Category Archives: #MeToo

“Unqualified trust relationship with this partner.” Hon. Judge Lisa Novak

By Michael G. Stogner

CarlosG.Bolanos

Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos

In a response to the Commission on Judicial Performance .

The Commission on Judicial Performance, established in 1960, is the independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges, pursuant to article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution.

Somebody filed a complaint against Judge Novak because she notified all the Judges present at the June 20, 2017 Judges Meeting, She had made a finding that SMCSO Sergeant Michael E. Otte Perjured Himself in her courtroom.

The person or persons who filed the complaint was not concerned at all by the fact that a SMC Sheriff Sergeant would lie under oath in her court, the person and the CJP was only concerned that she informed all the Judges who attended.

She noted the close relationship between the Sheriffs Office and the Court and cited the need to have an unqualified trust relationship with this partner.

Lets look at this unqualified trust relationship with the Sheriff’s Office under the leadership of Carlos G. Bolanos.

In-Custody Homicide of Chinedu Okobi three False News Releases. Omitting 6th Sheriff Employee for starters.

San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Lou Aquino DUI arrested by RWCPD September 14, 2019 Sheriff Bolanos refuses to release the Booking Photo. Why?

San Mateo County former Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez criminal case going for more than 5 years with the sole purpose to cause harm to him mentally and financially. The public might recall the big Press Conference claiming Nobody is above the law in San Mateo County and Charging Deputy Lopez with Smuggling a Cellphone and Drugs to a Hells Angel member in Jail. Sheriff Carlos Bolanos knew there was No Evidence to support those charges.

These are just three current examples unqualified trust relationship with the Sheriff’s Office under the leadership of Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos.

An older example when Carlos G. Bolanos was Undersheriff 2010 the Brave Female Deputy reporting the 46 San Mateo County Sheriff Male Employees receiving and sharing Porn and Rape Video on County Computers.

It is my experience that Judges in San Mateo County have allowed Sheriff Employees and District Attorney Employees and County Counsel Employees to lie/file false instruments and give False Testimony on a daily basis, this is the Norm it shouldn’t be.

I say you can’t possibly manage what you don’t measure.

Lets find out exactly what happened after Hon. Judge Lisa Novak made a finding that SMCSO Sergeant Michael E. Otte Perjured Himself in her courtroom.

Commission on Judicial Performance Report

1 Comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, Board of Supervisors, Body Camera Video, Brady List, California Bar Association, California State Bar, Charles Stone, Chief Deputy District Attorney Al Serrato, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizen Journalist, Citizens Oversight Committee, City of Millbrae, Community Service Officer Joseph Gonzales, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, D.J. Wozniak, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, DDA Albert Serrato, DDA Bryan Abanto, DOJ, Don Horsley, Evidence Tampering, Felony misappropriation of public money., First Chance, Government Hiding the Obvious, Governor of California, Grand Jury, Hon Stephanie Garratt, Hon. Judge George Miriam, Hon. Judge Gerald Bushwald, Hon. Judge Jeffrey R. Finnigan, Hon. Judge Lisa Novak, Hon. Judge Mark Forcum, Hon. Judge Raymond Swope, Hon. Judge Robert Foiles, Hon. Judge Stephanie Garratt, Hon.Judge Donald Ayoob, Illegal Search of Cellphone, Jamie Draper, John Beiers, John Warren, Joseph Charles, Judicial Misconduct, Kevin Mullins, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, NAACP, Organized Crime, Outrageous Government Conduct, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, Rick Decker, Robert Fourcrault, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Lt. Andrew Armando, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, San Mateo County Sheriff Office Porn and Rape Video, Sean Gallagher, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Selective Prosecution, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMCSO Lt. Kristina Bell, SMCSO Michael E. Otte, SMCSO PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, SMCSO Sergeant Jacob Trickett, SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino, SMCSO Sgt. Irfan Zaidi, SMCSO Sgt. Jason Peardon, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office Top Two Investigators being Investigated. By Who?

By Michael G. Stogner

This might come as a surprise to the residents of San Mateo County but Attorneys file False Instruments with the Courts every single day, Would the San Mateo County Counsel’s Office do it? Sure it’s possible, lets find out. The District Attorney’s Office had 73 days to Investigate Massey and Warren, why the long delay. Who’s left in the D.A.’s office to conduct an Internal Investigation of the top two anyway?

Update: 1/10/2020 San Mateo County Counsel Attorney Joseph F. Charles appeared and his two clients D.A. Inspectors William Massey and John Warren remained outside the courtroom for several hours. They did not take the witness stand but never the less it was good to see them there. Mr. Charles asked for and got his Motion to Quash Subpoenas filed Jan. 07, 2020 SEALED. Why would he ask for that?

Another attorney (female) from San Mateo Counsel Office representing the Five Sheriff Employees who were there to testify and one unnamed Sheriff Employee involved in a Belmont “incident” while not on duty many years ago, and had nothing to do with Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez ( according to her) was there to make sure the Belmont Police report was not only not made public but that Juan Lopez’s Attorneys could not see it either. The Judge temporarily SEALED it to give the Government time to file a motion to seal.

Note: Attorney David Washington sued the City of Belmont November 13, 2014 for not providing the Police Report involving Sgt. Jason Edward Peardon, I know this because I filed the suit and personally served the City of Belmont Attorney. The PADP did a story on it the next day, the attorney claimed the suit was unnecessary and a phone could have resolved this matter. Within a couple of days the City of Belmont retained a Law Firm across the bay and Never provided the Police Report.

The Statement by San Mateo County Counsel that “Sheriff Sergeant Jason Peardon has nothing to do with the Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez.” case is Laughable, He is the Juan Lopez case. Finally the Belmont Police Report surfaces only to be SEALED.

According to a Motion to Quash Subpoenas filed Jan. 07, 2020 by Deputy Counsel Joseph F. Charles SBN 228456 in Case No. NF433910A former Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez. Mr. Lopez’s next court date is Tomorrow Jan. 09,2020 9:00AM SSF court Hon. Judge Danny Chou.

San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers Office just filed a motion Yesterday Jan. 7, 2020 to Quash Subpoenas for District Attorney’s Office Senior Inspector William Massey and Chief Inspector John Warren to testify tomorrow.

“In response to the October 28, 2019 Citizen Complaint served by Defendant Lopez, the San Mateo County District Attorney Office has commenced an Internal Investigation into  the allegations made by Defendant in his October 28, 2019 Citizen Complaint has recently commenced, is ongoing, and will not be completed until after the completion of the Defendants underlying criminal trial.” This internal investigation subsumes all of the factual issues raised in the Citizen Complaint which include events that transpired as far back as 2015. More importantly Defendant’s criminal trial is likely to reveal the names of witnesses, events, information and additional evidence directly relevant to the District Attorney Office internal investigation into alleged misconduct (and potentially criminal misconduct) allegedly engaged in by law enforcement personnel.

How do they know when x Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez’s underlying criminal trial is going to be completed?

What date was this Investigation opened and Who is conducting it?

Why wasn’t this Investigation opened several years ago when Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez filed a lawsuit with the exact same complaint?

thumbnail-2Senior Inspector John Warren, Lets hope this is on his off time.

Update 5:40 PM 1/8/2020 No response from San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers yet.

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>.   Jan 8 at 11:46 AM

To: John Beiers

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

Hello John.

I hope you had good Holidays,

I writing a story on the Investigation of San Mateo County District Attorney’s top two Investigators Massey and Warren.

Can you tell me what Date that Investigation was opened?

Also Who is conducting that Investigation.

Thank You

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers waited to respond until the Judge Sealed the Motion to Quash.

John Beiers <jbeiers@smcgov.org>. Jan 10 at 1:57 PM

To: Michael Stogner

Cc: Dave Pine, David Canepa, Don Horsley, Carole Groom,Warren Slocum and 1 more…

Michael:
I hope you also had a good holiday season.
As you may know by now, yesterday the court ordered the Citizen’s Complaint and any information related to it including the DA’s internal investigation, sealed from disclosure as a confidential record.  Therefore, the County is not at liberty to discuss the investigation or answer any questions about it because to do so would violate the court order.

Best,

John

San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe has not responded.

Michael G. Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>.   Jan 10 at 7:31 AM

To: Steve Wagstaffe

Hello Steve,

The San Mateo County Counsel has stated that your office is conducting an Investigation of Inspector Massey and Warren.

Can you confirm that?

Who is conducting that Investigation?

What date was that investigation opened?

Thank You

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

Leave a comment

Filed under #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, 911, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Brady List, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Citizen Journalist, Citizens Oversight Committee, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, D.J. Wozniak, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, DOJ, Don Horsley, Facebook, Google, Governor of California, Grand Jury, Jamie Draper, John Beiers, Juan P. Lopez, Judicial Misconduct, Kevin Mullins, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Outrageous Government Conduct, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, Rick Decker, RICO, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, San Mateo County Superior Court, Sean Gallagher, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Sheriff's Public Information Officer, SMCSO Lt. Kristina Bell, SMCSO PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino, SMCSO Sgt. Jason Peardon, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Whistleblowers

Ladera Recreation Center Swim Team Photographer Arrested. SMCSO Looking for Victims

67403688_2452356288159018_6145548371747667968_n

Randolf Randy Haldeman Swim team photographer at Ladera Recreation Center Portola Valley has been arrested July 25, 2019 and charged with sexually abusing young boys.

The alleged assaults of boys from 8 to 13 years old by Randy Haldeman, 47, occurred at the Ladera Recreation Center in Portola Valley and at the suspect’s home on the 2000 block of Camino de las Robles in Menlo Park.

Possibly as long as 30 years, according to the Sheriff’s Office.

He was arrested at his home on two counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 years old, and was booked into San Mateo County Jail. He is out on bail.

The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office encourages anyone who had contact with Haldeman or whose children had contact with him or know of someone who was victimized to contact Detective Joseph Fava at 650-363-4192 or e-mail jfava@smcgov.org or Detective Sergeant Joe Cang at 650-363-4008 or jcang@smcgov.org.

This is a serious topic Victim’s are asked to contact the Sheriff”Office. Most victim’s will not want to talk about this so support them the best you can. The Public Comments are open and all sincere comments will be posted.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #CostcoReleaseVideo, #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, Citizen Journalist, Ladera Recreation Center, Michael G. Stogner, Randolf "Randy" Haldeman, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Victim's Advocate

Deputy Sheriff’s Association President rejects Board of Supervisors oversight; vows to defend four of five Sheriff’s Office personnel involved in use of force Millbrae Death.

In an email to his members (BELOW), Deputy Sheriff’s Association President David “DJ” Wozniak was critical of Board of Supervisor oversight, the NAACP, the Black Lives Matter movement, and citizens concerned over the 2018 Millbrae use of force death of pedestrian Chinedu Okobi, at the hands of five sheriff’s deputies. In response to Deputy Wozniak’s communication, I would ask him the following:

In your email to your organization’s body, the Deputy Sheriff’s Association (DSA), you say I had hoped they [the Board of Supervisors] would simply ignore these anti police activists, they have not. How interesting you would characterize concerned citizens as “anti police activists”.

When an unarmed pedestrian is confronted by and dies at the hands of your members, sheriff’s deputies, is it anti police activism, to question whether or not what had occurred was appropriate, not an instance of the unnecessary and excessive use of force, and ask for the release of videos depicting what actually occurred? Do you and your organization believe such a call for transparency and oversight is inappropriate? It would seem so.

BOS Meeting 12/4/2018 Public Comment at 8:50 mark

And when you incredulously single out San Mateo County Supervisors Groom and Pine as having given these “activists” an audience, are you frustrated that they would dare to exercise any sort of oversight, in an incident involving the the death of a person at your member’s hands? Again, it would appear so.

In singling out these supervisors to your body, are you trying to communicate your ire and influence their conduct? In short, are you trying to sanction them? If so, I believe you have lost sight of the relationship the sheriff’s office, your membership, and the Board of Supervisors enjoy.

The Board of Supervisors have an oversight function with all County departments, their respective efficiency, missions, conduct, behavior, etc.. Though the Sheriff is the head of your department, its funding, resources, standards of conduct, and staffing levels are all subject to the control and oversight of the board.

And when you say “the decision to deploy Tasers is not made by the Board of Supervisors, it is the decision of the Sheriff” coupled with your assertion that you have had numerous conversations with Sheriff Carlos Bolanos, on the issue, are you saying he, Bolanos, is representing anything different to you?

And while we are on the subject of, what appears to be, your unfettered access to Sheriff Bolanos and conversations with him about this incident, death of pedestrian Okobi, I have to say his public presence, on this issue, is nonexistent and he appears to be ducking public scrutiny. I can’t help but remember how he ducked questions about his 2007 detention, at a residence in a seedy part of Las Vegas, by the FBI and Police, in a human trafficking investigation -one in which he had been detained, along with other patrons, at an illegal whorehouse, featuring Asian indentured sex slaves, to include a minor and a substantial cache of ecstasy drugs & cash.

True, such a strategy, ducking questions from the public and press (public scrutiny), has served him well, in the past, but he’s Sheriff now, holds the public’s trust, and more is expected of him. Or is he using you, Deputy Wozniak, as a proxy, to communicate his position, on the matter, to both the Board of Supervisors and public? I’m just asking.

I remember how then Undersheriff Bolanos and Sheriff Greg Munks had feverishly sought the support of both the Deputy Sheriff’s Association and Organization of Sheriff’s Sergeants, to publicly provide the duo with a vote of confidence, following their Las Vegas detention by the FBI. I also remember how Sheriff Munks had, concurrently, gone on an apology tour within the sheriff’s office, a mea culpa, saying words to the affect that he was sorry for his conduct and dishonor / humiliation it had subjected the organization to. Poignantly absent, on this endeavor, was Carlos Bolanos. Was this machismo, on his part, or an aversion to accountability? Just asking. And now his silence, in the Okobi incident, is both deafening and, seemingly, true to form.

Why, Deputy Wozniak, are you fearful of citizens questioning the circumstances which led to the death of a pedestrian, at the hands of your organization’s members?

Why do you feel it necessary to demonize these persons as anti police activists, painting them as part of the NAACP & Black Lives Matter movement en masse?

Why do you further characterize these citizens as the social media army of the Black Lives Matter organization and their knowing nothing about use of force issues?

Do you not see why reasonable well intentioned persons might question why an unarmed pedestrian who, when confronted by officers, ends up dead this following officers’ use of force?

Do you believe the sheriff’s office and your organization’s members are not accountable to the community which it serves and or the County Board of Supervisors?

Since you have characterized the deputies involved, in Okobi’s death, as doing nothing wrong, have pledged to defend them, and said “the DSA stands behind our members and the actions they took that day in Millbrae”, I assume you have reviewed the results of the investigation conducted by District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s Office, in coming to this position and commitment? If this is true, could you please share with us those materials, as, thus far, Steve has told us his investigation has not yet concluded. If you are relying on other materials and or what  persons involved [deputies, Supervisors, Bolanos, Wagstaffe, etc.] have told you, please share, we would welcome such insight.

And I have to ask you, Deputy Wozniak, would you concede citizens have a right to question an investigation conducted by either the Sheriff’s or District Attorney’s Office? More importantly, given a past history of demonstrated bias, on District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s part, towards Sheriff Munks and Sheriff Bolanos, do you believe he should recuse himself and his office from conducting an investigation into Okobi’s death?

To be completely transparent, shouldn’t a grand jury be convened, witnesses called, evidence presented, and a result sought -bill or no bill of indictment? Or would that be too risky, as there is no defense information presented or cross examination conducted in such a venue, and, therefore, the results entirely predicated upon what narrative the District Attorney wants to present, guilty or not guilty?

Would you acknowledge, Deputy Wozniak, that politics influence decisions made by the both the district attorney’s office and sheriff’s office, respectively? Examples would be, say, the district attorney’s decision not to file charges against Eddie DeBartolo Jr. for a rape he had allegedly committed, in Menlo Park -the case had begun at a bar, the British Banker’s Club, in Menlo Park, and ended at DeBartolo Jr.‘s Menlo Park residence.

What about other allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct involving San Mateo County employees? Wouldn’t you concede, Deputy Wozniak, politics had been a consideration, in the outcome of some of these cases? I’m just asking.

 

thumbnail-6 

DJ’s email and its content to the DSA membership:

As you all know, the District Attorney has not yet announced if he will or will not prosecute 4 of our members for the death in custody in Millbrae last October. While I’m disappointed his decision has taken so long, we are confident our members did nothing wrong  and are fully prepared to defend our members if any charges are filed. The DSA stands behind our members and the actions they took that day in Millbrae. I’m confident that if the DA’s office wanted to move forward with any charges, we would prevail in court.

While the DA’s office weighs its options, the NAACP and the National Black Lives Matter movement have taken a particular interest in the Sheriff’s Office. They have activated their base via social media and have inundated the Board of Supervisors with thousands of calls and emails asking them to remove Tasers from San Mateo County Law Enforcement.

While I had hoped they would simply ignore these anti police activists, they have not.  Unfortunately,  SupervisorPine and Groom have given these people an audienceand formed a “taser committee” where they’ll will be looking into Tasers, policies surrounding them and researching deaths related to Tasers.

This is baffling because the decision to deploy Tasers is not made by the Board of Supervisors, it is the decision of the Sheriff.

The committee plans on holding a public meeting to “discuss Tasers”. The meeting is tenatively scheduled for February 11th at 1800 hours.

Once the meeting date/ time is confirmed, I will be asking all DSA members try to attend the meeting.   I’m not asking you to speak or participate in the conversation as  I find it unlikely that any of activists attending are open to listening to anything we have to say.  We simply don’t want the entire audience to be full of anti police activists and having normal rational people in the audience will be helpful.

Here is what I have one in response to these events:

 I have had numerous conversations with Sheriff Bolanos on this issue and made it crystal clear that the DSA does not support removing Tasers from our members.   The Sheriff has has told me that he supports that decision and believes in Tasers have their place in the use of force policies of the Sheriff’s Office.

I have met with the board members individually.  I have explained how valuable Tasers are to public safety. I have explained how high in the use of force continuum Tasers are and how restrictive our policy and procedures are regarding their use.  I explained to them that the calls/emails they are receiving are not from people in San Mateo County.The people calling are part of the social media army of the Black Lives Matter organization and know nothing nothing about use of force issuesand know nothing about Tasers and their use in law enforcement and most importantly, have no idea about the events in Millbrae resulting in the death in custody.

Sheriff Bolanos has authorized me to create a “use of force” day for the County Manager, County Council and Board of Supervisors.  Working with the training unit, we will give the BOS training on Tasers and run them through various scenarios, with and without Tasers so they can see their value in public safety.

I ask that any of you who happen to have a conversation with Sheriff Bolanos, convey your appreciation for his stance on this issue and supporting the DSA.

I will obviously keep you posted on any developments with this “Taser Committee”.

My final question D.J. Wozniak, Who is conducting the Sheriff’s Office Investigation?

Here is D. J. Wozniak (Plaid shirt looking down) in the audience with a very small group of his supporters. two guys behind him staring at camera.

thumbnail-7

By Michael G. Stogner

Reuters Article on Taser Deaths

 

1 Comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, 911, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizens Oversight Committee, City of Millbrae, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Deputy Alyssa Lorenzatti, Deputy Bryan Watt, Deputy John DeMartini, Deputy Joshua Wang, Don Horsley, Grand Jury, John Beiers, Menlo Park Police Department, Michael G. Stogner, Mike Callagy, Ordinance 04430, Positional Asphyxia, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, SMCSO Sgt. Weidner, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter

SMCSO DSA President D.J. Wozniak can’t say Chinedu V. Okobi’s name.

17862588_1618867384820560_4466109734454003179_n

Chinedu Valentine Okobi

EXCESSIVE & UNNECESSARY USE OF FORCE
Chinedu V. Okobi was murdered October 3, 2018 on El Camino Real in Millbrae by 5 San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies. One of them Sgt. David Weidner not represented DSA.
thumbnail-6
He is upset that 40 residents came and spoke at the December 4, 2018 Board of Supervisor meeting and used the M word Murder.
He is upset that the Supervisors formed a Committee on Tasers to meet Feb. 11, 2019 6-8PM in the Supervisors meeting room 1st floor of the 400 County Center Building. He is not the only one upset at the Supervisors, this Committee and subject matter is not at all important to the murder of Chinedu.
EXCESSIVE & UNNECESSARY USE OF FORCE is the only topic that is important. That is what Steve Wagstaffe, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Dave Pine, Don Horsley, Warren Slocum, David Canepa are all distracting the public with the Committee dog and pony show. If this “Committee on Tasers” Charade sounds familiar it should 2008 the BOS did a similar performance.

Ethics committee in works

Elected county officials suspected of wrongdoing or unbecoming conduct can be investigated by a five-member ethics committee with the authority to recommend their removal, according to an ordinance unanimously endorsed yesterday by the Board of Supervisors.

The board created the independent citizens review panel on Tuesday after revisiting an earlier proposal by supervisors Jerry Hill and Adrienne Tissier. At its July 22 meeting, the board cautiously backed the idea but asked for some fine-tuning of language to avoid the panel embarking on what Supervisor Mark Church characterized as a “witch hunt” against officials.

The approved proposal defines “serious official misconduct” based on an existing San Bernadino ordinance and allows the board to determine an allegation is unfounded before calling together the review panel. The passed ordinance also suspends the panel’s investigation when necessary as not to conflict with any criminal proceedings.

Although having such a review panel will help the county deal with questionable situations if needed, the goal is to never have them arise, Hill said.

The ordinance, which still requires a second reading to become official, also can’t retroactively address the matter which sparked its formation — the April 2007 detention of Sheriff Greg Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos in an undercover brothel sting in Las Vegas.

The pair were in town for a law enforcement race and told police they mistakenly went to the raided home because they thought it was a legitimate massage parlor.

Neither was charged with a crime and the supervisors said they had no discipline authority. Approximately a year later, Hill revisited the issue of official oversight for elected county officials.

Hill and Tissier suggested an independent ethics committee as an alternative to less viable oversight ideas such as letting the Board of Supervisors remove fellow elected officials. Not even a county charter amendment gives the board authority to remove an elected official and the state constitution doesn’t allow the board to discipline an official to any less degree.

While the committee itself can’t take action, its independent nature removes the politics from the process and can spark into action the grand jury, which does have the authority to recommend an official’s removal.

The citizen’s review panel of individuals will include either retired judges, former county or city administrators, former grand juror foreperson, or former county counsels, city attorneys or district attorneys. Selection would be random and Brown Act — California’s open meeting law — requirements enforced.

The San Bernadino County charter — the one most often referenced as a San Mateo County template — allows a four-fifths vote of the Board of Supervisors to remove any other county officer for “flagrant or repeated neglect of duties,” “misappropriation of public property,” “violation of any law related to the performance of the official’s duties” or “willful falsification of a relevant official statement or document.”

While the ordinance has survived a legal challenge, it has never been used.

Michelle Durand can be reached by e-mail: michelle@smdailyjournal.com or by phone: (650) 344-5200 ext. 102.
Here is D.J.’s recent email to the Union members.
As you all know, the District Attorney has not yet announced if he will or will not prosecute 4 of our members for the death in custody in Millbrae last October. While I’m disappointed his decision has taken so long, we are confident our members did nothing wrong  and are fully prepared to defend our members if any charges are filed. The DSA stands behind our members and the actions they took that day in Millbrae. I’m confident that if the DA’s office wanted to move forward with any charges, we would prevail in court.
NOTE: I think every San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy knows the above statement by D.J. Wozniak sounds really good, but in reality look what D.J. has done for Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez.
While the DA’s office weighs its options, the NAACP and the National Black Lives Matter movement have taken a particular interest in the Sheriff’s Office. They have activated their base via social media and have inundated the Board of Supervisors with thousands of calls and emails asking them to remove Tasers from San Mateo County Law Enforcement.
While I had hoped they would simply ignore these anti police activists, they have not.   Unfortunately,  Supervisor Pine and Groom have given these people an audience and formed a “taser committee” where they’ll will be looking into Tasers, policies surrounding them and researching deaths related to Tasers.
This is baffling because the decision to deploy Tasers is not made by the Board of Supervisors, it is the decision of the Sheriff.
The committee plans on holding a public meeting to “discuss Tasers”. The meeting is tenatively scheduled for February 11th at 1800 hours.
Once the meeting date/ time is confirmed, I will be asking all DSA members try to attend the meeting.   I’m not asking you to speak or participate in the conversation as  I find it unlikely that any of activists attending are open to listening to anything we have to say.   We simply don’t want the entire audience to be full of anti police activists and having normal rational people in the audience will be helpful.
Here is what I have one in response to these events:
  • I have had numerous conversations with Sheriff Bolanos on this issue and made it crystal clear that the DSA does not support removing Tasers from our members.   The Sheriff has has told me that he supports that decision and believes in Tasers have their place in the use of force policies of the Sheriff’s Office.
  • I have met with the board members individually.  I have explained how valuable Tasers are to public safety. I have explained how high in the use of force continuum Tasers are and how restrictive our policy and procedures are regarding their use.    I explained to them that the calls/emails they are receiving are not from people in San Mateo County. The people calling are part of the social media army of the Black Lives Matter organization and know nothing nothing about use of force issues and know nothing about Tasers and their use in law enforcement and most importantly, have no idea about the events in Millbrae resulting in the death in custody.
  • Sheriff Bolanos has authorized me to create a “use of force” day for the County Manager, County Council and Board of Supervisors.  Working with the training unit, we will give the BOS training on Tasers and run them through various scenarios, with and without Tasers so they can see their value in public safety.
I ask that any of you who happen to have a conversation with Sheriff Bolanos, convey your appreciation for his stance on this issue and supporting the DSA.
I will obviously keep you posted on any developments with this “Taser Committee”.
By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, #TimesUp, 911, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizens Oversight Committee, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Deputy Alyssa Lorenzatti, Deputy Bryan Watt, Deputy John DeMartini, Deputy Joshua Wang, DOJ, Don Horsley, electioneering, Errol Chang R.I.P., Hanson Bridgett LLP, Mark Olbert, Michael G. Stogner, Organized Crime, Positional Asphyxia, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Regina Islas, RICO, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Sergeant David Weidner, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Yanira Serrano Garcia R.I.P.

Great News, Recalled Judge Aaron Persky is asking for donations.

He received almost $900,000 and he is asking for donations to pay for legal fees he caused. He should have resigned, when the recall was first announced to the public.

IMG_la-1544641815-e4v6og_2_1_H24MFJPG

LATIMES December 13, 2018

Recalled judge seeks donations
Aaron Perksy says he could be liable for $135,000 in legal fees after fighting ouster.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY Judge Aaron Persky was voted out of office amid outrage over his sentencing of a former Stanford student convicted of sexual assault. (Jeff Chiu Associated Press)
By Hannah Fry
The first California judge to be recalled in more than 80 years, who was ousted from office amid public outrage over a light jail sentence he handed down in a high-profile sexual assault case, is asking supporters for donations to pay off legal fees by the end of the year.
Former Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky faced widespread scrutiny that culminated in a successful recall campaign after he sentenced Brock Turner, a former Stanford University student, to six months in jail and three years’ probation for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman in 2015 behind a garbage bin on the Palo Alto campus.
Persky, who was appointed to the bench by Gov. Gray Davis in 2003, unsuccessfully fought the campaign and was booted from office by voters in June.
In a recent email with the subject line “A Final Ask,” Persky implores his supporters to donate money through his campaign committee, Retain Judge Persky, so that he can use the funds to pay $135,000 in court-ordered attorney fees incurred during his legal fight against the recall. The fees are due Dec. 31.
Persky wrote in the email that his campaign committees, which public records show raised more than $700,000, spent all of their resources fighting the recall effort.
“If my campaign committee is unable to raise the money to pay the amount ordered, I will be personally liable for any balance owed,” he wrote.
Persky waged a legal fight against the recall in 2017, arguing in Santa Clara County Superior Court that, because judges are state officers, California’s secretary of state should have overseen the petition drive to qualify the measure for the ballot instead of the county registrar.
The court rejected that argument and, after the recall election, ordered him to pay more than $163,000 in fees to the attorney representing the recall campaign. The parties later reached a settlement to reduce the bill to $135,000.
Persky wrote that he “pursued the litigation so that Superior Court judges would benefit from the same procedural protections as other state officers who face recall elections.”
Attorney James McManis, whose law firm represented Persky for free during his court battle against the recall, said it’s understandable that the former judge is trying to raise money.
McManis was critical of Michele Dauber, a Stanford law professor who is a family friend of the victim and was the public face of the recall campaign, for seeking attorney fees.
“It’s not enough she took his job away and took his pension away and left him out on the street,” McManis said. “She wanted attorneys’ fees too.”
Persky didn’t meet California Public Employees’ Retirement System requirements to receive a pension by the time he left the bench, so he was required to take a lump sum — roughly $892,000 — that he and his employer had put into his pension fund plus interest. It is not clear whether he rolled that money into another fund or cashed it out.
Dauber contends that Persky brought the legal expense on himself when he “made the bad decision to repeatedly file frivolous lawsuits and appeals with the goal of stalling and causing expense.”
“The court has concluded that he should be required to pay for that decision, and we are happy that our lawyer will be getting paid for his outstanding work in defending our constitutional rights, and those of the voters of Santa Clara County,” she said.
hannah.fry@latimes.com
Twitter: @Hannahnfry

Full disclosure I supported the recall of Hon. Judge Aaron Persky from the moment I heard about it. I feel and still do that he should have recused himself from the case at the very beginning. Judge Persky was the captain of the Stanford Lacrosse Team.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, California State Bar, Citizens Oversight Committee, Hon. Judge Aaron Persky, James McManis, Michael G. Stogner, Michele Dauber, Santa Clara County Superior Court, Silicon Valley, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate

Six4Three vs.FaceBook, Mark Zuckerberg

Update: The idea that Hon. Judge Swope would order Theadore Kramer to surrender his laptop cellphone and Passwords to San Mateo County Authorities by 8PM today is Nuts. Just look at what the Authorities are doing to Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez in his criminal case. R.E.A.C.T. Task force.

Today 2:00 PM in San Mateo County Superior Court 8A Hon. Judge V. Raymond Swope.

ALL PARTIES MUST APPEAR no telephonic appearances. That means people flying in from around the world.

 

30727422_1046328192172159_7715425602097905664_n

San Mateo County Superior Court Hon. Judge Raymond Swope.

Not really sure what is left to talk about at this time since it looks like the Sealed Documents that the Judge ordered three years ago are now in the public domain from Europe. This was a two tiered Non Discloser Protective Order, Why?

To protect a favorite San Mateo County Employer?

San Mateo County Judges, Secret and Illegal Search Warrants, San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez and Jody L. Williams, Vungle x CEO Zain Jaffer criminal cases come to mind.

Here is the court documents:

SIX4THREE v. Facebook, inc

By Michael G. Stogner

CNN Article

Note: I just went to post this on my personal FB page and for the first time in 10 years I was asked to sign in. That is pretty fast for a picture sharing social media platform.

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, California Bar Association, Carole Groom, Chris Hunter, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Grand Jury, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Jim Hartnett, Judges, Kevin Mullins, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Mark Zuckerberg, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, RICO, Rosanne Faust, SAMCEDA, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Steve Wagstaffe, Theodore Kramer, Those Who Matter, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer