with abrasions to his face, (Deputy Joshua Wang) and a bald deputy who had been exposed to pepper spray (Deputy Bryan Watt).
Wagstaffe said, “You can hear the AMR people say to him, Check the pulse make sure he is still breathing.” That sentence makes no sense at all. A Reasonable Person would have to ask, Who is Wagstaffe calling Him? He can’t be talking about Chinedu Okobi, He has been dead since 9:10 mark.
Wagstaffe said, “You don’t see them taking out their nightsticks.” -5:27 mark
Deputy Wang & Deputy Watt both brought out their Batons. In the DA’s Video at the 10:57 Mark you will see Deputy DeMartini Tampering with Evidence by picking up a Taser and Extended Baton and putting them in CSO’s Sheriff Pick Up Truck.
Real Estate Investor Clyde Berg Supports Silicon Valley Journalism & Media Projects
Handshake Deal Brings Investigative Reporting to Silicon Valley’s Family Courts
CUPERTINO, CA—In a signature handshake deal, driven in part by Santa Clara County’s District Attorney Jeff Rosen’s recent refusal to prosecute another rape case, California real estate investor Clyde Berg has lent support to Bassi Productions for a collaborative project that strives to infuse substantial funding and investment to journalism, local investigative reporting and production projects that seek to bring media attention to Silicon Valley’s most shocking divorce and custody cases.
Historically, the wealth of Clyde Berg, and his activist billionaire brother Carl Berg, has attracted some of Silicon Valley’s most nefarious criminals and scam artists, yet Clyde Berg contends what attorney Bradford Baugh did while representing his former wife in a divorce case was the most elaborate legal scam of all.
As part of an alleged scam, Bradford Baugh partnered with fellow divorce lawyer Sharon Roper, who drafted a bogus post-nuptial agreement that was later determined to have been forged a year before Berg’s wife filed for divorce and made false allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence. Had Berg not challenged the forged agreement and false sexual assault claims during a divorce and related civil case, Ellena may have succeeded in fraudulently obtaining $10 million dollars from Berg’s estate. Ultimately, Clyde was exonerated of all charges and obtained a rarely issued formal “finding of factual innocence”, meaning the crimes Ellena had alleged, and garnered media attention from, never happened, and Clyde, at 73 years of age, should never have been criminally prosecuted based on false claims.
Susan Bassi, a local publisher and court watchdog who experienced her own seven-year divorce case in Santa Clara County, met Clyde Berg on social media after she had facilitated bringing national media attention to the domestic violence and custody case involving Kendra Scott and former San Francisco 49er Ray McDonald. Bassi was especially struck by Berg’s compassion to believe women like Kendra and Neha Rastogi, a former Apple manager who suffered years of abuse at the hands of her powerful immigrant CEO husband, Abhishek Gattani during their 10-year marriage.
Bassi and Berg are united in their criticism of DA Jeff Rosen. Bassi has publicly argued that Rosen has failed victims and wasted taxpayer money by maliciously prosecuting men like Berg, while giving men including McDonald and Gattani a free pass.
For the past five years, Bassi has been pushing local and national news outlets to cover family court cases, where court files are fraught with horror stories that include shocking details involving domestic violence, tax evasion, sexual assault, child abuse, rape, and fraud , all of which are typically ignored by law enforcement agencies and judges.
Mainstream media outlets historically have steered clear of investigating divorce and family court scandals, as it can be virtually impossible to sort out the “he said, she said” allegations that characterize these cases. The Berg-Bassi collaboration will seek to provide support for local reporting and production projects with added support requested from the 49ers, the Oakland A’s as well as tech and social media companies including; Apple, Google, 23andMe, Yahoo, LinkedIn, Oracle, Facebook, and Netflix where employees, investors and founders have been personally impacted by unethical private and government lawyers seeking to misuse the courts and incite conflict in families for profit.
“We live in Silicon Valley where stories arising from family courts should fill local newspapers and provide production content to an area quickly becoming known as Hollywood North. Silicon Valley has the money, drive and technology to support journalism and investigative reporting to watchdog elected officials and court systems. Justice is never served when the media isn’t watching, ” Bassi stated as the collaborative project was announced.
Berg’s support, combined with the support of other tech and social media companies, will allow Bassi Productions to direct funding to journalism projects, social media storytelling and non-profit organizations committed to social justice and bringing much needed transparency to California’s family courts and law enforcement agencies dealing with intimate partner violence, sexual assault and false claims made during divorce and custody cases.
To share a family court story, apply for grants, or to assist in project funding and support, contact: Bassiproductions.com, P.O. Box 2220 Los Gatos, CA 95031, or (831) 320-6421.
The above statement made at 1:41 minute mark in video. At the 11:00 mark they arrest the citizen journalist. This was at the Metro Press Conference.
This is the same Las Vegas Metro Police that did this to Jody L. Williams door at 9:30PM October 12, 2018. Claiming they just wanted to ask her a couple of questions. It’s also the same LVMPD that told Mark DePaula that they had nothing to do with the April 21, 2007 Operation Dollhouse Sting by the FBI which Detained/Transported UnderSheriff Carlos G. Bolanos according to Sheriff Deputy Heinz Puschendorf former President of the DSA.
When you see this door, think about Who and What, Jody L. Williams knows.
Dennis Hof R.I.P. & Antonio Pastini R.I.P.
Jody Loren Williams was charged in San Mateo County August 8, 2018 18SM009489
The entire case has been sealed. Why, it’s a Misdemeanor?
DMV under scrutiny in voting glitch
State leaders will assess whether registration errors changed November election results.
By John Myers
SACRAMENTO — Faced with evidence that some voter registration forms weren’t properly filed by California’s Department of Motor Vehicles, state officials will now investigate whether any votes were wrongly rejected and whether the final results in any state or local races should be reconsidered.
Secretary of State Alex Padilla and leaders of the agency that oversees the DMV agreed on Monday to settle a federal lawsuit brought by advocacy groups including the League of Women Voters of California and the American Civil Liberties Union. The settlement, in part, states that Padilla’s office will “take steps to ensure that every vote is counted” if ballots were rejected and will provide “guidance to elections officials in the relevant jurisdiction(s) on how to count the affected ballots and, if appropriate, recertify election results.”
On Dec. 14, DMV officials revealed that staff members had not transmitted voter registration files for 589 people whose applications or updated applications were filled out before the close of registration for the Nov. 6 statewide election. At the time, state officials could not confirm whether any of those voters had been turned away on election day, or if any had cast last-minute provisional ballots that were rejected in the final tally.
Monday’s settlement raises the possibility that a full investigation of the delayed voter registration documents could reveal races in which the outcome might have changed had those voters been allowed to participate.
State officials now have 60 days to complete an investigation into the identity of those voters and why DMV staff members failed to transmit the files in a timely fashion.
The error was the latest in a series of mishaps revealed in the first six months of operation for California’s new automated “motor voter” program, under which DMV customers are registered to vote unless they decline.
“I am committed to working with new leadership at DMV and the new administration to ensure integrity of the motor voter program and accuracy of the data,” Padilla said in a statement Monday night. “This settlement continues to move those efforts forward.”
Padilla’s office said on Tuesday that a preliminary investigation had not found any instances in which voter registration delays would have changed the outcome of a race.
The deadline to register for November’s election was Oct. 22. The records in question either came in before that deadline, or included documents signed and dated before that date. A Dec. 14 letter to Padilla from Jean Shiomoto, who was then DMV director, said the registration records weren’t submitted “due to a misunderstanding on the part of the department, for which we take responsibility.”
Shiomoto retired from state government at the end of 2018. Gov. Gavin Newsom has yet to appoint a new permanent director.
“We continue to actively work with our stakeholders to ensure full transparency for the California motor voter program,” Melissa Figueroa, deputy secretary for communications at the California State Transportation Agency, said in a statement Monday. “As an agency, we are committed to getting this right.”
The settlement, filed Monday in a San Francisco federal court, said that DMV staffers failed to transmit voter registration documents in a timely fashion beginning Oct. 12 and that all documents were held back for the three weeks following election day.
Several other problems were reported just days after state officials launched the DMV’s automated voter registration system in late April.
Those included multiple registration forms sent to counties for the same voter , flawed registrations for 23,000 DMV customers and a limited number of non-U.S. citizens — permanent green-card residents — mistakenly added to the voter rolls.
The agreement to investigate why DMV officials didn’t promptly submit hundreds of voter registration forms “establishes concrete steps that California will take to investigate and improve the DMV voter registration system,” said Melissa Breach, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California.
San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy has stopped/paused/delayed this policy from going into effect Feb. 1, 2019. May 1, 2019 is the date it will go into effect unless it is rescinded.
I’ll give just a couple of examples of why this is a terrible policy. San Mateo County’s last election had a tax measure W pass in the last couple of days by about 500 votes with more than 270,000 ballots cast. Several elected officials made public statements including Audit/Recall the elections office and officer. That is pretty unusual, it will be important to go back years to find all communications between the elected officials, county counsel attorneys, Supervisors, Assemblymen, Wordcrafters who communicated about placing Measure W on the ballot in the first place, using public monies to promote it etc.
San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office used as a weapon, falsely charging people: Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez criminal case is a perfect example, you will recall Steve Wagstaffe told the world he smuggled a cellphone and drugs to a gang member in jail. That was a lie from day one,
I said falsely charging people: Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas should be considered. Her case is sealed why? 2007 she was in Las Vegas when Operation Dollhouse netted Carlos G. Bolanos at a single family home which had Human Trafficked Sex Slaves including a minor.
San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office Not charging people: Chinedu V. Okobi Murdered by 5 SMCSO Deputies October 3, 2018.
This has felt like one of those runaway train movies. Simply to find out Who put this on the County’s Website, Why was it put on and more importantly How to stop/pause it.
Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.
J. E-mail Retention
Email messages are temporary communications and the email system (with the exception of archived email subfolders as set forth below) is not intended to be used as a means of records storage. To the extent that email messages which are generated or received through the County’ s computer systems constitute business records to be retained pursuant to the County’ s (or a department’s) records retention policy, such email messages shall be retained as set forth below. Email messages that do not otherwise serve a business purpose (including, but not limited to, draft communications, administrative communications, etc.) shall be routinely discarded. For that reason, each workforce member who uses the County email system has the same responsibility for their email messages as they do for any document they obtain in the course of their official duties and must decide which communications should be retained for business o legal reasons and which should be discarded. If a workforce member has any questions regarding if an email should be retained as a business record, he or she should seek guidance from his/her supervisor and/or department head who may consult with legal counsel as necessary.
Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.
Email messages that constitute records to be retained for business or legal reasons may be saved in excess of ninety (90) days in any of the following ways: (1) saved in Rich Text Format (RTF) or Portable Document Format (PDF) and then transferred to electronic filing systems or other media for long-term storage in accordance with the department’s regular filing and storage procedures; (2) affirmatively “dragged and dropped” or “cut and pasted” into email subfolders created by the user (the user must select the particular retention period that applies to any created subfolders (i.e. one year, two years, ten years, indefinitely, etc.)); or (3) printed in hard copy and filed or stored as appropriate. Any email subfolders created by the user within Microsoft Exchange will, along with the user’s in- box including any migrated mail, count toward the user’s 100GB mailbox space limitation as outlined in Section E of this policy.
Workforce members should seek guidance from their department heads to determine the specific time requirements applicable to records and electronic correspondence generated, received and/or maintained by their department in accordance with their department’s records retention policy. Workforce members are strongly encouraged to review the email content of subfolders on a regular basis and to delete any content for which retention is not required.
Regardless of countywide or departmental records retention requirements, email and other electronic correspondence pertaining to a threatened or actual legal action must be retained until the litigation is concluded. It is the responsibility of the department involved, or County Counsel, to notify ISO in writing, of the need for the hold on electronic communications.
The use or creation of local personal archive files (such as Outlook.pst files) is strictly prohibited and may not be configured on County equipment.
December 7, 2018 San Mateo County Superior Court Hon. Judge Raymond Swope Courtroom 8A. 9:00AM
Defendants: Cox, Christopher, Does 1-50, Facebook Inc., Lessin, Samuel, Olivan, Javier, Sukhar, Ilya, Zuckerberg, Mark, The Washington Post
Six4Three Attorneys: Godkin, David S, Kruzer, James E., Gross, Stuart G.
Facebook Attorneys: Miller Laura E., Kim, Catherine Y, Metha, Sonal N., Lerner, Joshua H
Washington Post Attorney: Carolan, Duffy
Yesterday I drove 90 miles be in the courtroom to observe. Many of you know I have been a Private Victim’s Advocate in San Mateo County for the last 19 years. I am very interested in the lobbying aspect and Influence peddling of the Tech companies with local governments, example Judges, District Attorneys, Local Sheriff Offices, Local Law Enforcement agencies, County Supervisors etc. What are the tech capabilities with respect to data, like hacking the California DMV computer system. I’m currently interested in keeping Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas alive. She was recently criminally charged in San Mateo County for a misdemeanor all records are SEALED. Is it possible that a friend of FB could influence the criminal charges being filed of a civilian? That is why I was there yesterday.
Hon Judge Raymond Swope, informed the people in the courtroom that it is very common for him to sign protective orders, and seal orders. That is when I realized he might not have a clue what he sealed. He did acknowledge that at least 250 pages are now in the public domain in Europe House of Commons.
Expedited Discovery: FB Attorneys claimed they don’t know what information Ted Kramer disclosed. They know what was sealed don’t they? They claim “We need to know and most importantly the Court needs to know. “How do we get to the bottom of this.”
That is a great question, in order to answer that you would need to identify what THIS is.
Hon. Judge Judge Raymond Swope was doing the work of FB attorneys when he got stopped. He tried to get attorney David S. Godkin to answer a question that violated “Attorney Client Privilege.” That is when I decided to leave, this case was getting bigger and causing more questions to be asked not less. like watching an atomic mushroom cloud grow. I have to give FB credit they not only show up with enough attorneys to fill a Mini Van they also had a Public Relations pretty girl to ask me in the hall if I was Media and do I have any questions for her about what I just observed. I answered I am the media, I’m San Mateo County News, and no I have no questions.