Category Archives: Michelle Durand

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo – Kavanaugh Appointment.

Anna Eshoo
Eerily reminiscent of the Ford-Kavanaugh matter, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo had brought yet another allegation of sexual misconduct by an official forward, one in which republican sheriff Greg Munks and his underboss, undersheriff Carlos Bolanos, had been caught and detained by the FBI, in a human trafficking investigation -the two were found at an illegal Las Vegas (Clark County) brothel, one trafficking underaged indentured sex slaves and controlled substances -Ecstasy. They were there as customers.

At the time, Eshoo had called for the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to sanction Munks and Bolanos, but they had refused to address the matter. In fact, current San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe had gone so far as to excuse the duo’s behavior, consoling Munks, telling him it would soon be yesterday’s news, and saying he was “a man of integrity, such that it would not in any fashion affect his office’s ability to enforce the laws of the state of California”. On its face, such a comment could only be characterized as laughable, had the persons and conduct involved not been so serious. Not to mention DA Wagstaffe’s apparent dismissive attitude towards the abuse of women, by “Those Who Matter.”

MunksVegas4 copy

Munks went on to issue a press release, saying he had thought he had been going to a legitimate business, only to find out “It was not”, with Bolanos, to answer questions about the matter. A strategy which had worked, with the media/press and the board of supervisors not pursuing the matter further.

Congresswoman Eshoo is to be commended. I only hope her efforts, in the Kavanaugh matter, won’t be met with a similar fate -speaking truth to power is often an uphill battle.

By Michael G. Stogner

 

Leave a comment

Filed under #CarlosBolanos, #MeToo, #OperationDollhouse, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, Adrienne Tissier, Board of Supervisors, Chief Deputy District Attorney Karen Guidotti, Citizens Access TV, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Heinz Puschendorf, John Beiers, John Maltbie, John Ullom, Jordan Boyd, Karen Guidotti, Mark De Paula, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Please Withdraw Endorsement of Carlos Bolanos for Sheriff 2018, Prosecutorial Misconduct, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Munks, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

Few reports against police upheld, You can interchange Judges, District Attorneys,Prosecutors,CPS,Probation Officials & Those Who Matter.

 

This is a very good article, Thank You LATIMES,

My recommendation is to stop reporting privately and before you report a Corrupt San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy and the alleged crimes his has committed against his children, his ex wife, and the Court (photos to CPS and filed with the family law court), The purpose to harm the mother, First of all you would be Stupid to report this crime to San Mateo County Sheriff Office under the leadership of Carlos Bolanos. He has a history of protecting Corrupt Deputies. SMCSO Lt. Andrew Armando is a current example. So before you report to the A.G. or the Feds you must cover your bases and give the District Attorney’s Office a chance to prove that they are opposed to a Sheriff Deputy filing false documents to CPS and the Court. You would also hope they would acknowledge the obvious conflict of Interest the current girlfriend of the Deputy works for the DA’s Office. After you go twice to report the criminal acts of (your ex) the SMC Sheriff Deputy, The DA finally takes the complaint they hate that you force them to do what they have sworn an Oath to do. Don’t be surprised when they recommend that YOU take a polygraph test and you agree to it and pass with flying colors. What did that have to do with the Deputy committing Felonies you might ask? Nothing, but if the DA was more interested in attacking the single mother/victim then prosecuting the Sheriff Deputy. Now after passing that test you would hope the DA invited the SMC Sheriff Deputy to take the same polygraph test, they choose not to and closed the criminal investigation. This lack of action only emboldens the dishonest Sheriff Deputy to once again report child abuse to the Redwood City Police Department where he has several personal friends.

San Mateo County Residents can thank the entire District Attorney’s Office and Sheriff’s Office for this.

9/23/2018 LATIMES

Few reports against police upheld

Across California, complaints of officer misconduct are often rejected and inquiries kept from public view.

By James Queally

Angry that she had been falsely accused of a drug crime, Tatiana Lopez filed a complaint against a Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy who had arrested her on suspicion of possessing methamphetamine.

But when Lopez met with a sheriff’s lieutenant to discuss her accusation, he urged her to drop her complaint, she said.

After a preliminary investigation, the Sheriff’s Department ruled the deputy had done nothing wrong, without giving her any explanation.

It would take years of legal battles before a judge exonerated Lopez and a new internal investigation led the department to fire the deputy for lying about her arrest.

Lopez is one of nearly 200,000 members of the public who filed a complaint against California law enforcement officers in the last decade. Her initial complaint ended the way most did — with police rejecting it without saying why.

A Times analysis of complaint data reported to the California Department of Justice shows law enforcement agencies across the state upheld 8.4% of complaints filed by members of the public from 2008 to 2017.

In a state with some of the strictest police privacy laws in the country, those who make complaints against officers are entitled to learn little more than whether their allegations were found to be true or not. They are given no other explanation about how a final decision was reached, what was done to investigate their allegation or whether an officer was disciplined.

A bill that cleared the state Legislature last month would begin to address the issue by opening up records from internal investigations into shootings by police officers and other major force incidents, as well as cases where officers were found to have committed sexual assault or lied on duty. Gov. Jerry Brown has not said whether he will sign the measure, Senate Bill 1421.

But even if he does, records from the vast majority of internal affairs investigations would remain secret.

The Times’ analysis of complaint data found several of California’s largest police agencies sustain complaints at a lower rate than the state average, including the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department and the Los Angeles and Oakland police departments.

Police officials argue that a large number of the complaints they receive are frivolous, filed by people they have arrested or others who have an ax to grind. Some said the proliferation of body-worn cameras among California police agencies has helped disprove a larger number of allegations about interactions between police and the public.

In Los Angeles, police said the low rate of upheld complaints was due, in part, to the department’s commitment to accepting a wide array of allegations. The LAPD received 25,006 complaints from the public in the last decade, according to state records. Officials concluded there was evidence proving 1,360, about 5.4%.

“We take every single complaint on the planet,” said Josh Rubenstein, the LAPD’s chief spokesman. “When you open yourself up to that wide a spectrum, you are going to get a high number of complaints that are not legitimate.”

Cmdr. Michael Hyams, who heads the LAPD’s Internal Affairs division, said that by examining even the flimsiest of allegations, the department has proved it will heavily scrutinize its own officers. He noted there has been a dramatic drop in citizen complaints against LAPD officers. State records show the number fell by roughly 67% from 2008 to 2017.

At the Sheriff’s Department, internal investigators upheld only 69 of 15,661 complaints made by members of the public in the last decade, less than 1%, according to figures the agency reported to the state.

Nicole Nishida, a department spokeswoman, said the agency had under-reported the number of sustained complaints to the state. By the department’s own accounting, roughly 8% of all public complaints were upheld from 2004 to 2016, she said.

Peter Bibring, director of police practices for the American Civil Liberties Union of California, said that a low rate of sustained complaints does not necessarily mean a department is doing a poor job of policing itself, but the lack of information disclosed about those investigations is a significant problem.

“If their complaint is rejected, they are not told why,” he said. “That lack of transparency prevents the public from having any faith that the process is working.”

California law requires police departments to report the number of citizen complaints and the outcome to the state’s Department of Justice, but no agency audits the data to ensure the figures are accurate. A Justice Department spokeswoman said the agency is not required by law to conduct audits and hasn’t been given funding to do so. The state has gathered such data since 1981 and expanded the database to include information about racial profiling complaints in 2016.

Wayne Fisher, a former deputy attorney general in New Jersey who helped set the state’s guidelines for monitoring internal affairs complaints, said it was pointless to collect the data without checking to see whether some agencies are rejecting an abnormally large number of complaints and deserve more scrutiny.

“It acts as a pointer system to certain other areas that are screaming for analysis,” said Fisher, who now leads the Rutgers University Policing Institute.

Francine Tournour, a civilian watchdog for the Sacramento Police Department, agreed. Police departments need to be more open about their investigations into complaints about officers if they want the public to trust the results, she said.

“Part of this is customer service. Part of this is the relationship building,” she said. “If you have a process where people make complaints … and there’s no feeling that the complaint was taken seriously, you may see people stop bringing things to the department.”

In Sacramento, a city with a population of nearly 500,000, police reported only 18 complaints to the Department of Justice last year. Det. Eddie Macaulay, a department spokesman, said the agency did not include an additional 301 informal “inquiries,” a label used when department officials believe it was clear that an accusation did not amount to a violation of policy or crime. Had the department included those inquiries in its reporting to the state, its rate of sustained complaints would have plummeted.

Tournour, who heads the Sacramento Office of Public Safety Accountability, warned that handling such complaints informally can distort the history of documented allegations against individual officers — and a department as a whole.

In 2016, Jasmine Abuslin accused more than a dozen Oakland police officers of having sex with her, sometimes in exchange for information about prostitution raids. Her accusations — including that the misconduct began when she was underage — sparked a scandal that made national headlines and led to the firing and prosecution of several officers.

During her first contact with an internal affairs investigator, Abuslin said the police official seemed uninterested in her allegations.

“I felt like she wasn’t taking me seriously,” she said.

She also accused internal affairs investigators of threatening her for coming forward and of allowing her to delete text messages that could have proven her allegations.

Members of the public have filed 16,345 complaints of misconduct against Oakland police officers in the last decade, according to the state data. Only 1,073 of those complaints, roughly 6.5%, were sustained.

Oakland police did not respond to requests for comment.

In recent years, police agencies in California have had to report more details about citizen complaints and their outcomes, including how many they decided were false, involved conduct that did not amount to a policy violation or could not be proved or disproved. Last year, police agencies statewide concluded that 28% of complaints were false.

In Fresno, Chief Jerry Dyer said he has sought more thorough investigations and urged his internal affairs department to revisit investigations where it could not prove or disprove a misconduct allegation.

Fresno has one of the highest rates of sustained complaints among California’s largest cities. The department upheld 325 out of 1,332 citizen complaints in the last decade, roughly 24%, according to the state data. Last year, the agency reported it couldn’t prove or disprove less than 6% of complaints made by the public, compared with the statewide average of 25%.

The push for more conclusive results better serves the community, said Dyer, adding that he supports releasing more information about the way complaints are reviewed. The current process, which sees citizens simply receive a form letter announcing a complaint’s disposition, “raises a lot of concerns on the part of those voicing the complaint,” Dyer added, though he said he does not support making individual officer disciplinary records public.

For Lopez, the shortcomings of the internal investigation into her complaint about L.A. County sheriff’s deputies destroyed her trust in law enforcement.

The Downey woman was a college student with no criminal record in 2009 when three deputies trained their guns on her in a gas station parking lot. Deputy Francisco Enriquez alleged he found several bags of methamphetamine in his cruiser after she rode in its back seat. He said they fell out of her pocket.

Lopez’s attorney, Thomas Beck, later obtained sheriff’s radio transmissions proving Lopez was never in Enriquez’s car.

Lopez said the ordeal had a lasting effect.

Leave a comment

Filed under #CarlosBolanos, #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, 911, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Chief Deputy District Attorney Karen Guidotti, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Karen Guidotti, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Redwood City Police Department, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Domestic Violence Protocol, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, San Mateo County Superior Court, San Mateo County Supervisors, SMC, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

Did San Mateo County Adult Protective Services, Protect & Advocate Properly for Firoz Jaffer? Elder Abuse Victim.

 

October 15, 2017 3:56AM Firoz Jaffer called 911 to report an assault on him and his grandchildren by his son Zainali Jaffer. Hillsborough Police responded within minutes to the home at 1026 Lancaster Lane, Hillsborough, California. San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said Firoz Jaffer was Beaten when he tried to stop his son from sexually assaulted his 3 year old son in the back yard. Here is a description from a press release by the District Attorney’s Office about one of the Court Dates.

Peo. v. Zainali Jaffer (2-16-88), Hillsborough Police Department 664- 288.7(B)/288(B)(1)/245(A)(4)/273A(A)-Two Counts/243(B) Misdemeanor October 15, 2017; Defendant Is 29 Year Old Hillsborough Resident And Former CEO Of Mobile Advertising Company “Vungle”; At 3:56AM Sunday Morning Police Were Dispatched To Defendant’s Home In 1000 Block Of Lancaster Road In Hillsborough; They Were Met By Defendant’s Father Who Was Cut And Bleeding In Face From Being Beaten By Defendant; Father Directed Police To Backyard Where Officers Found The Naked Defendant On Top Of And Sexually Assaulting His Three Year Old Son Who Was Screaming; Officers Approached And Defendant Started Choking The Victim With His Legs; The Defendant Ignored Orders To Stop And Kept Choking The Child; Officers Had To Use Taser To Control The Defendant; The Defendant Continued To Resist The Officers And Spat At The Sergeant; The Officers Determined That Defendant Had Also Punched And Struck His One Year Old Daughter As Well As The Three Year Old Son And Beat His Father When The Father Tried To Intervene; 17-NF-012415-A (DDA Sharon K. Cho) 

-The case was set in SSF Felony Court, Dept. 9, Judge Stephanie G. Garratt, for the preliminary hearing. The defense written section 1050 motion to continue the hearing in order to conduct further investigation and preparation and based on a new attorney added to the defense was granted without prosecution objection. The case was continued to January 31, 2018 9:00 for the preliminary hearing with a 90 minute estimate. This will be the second setting of the preliminary hearing date since the initial felony arraignment on October 17, 2017. The defendant’s father failed to appear in court despite the fact he was served with a subpoena. The defense attorney represented the father returned to his home in England. At the request of the prosecution, the court issued a $25,000 bench warrant for the witness’s arrest. The defendant remains out of custody on $300,000 bail bond (posted on October 26, 2017). The defense attorney is Daniel Olmos (retained). 

My question is did APS offer and provide all the services needed for him to be safe and have an advocate to explain the legal process for example “It is Illegal for you to leave the Country after you have been served a subpoena.” You are the key witness besides the 3 police officers and the body camera videos etc.

Michael Callagy should Audit San Mateo County on this case, including CPS.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, 911, Attorney Generals Office, Board of Supervisors, Body Camera Video, Carole Groom, Chief Deputy District Attorney Karen Guidotti, Citizens Access TV, CPS, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, Don Horsley, Hillsborough Police Department, Hon Stephanie Garratt, John Beiers, John Maltbie, John Ullom, Karen Guidotti, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Patrick Clancy, Prosecutorial Misconduct, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Domestic Violence Protocol, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Superior Court, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Vungle, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer

San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe fails to Mention Motion to Dismiss the Entire Zain Jaffer case.

The Zain Jaffer case was dismissed July 2, 2018. That is a fact.

San Mateo County should Audit this case and determine if Audit of CPS imperative.

 

The decision to dismiss the entire Zain Jaffer case must have been made before this Media Update of Cases of Interest was sent out. What date was it decided to dismiss the case? What date was the motion to dismiss prepared? What date was the motion to dismiss filed with the court? The reason I ask these questions is that Zain Jaffer read a prepared statement in court written before hand by a public relations firm, so they all knew this was going to happen.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM 

TO: MEDIA MEMBERS 

FROM: STEPHEN M. WAGSTAFFE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

Media Notes For Monday, July 2, 2018 

CASES OF INTEREST IN COURT TODAY 

Peo. v. Zainali Jaffer (2-16-88), Hillsborough Police Department 664- 288.7(B)/288(B)(1)/245(A)(4)/273A(A)-Two Counts/243(B) Misdemeanor October 15, 2017; Defendant Is 29 Year Old Hillsborough Resident And Former CEO Of Mobile Advertising Company “Vungle”; At 3:56AM Sunday Morning Police Were Dispatched To Defendant’s Home In 1000 Block Of Lancaster Road In Hillsborough; They Were Met By Defendant’s Father Who Was Cut And Bleeding In Face From Being Beaten By Defendant; Father Directed Police To Backyard Where Officers Found The Naked Defendant On Top Of And Sexually Assaulting His Three Year Old Son Who Was Screaming; Officers Approached And Defendant Started Choking The Victim With His Legs; The Defendant Ignored Orders To Stop And Kept Choking The Child; Officers Had To Use Taser To Control The Defendant; The Defendant Continued To Resist The Officers And Spat At The Sergeant; The Officers Determined That Defendant Had Also Punched And Struck His One Year Old Daughter As Well As The Three Year Old Son And Beat His Father When The Father Tried To Intervene; 17-NF-012415-A (DDA Sharon K. Cho)
-The case is set at 1:30 in Dept. 9, Criminal Presiding Judge Stephanie G. Garratt, for the pretrial conference. The case is set on August 27, 2018 8:30 for jury trial. This is the third setting of the jury trial date since the superior court arraignment on February 15, 2018. The defendant is out of custody on $300,000 bail bond (posted on October 26, 2017). The defense attorney is Daniel Olmos (retained) and Patrick Clancey (retained). 

Here are the charges minus the Attempted Murder Charge the Hillsborough Police called for.

COUNT 1: PC664/PC288.7(b) (Felony) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Attempted Oral Copulation With Child 10 Years Old Or Younger in violation of PC664/PC288.7(b), a Felony, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER being a person 18 years of age or older, did attempt to engage in oral copulation with John Doe (3 years old), a child who was 10 years of age or younger. NOTICE: Conviction of this offense will require you to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. Willful failure to register is a crime. NOTICE: The above offense is a serious felony within the meaning of Penal Code Section 1192.7(c) and a violent felony within the meaning of Penal Code Section 667.5(c). 

COUNT 2: PC288(b)(1) (Felony) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Forcible Lewd Act Upon Child in violation of PC288(b)(1), a Felony, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER did willfully, unlawfully, and lewdly commit a lewd and lascivious act upon or with the body or certain parts or members thereof of John Doe (3 years old), a child under the age of fourteen years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the said defendant, ZAINALI JAFFER or the said child, by use of force, violence, duress, menace, or threat of great bodily harm. NOTICE: The above offense is a serious felony within the meaning of Penal Code Section 1192.7(c) and a violent felony within the meaning of Penal Code Section 667.5(c) NOTICE: Conviction of this offense will require you to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. Willful failure to register is a crime. NOTICE: Conviction of this offense will require the court to order you to submit to a blood test for evidence of antibodies to the probable causative agent of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). Penal Code Section 1202.1. 

COUNT 3: PC245(a)(4) (Felony) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Assault By Means Likely To Produce Great Bodily Injury in violation of PC245(a)(4), a Felony, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER did willfully and unlawfully commit an assault on Firoz Jaffer by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. 

COUNT 4: PC273A(a) (Felony) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Child Abuse in violation of PC273A(a), a Felony, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER did willfully and unlawfully, under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death, injure, cause, or permit a child, John Doe (3 years old), to suffer or to be inflicted with unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or, having the care and custody of said child, injure, cause, or permit the person or health of said child to be injured or did willfully cause or permit said child to be placed in such situation that his/her person or health was/were endangered. 

COUNT 5: PC273A(a) (Felony) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Child Abuse in violation of PC273A(a), a Felony, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER did willfully and unlawfully, under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death, injure, cause, or permit a child, Jane Doe (1 year old), to suffer or to be inflicted with unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or, having the care and custody of said child, injure, cause, or permit the person or health of said child to be injured or did willfully cause or permit said child to be placed in such situation that his/her person or health was/were endangered. 

COUNT 6: PC243(b) (Misdemeanor) 

On or about October 15, 2017, in the County of San Mateo, State of California, the crime of Battery Upon A Peace Officer in violation of PC243(b), a Misdemeanor, was committed in that ZAINALI JAFFER did willfully and unlawfully use force or violence upon the person of Peter Gould when said defendant, ZAINALI JAFFER, knew or reasonably should have known that said person was a peace officer engaged in the performance of his duties. Pursuant to Penal Code Section 1054.5(b), the People are hereby informally requesting that defendant(s) and his or her attorney provide to the People the discovery required by Penal Code Section 1054.3. This is a continuing request pursuant to the provisions of Penal Code Section 1054.7. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct except for those things stated on information and belief and those I believe to be true. 

Executed on October 17, 2017, at San Mateo County, California. 

Also here is an e-mail to reporter at the PADP where he is describing a witness from the P.H. Jan. 31, 2018

From: Steve Wagstaffe
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:01 PMTo: Emily Mibach
Subject: People v. Jaffer

Hi Emily,

Here is the description of the testimony by the instructor:

DEFENSE THEN CALLED MARTIN ROMUALDEZ, D’S JIU-JITSU INSTRUCTOR FOR 6 MTHS PRIOR TO INCIDENT, AND THEN CALLED OFC REY. MR. ROMUALDEZ TESTIFIED THAT WHAT HE OBSERVED ON THE BODY CAM FOOTAGES WAS THE DEF PERFORMING A JIU-JITSU MOVE THAT HE HAD BEEN TRAINED IN (ARM BAR/TRIANGLE). MR. ROMUALDEZ ADMITTED HOWEVER THAT IN THE NUMEROUS PRACTICE SESSIONS WHERE D AND HIS SON JOHN DOE WERE INVOLVED THAT D WAS NEVER NAKED, THAT IT DID NOT RESULT IN ANY SCREAMING ON THE PART OF JOHN DOE, THAT JOHN DOE DID NOT APPEAR TO BE IN PAIN, THAT JOHN DOE WAS NEVER INJURED OR TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL. INSTRUCTOR FURTHER ADMITTED THERE IS NO JIU-JITSU MOVE THAT INVOLVES INSERTING FINGERS INTO ONE’S ANUS OR SELF-STIMULATING IN THAT MANNER, AND THAT THE PRACTICE SESSION S WITH D AND HIS SON NEVER INVOLVED ANY KIND OF TRASH TALK OR LANGUAGE SUCH AS “PUSSY.”

San Mateo County should Audit this case and that includes Audit of CPS.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #TimesUp, Board of Supervisors, Citizens Access TV, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, Don Horsley, Hillsborough Police Department, Hon. Judge Mark Forcum, Hon. Judge Stephanie Garratt, John Beiers, John Maltbie, John Ullom, Karen Guidotti, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Palo Alto Daily Post, Patrick Clancy, Prosecutorial Misconduct, RICO, San Mateo County, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County News, SMC, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Uncategorized, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer

Mark De Paula a San Mateo County Concerned Citizen is requesting all Elected Officials to withdraw Endorsement of Carlos G. Bolanos for Sheriff 2018.

Mark De Paula

By Michael G. Stogner & Sarah Navratil

Mark De Paula is about as Good & Concerned Citizen as you can get.

In 2015 he personally went to Las Vegas and invested 3 days of his time and money to get to the truth about what really happened April 21, 2007 ending a 2 year Sting by the FBI called Operation Dollhouse where Carlos G. Bolanos was caught and detained Inside a single family residence at 3474 Eldon Street Las Vegas, Nevada as a CUSTOMER of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves which included Children.

Las Vegas Metro Police Department Spokesperson Bill Cassell and Lt. Karen Hughes both placed him inside the single family residence. For the last 11 years he has refused to discuss this subject and none of the 7 advertising businesses claiming to be newspapers have ever asked him. Q. Carlos G. Bolanos where you ever inside 3474 Eldon Street, Las Vegas Nevada on a Saturday night of April 21, 2007? Why would two law enforcement Officers who were working the Sting Operation that night say you were inside if you weren’t?

What Carlos G. Bolanos did communicate at a News Conference at 400 County Center Redwood City on April 24, 2007. He denied that he went there to pay for sex, which brings up the next question. What was your intention regarding the payment for sex in an illegal bordello?

Mark De Paula has recently received a CD-Rom titled Operation Dollhouse from the FBI after a 3 year wait. He is prepared to share this information with every single elected official who is currently endorsing Carlos G. Bolanos for Sheriff of San Mateo County 2018. He is confident they do not know the truth about that night and if the did they would withdraw their endorsements immediately. He has met and communicated with Assemblyman Kevin Mullins’ office and shared this information so far Mullins is still endorsing Bolanos. Below is photo of FBI CD-Rom that another Good and Concerned Citizen John Ullom received. Mark’s has his name on it. So that makes 2 citizens who spent the time and money to get to the truth and 7 advertising businesses who didn’t.

Lets see who is the first elected official to come to his/her senses and withdraw their endorsement.

Mr. De Paula has now gone to the Board of Supervisors’ Office and met with staff to formally request that each withdraw their endorsement after being briefed on the information that he now has from the FBI. Mr. De Paula will be speaking at the March 13,  2018 (9:00 sharp) Board of Supervisor meeting during public comment which is normally limited to 2 minutes, he has requested he have 3 minutes and that has been approved by President Dave Pine.

Mr. De Paula has also contacted the local businesses who look and act like Newspapers in SMC. They have known about him finally receiving a response from the FBI for over a month. Jon Mays of the San Mateo Daily Journal called Mark last night and expressed an interest, What took so long Mr. Mays?

Update: Mark De Paula presented his information to the Unions, Here is one response notice the Sheriff Office is not mentioned. Congratulations Mr. De Paula.

SEIU521 Endorsements 2018

Welcome to San Mateo Countythumbnail

3 Comments

Filed under #MeToo, #TimesUp, Adrienne Tissier, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Silberman, John Beiers, John Maltbie, Michelle Durand, San Mateo County, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Department, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

Questions for San Mateo County Chief Communications Officer Michelle Durand about the Violent Coup of July 12, 2016.

By Michael G. Stogner

July 1, 2016 Ms. Durand issues a NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE.

Scan

“San Mateo County Statements on Sheriff Munks’ Retirement” was the title.

At the bottom of page Please note: “The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors will discuss next steps to fill the remaining two years of Munks’ term at its regular July 12, 2016 meeting.

July 5, 2016 2:07 PM Ms. Durand emails Almanac reporter Dave Boyce and again states, “The Board of Supervisors will discuss at its July 12, 2016 how it wants to proceed”

July 5, 2016 Internal -Departmental Correspondence from County Manager’s Office and County Counsel, that’s John Maltbie and John Beiers to Honorable Board of Supervisors.

Subject : Vacancy in the Office of Sheriff

Recommendation: Make appointment or call an election. That is a Huge difference from what Michelle Durand was telling the 750,000 plus residents of San Mateo County, which was to discuss which PROCESS to choose either appointment or election process.

John Maltbie is Michelle Durand’s boss. Ms. Durand never made a correction to her July 1, 2016 Press Release but somebody deleted it from the County’s website. She also never e-mailed the reporter from the Almanac about this Huge change to mislead the public. The Sheriff is the most important Office in the County it should be voted on by the People.

Another example of filling a vacancy in SMC November 10, 2008

Inter-Departmental Correspondence from County Counsel to Hon. Board of Supervisors.

Subject : Process to Fill Vacancy On Board of Supervisors

Recommendation: Approve a process to fill the vacancy caused by Supervisor Hill’s election to the State Legislature.

Note: The 2008 Correspondence to the BOS did not include the County Manager/Clerk to the Supervisors. It clearly stated PROCESS

1 Comment

Filed under #MeToo, #TimesUp, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Silberman, Don Horsley, John Beiers, John Maltbie, Mark Church, Michelle Durand, Prosecutorial Misconduct, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Department, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

Concerned SMC residents, Please Attend  July 21, 2017 @ 2:PM Sentencing Hearing of Mathew Graves.

 

Google Prosecutorial Misconduct and my name, you will see some of my efforts to Eliminate Prosecutorial Misconduct in San Mateo County for the last 17 years. The leaders of SMC both elected and appointed have been warned, notified and asked to stop this, to date they have refused.

 

Editor,

Response to SMDJ article “Jury issues first-ever human trafficking conviction in county: Man found guilty of crimes stemming from Burlingame.”

By Anna Schuessler Daily Journal staff Feb 18, 2017

When I think about Human Trafficking of Underaged Sex Slaves in San Mateo County, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos comes to mind. He was caught and detained as a CUSTOMER inside a single family residence located at 3474 Eldon Street, Las Vegas, Nevada on April 21, 2007 around 9:20 PM by the FBI and LVMPD. There were several women in the home.

The residents of SMC all know what our District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe thinks about “Those Who Matter,” being caught as customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves. Here is his e-mail I received from a FOIA request.

Steve Wagstaffe e-mail sent 4/25/07 10:20 AM

Greg and Carlos

Just a quick word of support from me as you go through a difficult time.

To those who matter, your decades of outstanding work in law enforcement

are all that count and your integrity is not the slightest marked by the

modern media’s efforts to make a story out of a non-story. Hard as it is

to think it now, remember it will be yesterday’s news and irrelevant by

tomorrow.

My positive thoughts are out there for both of you.

Steve

Mathew Graves turned down a 10 year prison term plea bargain because he had faith in our judicial system and he knew he was not guilty of the charges the DA charged him with. He faces 30 years in prison next Friday.

Michael G. Stogner

Monterey County

Leave a comment

Filed under Board of Supervisors, California Bar Association, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Silberman, DDA Melissa McKowan, Don Horsley, John Beiers, John Maltbie, Letters to Editors, Michelle Durand, Prosecutorial Misconduct, San Mateo County, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Superior Court, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum