By Michael G. Stogner
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.
There is no Press Release or Official Notice of this change on the Courts Website. Why?
Who authorized this change?
Updated 11/22/21 – The listen-only public access lines are no longer in effect; proceedings are open to the public to attend in person.
Yesterday San Mateo County News.com published an article on Dr. Dylan Edward Oconnor’s court appearance.
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.
Superior Court of California San Mateo County
Superior Court of California Santa Clara County
Superior Court of California Contra Costa
Superior Court of California San Francisco County
Superior Court of California Marin County
Superior Court of California Alameda County
Superior Court of California Napa County
Superior Court of California Solano County
Superior Court of California Sonoma County
Superior Court of California Monterey County
Filed under #prosecutorialmisconductmatters, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SanMateoCountyNews.com, Ali Winston Investigative Reporter, Attorney General Rob Bonta, Attorney J. Tony Serra, Britney Spears Case RECORDING, California Judicial Branch News Service, Colin Kaepernick, Court Clerk Katrina Bihl, Court Reporter Jocelyne Fakouri, Hon. Judge Joseph Scott, Michael G. Stogner, People vs. Juan Pablo Lopez case NF433910A, San Mateo County Superior Court, Santa Clara County Superior Court, Uncategorized
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.
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.
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
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
You would think Judges, and Sheriff Deputies would know the law. Why would Judges care that the public is outside in a public area. This is just one of the reasons I support videos of all court cases. Why would the SCC Sheriff Deputies even go out and communicate to Vicky Nguyen a very well known and respected Journalist/Reporter.
The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
What is the name of the person who contacted the SCCSO? That is a story.
Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, Body Camera Video, California Bar Association, California State Bar, Jeff Rosen, Michael G. Stogner, Parental Alienation, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, Santa Clara County Superior Court, Vicky Nguyen Journalist/Reporter, Victim's Advocate