Update: April 14, 2022 9:35AM Defense motion to Continue granted next court date May 3, 2022 2PM
No Booking Photo/Press Release Why?
Public Service Announcement: If you see this man Run like hell.
22-SF-004137-A | The People of the State of California vs. Raekwon Marquise Bush
Department 27 Courtroom 7B The Honorable Judge Donald J. Ayoob
He is in court today for Assaulting a woman at Fitzgerald Marine Reserve on March 28, 2022. She was sucker punched and knocked out, she was hospitalized. The video below shows him the week before in San Francisco.
Remember this is the man that nobody in San Mateo County Government thought it might be a good idea to notify the public about this man. No Booking photo, No Press Release. WHY?
INFORMATION REGARDING THE CASE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. SCOTT LEE PETERSON, CASE SC055500A
FUTURE HEARING DATES:
Evidentiary Hearing:
Date: February 25, 2022 – March 4, 2022 Time: 10:00 a.m. – 3:45 p.m. Location: 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063 Hall of Justice, 2nd Floor, Courtroom 2K Stream Audio of Hearing: Click to view Information (no video stream will be available)
MEDIA REQUESTS TO RECORD AUDIO/VIDEO OR FOR STILL PHOTOGRAPHY:
By order of the judge, audio and video recording of the proceedings is not permitted. In addition, recording and rebroadcasting of the audio of the proceedings is not permitted. Violation of this order of the Court is punishable as contempt pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1209.
The Court will permit the sketch artist to be present in the courtroom. The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on who/what may be sketched.
Sketch Artist – Vicki Behringer (Media outlets need to contract with her individually)
The Court will permit one pool photographer to be in the courtroom. The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on who/what may be photographed.
To submit your request to be the pool photographer you must email slind@sanmateocourt.org by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday February 23, 2022. The pool photographer will be selected at random from the names received by the Court. The Court will post the pool photographer selection to the Court’s website by 12:00 p.m. (noon) on Thursday February 24, 2022.
* The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to whether or not counsel and witnesses will have to wear a mask while speaking throughout the proceedings.
PARKING ON FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022:
You may park your car for free in the public parking structure located at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA in any spot labeled as Jury Parking. The spots for Jury Parking are labeled with purple signs.
You may park your Electronic News Gathering vans/Satellite News Gathering vans in the surface lot located at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA behind the Regional Emergency Operations Center. You may only park where the signs say ‘Contractor Parking’ or ‘Boards and Commissions’. Please note that the surface lot is only accessible from Winslow Street.
MEDIA ACCESS TO THE FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022 HEARING:
There will be a live audio stream of the proceedings made available (link above). There will be no live video stream of the proceedings.
There will be two seats in the jury box dedicated to the media each day of the hearing. To request a seat, you must appear outside of the entrance to the courthouse between 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. to enter your name for a seat raffle. At 9:15 a.m. each day, the Court will announce from the courthouse steps who has been selected for the two seats. Note: Members of the media may coordinate amongst themselves to rotate who sits in the seats after the selection has been made. That will be left to your discretion. If there will be any rotation throughout the day, you will need to alert Sarah Lind so that the alternative person(s) may be provided a wristband in order to enter the courtroom.
* Members of the media may also enter the public seat raffle.
For those in the courtroom, please note: There is no audio or video recording allowed in the courtroom. The Court will make an announcement at the start of session daily as to the limitations on use of electronic devices to live Tweet, etc.
PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE FEBRUARY 25, 2022 – MARCH 4, 2022 HEARING:
There will be 6-8 seats dedicated to the public each day of the hearing. To request a seat, you must appear outside of the entrance to the courthouse between 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. to enter your name for a seat raffle. At 9:15 a.m. each day, the Court will announce from the courthouse steps who has been selected for the seats.
For those in the courtroom, please note: There is no audio or video recording allowed in the courtroom.
ACCESS TO CASE INFORMATION ON THE COURT’S PORTAL:
The Presiding Judge issued Standing Order 21-160 that allows remote access to public case information in the matter of The People of the State of California vs. Scott Lee Peterson, Case Number SC055500A. What this means is that you may now access through our online Odyssey Public Portal any public records that have been filed on this case.
Zain JafferD.A. Stephen M. WagstaffeKaren Guidotti
Upadte: This Motion to Destroy has been continued to January 3, 2022
Today December 20, 2021 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2A the Hon Judge Barbara Mallach will rule on a Motion to Destroy all of the records in the People vs. Zainali Jaffer case 17NF012415A. The Public is invited to attend in person.
Who filed the Motion to Destroy all records and Body Worn Camera Video?
I call this the “Magic Case” because of the “Magic Meeting” held on June 7, 2018
Who is speaking for the two Children?
Diminished Capacity is No Excuse for Criminal Conduct
This case should be taught at every law school in the United States of America. NOT Destroyed.
This case was Very Fast from start to finish, How and Why?
Just because somebody says something is true, doesn’t mean that it is.
As it turns out a San Mateo County Resident was arrested and Criminally Charged with three Felony Sexual Assault counts Bail was $500,000 and 47 days later his case is complete all the Sexual Assault charges are dismissed. This would be a good case for an AUDIT to simply find out what really happened. Was a man falsely charged in the first place? There is No Comment from Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos about his Sheriff Investigators and their work on this case. What are their thoughts?
Sean Gallagher and Steve Wagstaffe offered Mr. Banister to reduce this case to 1 count a Misdemeanor, Why? and Why so fast?
San Mateo County Sheriff Office arrested Mr. Banister on August 31, 2021 after Investigating the Sexual Assault allegations. The Investigation started on August 2, 2021, A Judge issued a $500,000 Warrant for his arrest based on the SMCSO work product.
San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office filed the charges below on November 1, 2021, that’s 2 months after his arrest. So the District Attorney’s Office had two months to review the SMCSO Investigators work and they confirmed the three Felony sexual assault charges on an 11 year old victim.
On November 30, 2021 this offer was read in court, that is 29 days after the charges were approved and filed, What changed? What Happened?
I was not able to report what the District Attorney’s Offer was on November 30, 2021 because I was not sitting in the Courtroom. Also not in the Courtroom that morning was defendant Michael D. Banister and his defense attorney Joseph Goethals. They appeared by zoom or phone.
Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo Presiding Judge Leland Davis III cancelled the Public Access by Telephone on November 22, 2021. He has never explained Why? It can’t be because it’s safe to attend court in person now, So it must be some other really Important reason.
“The listen-only public access lines are no longer in effect; proceedings are open to the public to attend in person.“
The San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office has a Victim’s Advocate. Did the Victim’s Advocate meet with the child and did he/she agree with this offer?
Did the parents of the victim agree with the offer?
Does anybody wonder why Sexual Assault Victims don’t want to report the crimes.
Does San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office ever charge somebody with crimes they know they did not commit? Of course they do, look no further than People vs. Juan Pablo Lopez case NF433910A
Is that what happened is this case? I don’t know. Somebody reported a crime, the Sheriff’s Office Investigated and so did the District Attorney’s Office. They called the 11 year old girl a Victim.
How is it possible for these charges to be DISMISSED?
Remember a person is innocent until proven Guilty.
This Letter to the Editor was published today December 8, 2021 in the Half Moon Bay Review. Very few of the 760,000 Residents of San Mateo County have any idea that this Big Change has even occurred, Not one of the many local Newspapers have even bothered to inform their readers. It could be because they don’t have any reporters covering the Courts and none of them are even aware of this change.
Dear Editor:
San Mateo County Superior Court would have us believe this pandemic is over.
On Nov. 22, the Superior Court announced on its website that Remote Access, which enables the public to listen via telephone to courtroom proceedings, has been discontinued, effective immediately.
No explanation nor advanced notice was given. Other Bay Area counties’ Superior Courts and even the Ninth District Federal Court in San Francisco continue to provide courtroom audio via telephone.
This is a public health issue. Requiring that courtroom observers attend court proceedings in person at the 400 County Center Building in Redwood City is risky and inconvenient during this pandemic — especially so for those who reside along the coast.
Ironically, the announcement adds that Superior Court will begin to convene some court proceedings via Zoom in order to eliminate the need for court trial participants to attend hearings in person. It states, “This is to reduce the number of visits by the public to the courthouses, thereby minimizing potential infection of the public and staff.” Yet court watchers must attend in person. Sounds as if someone wants to stifle public oversight of the San Mateo County court system.
Public trials assure defendants a fair and honest playing field, and accurate reporting of court proceedings is critical to the public’s right to know. We want to trust the system, the judges, the clerks, the court reporters. We want the Remote Access telephone lines reinstated.
Evidently the Pandemic is over and Somebody in San Mateo County is inviting the public to attend Court proceedings in person in the 400 County Center Building, Redwood City, California.
I was on the Public Access phone line for 3 hours waiting to hear the court proceeding just like I have done many times this last 2 years. The phone line and code worked perfectly, other than I got disconnected about 8 times and had to re-dial which I did. At no time was there a notification that the Telephonic Public Access had been discontinued. I checked the Court case file and saw it was already Held and Completed.
Here are 10 other Counties close to San Mateo County, They still think there is a Pandemic.
Who would want to cut off the Telephonic Public Access? A more important question is WHO did cut it off? What has recently happened in San Mateo County Superior Courts that would caused this change. The only thing I can think of is recently, Hon. Judge Joseph Scott, his Court Clerk Katrina Bihl and the Court Reporter all conspired and committed Perjury in the x Sheriff Deputy Juan Pablo Lopez 7 year criminal case.
Tuesday, 5/11/2021 Time 9:00 AM: To Listen Call 1-425-650-1381 Code 425463
Defendant Juan Pablo Lopez Jury Trial Day 6 of Motions, Judge Leland Davis III, Courtroom 2H
Hon. Judge Joseph Scott has been out of the Courtroom on a Medical Emergency since April 1, 2021.
Judge Davis should have an update in the morning.
A little background I call this the San Mateo County District Attorney Supervisor of the Inspectors William Massey case. Remember back to 2014 Sheriff Deputy Juan Lopez decided to offer the residents a choice for Sheriff in 2014.
William Massey did not like that idea and contacted the Employer of Juan’s finance and told him to Fire her. He refused do it so of course William Massey contacted him again with a more forceful demand to fire her.
DDA Kimberly Perrotti doesn’t want William Massey on the witness stand, I don’t blame her.
Anyhow it’s been 6.5 years, there is more than one way to destroy a person, when the D.A. Office is used as a weapon, False Charges like the Smuggling a Cell Phone and Drugs to an inmate. What happened to those charges? You would think your D.A. shouldn’t falsely charge Who’s going to know, or Who’s going to care?
What did the DSA do for Deputy Lopez? Nothing That’s strange.
x Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez asked San Mateo County District Attorney Inspector Jordan Boyd to speak to his attorney two times during an interview on August 4, 2014. Jordan Boyd had other plans and continued the interview.
Does a Law Enforcement Officer have the same rights the rest of us do? DDA Kimberly Perrotti doesn’t think so, she argued to Hon. Judge Joseph Scott that Juan Lopez was an experienced Law Enforcement Officer and knew that he could just get up and walk out of the little room in the D.A.’ s office anytime he felt like it.
On August 4, 2014 Deputy Lopez was escorted from his work station on the 4th floor to Inspector Jordan Boyd’s interview room by Ed Barberini and Craig Denton of the Sheriff’s Office. There was a Plan between the Sheriff’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office. The reason I say this is on August 1, 2014 a Judge in San Mateo County signed 2 Search Warrants for both of Juan’s properties and Jordan Boyd claimed to have them at that moment and informed Juan that teams were at both properties as they speak.
That information by itself would be pretty disturbing to most of us.
The Search Warrants mentioned Mortgage and Insurance fraud issues. It means prior to August 1, 2014 the Sheriff and District Attorney have reason to believe a San Mateo County Sheriff Employee might have provided a lender with the box for owner occupied checked, when that might not have been accurate. Does that ever happen in the lending industry? Did the lender file a criminal complaint to bring it to the Sheriff’s attention?
Where would they have gotten that idea?
April 2014 San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez reported to the Sheriff’s Office that his car was broken into at his Redwood City Condo. Stolen from a Backpack were documents regarding mortgage and insurance.
When Juan Lopez was asked if he had any idea who broke into his car he answered San Mateo County Sheriff’s Gang Task Force.
Miranda rights, are they equal for everyone? How many times do you have to say I want to speak to my/an attorney?
I’m not an attorney but, It looks like just to be on the safe side, especially with Jordan Boyd you should say it right after he says Hello, and say it every sentence there after.
Example Hello, I’m Inspector Jordan Boyd.
You: I want to speak to my/an attorney, I want to speak to my/an attorney, I want to speak to my/an attorney, etc.
Hon. Judge Joseph Scott is expected to rule on the Miranda issue today.
Defense Attorneys for Juan P. Lopez are Tony Serra and Maria Belyi from San Francisco.
If you are interested you can listen today at 9:30 AM phone 1-206-279-9591 code 631595
