April 25, 2019
The Governor of California
President pro Tempore of the Senate
Speaker of the Assembly
Sacramento, California 95814
At the request of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the California State Auditor presents this audit report of the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP). CJP is the agency charged with investigating complaints about judicial misconduct and deciding whether to discipline California judges for violations of the code of judicial ethics, and our review found that CJP must address the following weaknesses:
In about one-third of the cases we reviewed, we found that CJP’s investigators did not take all reasonable steps to determine the existence or extent of alleged misconduct, such as inappropriate demeanor or improper delegation of duties to court staff. These missed steps include not speaking with all relevant witnesses, not obtaining additional evidence, and not taking a broad approach to determining misconduct in light of a pattern of allegations. Furthermore, CJP’s structure—as a single entity that both investigates alleged judicial misconduct and makes decisions about the appropriate level of discipline—results in judges facing potential discipline from a body of commissioners that is privy to unfounded allegations of misconduct. CJP also delegates responsibility for evidentiary hearings on alleged misconduct to three judges appointed by the Supreme Court of California, a practice that falls short of the voters’ intent to increase the public’s role in judicial discipline with the passage of Proposition 190 in 1994. Finally, CJP has not taken steps to hold meetings that are open to the public or to accept electronically submitted complaints, despite decades of public scrutiny about its lack of transparency and inaccessibility.
CJP’s operations and structure must change significantly to address the issues that this audit revealed. CJP can change its internal policies to address concerns about the planning and supervision of its investigations. However, changes to CJP’s structure will require an amendment to the California Constitution and CJP will need to inform the Legislature about any related funding needs as it adjusts its practices.
ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA
California State Auditor
I think most people in the world would have found the “Sealed Order” Unconscionable. It could be seen as a San Mateo County Judge, protecting a “Those Who Matter” individual or a large Employer in the County, which it did. That 4 year old case is still current next court date is April 25, 2019.
November 30, 2018 2:PM Courtroom 8A, San Mateo County, California. The Hon. Judge Raymond Swope said:
“What has happened is unconscionable,” “It shocks the conscience.” “And your conduct is not well taken by this court.”
Judge Swope ordered Mr.Kramer to hand over his laptop, cellphone and passwords to a forensic investigator and ordered Thomas Scaramellino, a member of the Six4Three legal team who was also an investor in the company, to provide his devices for document preservation.
Who is the Forensic Investigator for San Mateo County? The world should pray that it is not an employee of San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers, Sheriff Carlos Bolanos, District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe or a member of R.E.A.C.T. Taskforce.
I give the current 4 year criminal cases of Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez and the recent sealed search warrant and sealed complaint for Jody L. Williams as just two examples of why you would not want any of the above to handle the Laptop, Cellphones etc.
The New York Times, Washington Post and Associated Press contended that the documents could help answer questions of great public interest about how Facebook handled user data.
Civil Case 533328
Note to San Mateo County residents reading this, I was unable to attend yesterday’s hearing, I had 2 reporters in the courtroom, More importantly I notified 23 media and reporters first thing in the morning, letting them know this is a Big News story.
By Michael G. Stogner
San Mateo County News.co will publish every elected official and public leaders comments on Mark Zuckerberg’s NO SHOW. Here are just a fews words said in that meeting, “Misleading, False or a Lie.” “Corporate Fraud” “RICO” “Break up FaceBook”
“The Problem is Facebook”
“The problem is Facebook,” said Canadian lawmaker Charlie Angus. “We’re talking about symptoms but the problem is the unprecedented economic control of every form of social discourse and communication.”
It’s been three days now and below are the public comments so far from The Board of Supervisors and all elected officials of San Mateo County.
By Michael G. Stogner
Mark Zuckerberg refused to show up, and refused to answer questions. Why are you protecting him? also the British Parliament has the documents.
Editors note: Sealed Documents in Jody Williams case for a single misdemeanor charge.
The case against a former San Mateo County sheriff’s deputy being charged for allegedly helping to smuggle cellphones and prescription drugs into county jail was dismissed Friday after a judge ruled evidence that could have showed he did not commit the crime should have been presented to a criminal grand jury.
But District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said Judge Donald Ayoob is imposing a burden on the prosecution that the law does not require. He said prosecutors informed grand jury members of letters an inmate wrote recanting his testimony connecting Juan Pablo Lopez, 54, with a cellphone involved in the case, and were not required to present them unless the jury asked to see them. He disagreed with Judge Donald Ayoob’s ruling that prosecutors had a duty to present the letters, and said prosecutors may consider refiling the case or appealing the decision.
“We feel the judge made a very serious error in his ruling,” he said. “We will assess it the coming days.”
On Dec. 16, 2015, Lopez and two county jail correctional officers, George Ismael and Michael Del Carlo, were accused of providing cellphones and drugs to inmate Dionicio Rafael Lopez Jr., who was also indicted along with Leticia Lopez, Amanda Lopez and Roxanne Ingebretsen, according to prosecutors.
On Nov. 17, the case against Del Carlo was dismissed after Ayoob granted his motion to dismiss over strenuous prosecution objection, according to prosecutors.
Once a write-in candidate for county sheriff, Lopez is also being accused of embezzlement, perjury and election fraud based on allegations he used donations from his campaign for his own personal use and lied about his city of residence, according to prosecutors.
Lopez listed his residence as being in Redwood City but allegedly was living in Newark when he filed to run for sheriff in 2014. He is also being accused of misrepresenting his address on a real estate loan, according to prosecutors.
Lopez will next appear in court Jan. 25 to set a new jury trial date for the embezzlement, perjury and election fraud charges and is out of custody on a $170,000 bail bond, according to prosecutors.
(650) 344-5200 ext. 102
San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe has appointed Al Serrato as Chief Deputy District Attorney as of Monday, November 5, 2018.
By Michael G. Stogner