Supervisor Don Horsley has already discussed and shared his thoughts, his personal opinions with Congresswoman Jackie Speiers daughter Stephanie Sierra.She is a reporter for ABC 7 KGO May 8, 2020. She somehow got interested in a meeting that took place 3 weeks earlier. Why? She also Interviewed Kevin Mullin. Why?
Don Horsley has placed this Vague subject on Tuesday’s agenda, I’ve asked him to explain what his wishes to accomplish, He has not responded.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAY 19, 2020
AGENDA ITEM 5
Discuss and/or Act on concerns regarding Harbor Board of Commissioners and request for updated Municipal Service Review on San Mateo County Harbor District by San Mateo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).
Sponsors: Don Horsley
Don Horsley wants to Discuss his concerns regarding Harbor Board of Commissioners. Which ones?
A Republican up until Nov 15, 2019, Virginia Chang Kiraly changed her voter registration from Republican to Democrat in preparation for upcoming campaign/s. That is the exact same thing Jerry Hill did. Virginia Kiraly who recently Victim Shamed S.B. “Stop Lying Sabrina” She couldn’t possibly be talking about the Pornographic Photos sent to Sabrina.
Democrat Sabrina Brennan a victim of Sexual Harassment by another Harbor Commissioner. The Harbor District dealt with that, like San Mateo County does with all of their Pornographic Passing and Child Molesting friends. They hire an Attorney (First Red Flag) to do an Independent Investigation which translates to results favoring those who paid for it.
Supervisor Don Horsley, a former school teacher and Sheriff of SMC wants Commissioner Sabrina Brennan to stop mentioning Pornographic Photos and Sexual Harrassment at the Harbor District Meetings. WHY?
The answer is simple Supervisor Don Horsley Supports it. He wants VICTIMS to Shut UP.
Supervisor Horsley has been interfering with the Harbor Districts business for years. May 26, 2015 Meeting is a perfect example.
Let the Commissioners solve this, Sabrina Brennan the victim has every right to mention this at every single meeting if she wants to. Perhaps at the Public Comment section just like the BOS meetings where serious subjects are made public and the Supervisors simply ignore them.
As a Private Victims Advocate for the last 22 years in San Mateo County I find the way to get a victim to stop talking about a subject is to deal with it Honestly in the first place. Victim Shaming, and telling the Victim to Shut up is a guarantee that you will hear about it at Every Single Meeting.
“I will continue bringing up my harassment at these meetings,” she said. “I won’t be silenced.” Sabrina Brennan.
If you would like to make a Public Comment to the Supervisors on this item you can send it by e-mail. It will be read into the record.
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors met in Closed Session yesterday Jan. 14, 2020 to discuss settling the Maureen Okobi vs. San Mateo County and 5 of its 6 Employees case.
Maureen Okobi is the mother Chinedu Okobi who was legally walking down the sidewalk on the Millbrae side of El Camino Real at 1:00PM on Wednesday October 3, 2018. After interacting with SIX San Mateo County Sheriff Employees for 9:10 he was completely Unresponsive. When a monitor was put on him 10 minutes later it was Flatlined. At San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office closed to the public Press Conference on March 1, 2019 Steve Wagstaffe was asked by KQED Reporter Julie Small “What was the Manner of Death?” At that point he confirmed what SMCCO Deputy Coroner Heather Diaz reported in December 2018. Chinedu Okobi’s death was ruled a Homicide.
The only San Mateo County District Attorney Employee to Include SMCSO Employee civilianCSO Joseph Gonzales was SMCDA Inspector Gregory Giguiere 80215
October 3, 2018 2:50PM
San Mateo County Sheriff Sgt. Trickett was the Incident Commander at the scene. He identified the “Involved Parties.”
Sergeant David Weidner
Deputy Joshua Wang
Deputy Alyssa Lorenzatti
Deputy John Demartini
Deputy Bryan Watt
Community Service Officer (CSO) Joseph Gonzales
So the question is Who & How many San Mateo County Employees/Elected Officials had knowledge and were involved in the False Narrative of FIVE SMCSO INVOLVED PARTIES.
It’s pretty simple if you are willing to Falsify Police Reports, and produce 3 False Sheriff News Releases (Sheriff Carlos Bolanos & PIO Rosemary Blankswade) Why should the residents of San Mateo County believe anything you say or report?
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 intothe 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?
Senior 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.
Cc: Dave Pine, David Canepa, Don Horsley, Carole Groom,Warren Slocum and 1 more…
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.
San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe has not responded.
December 27, 2018 and signed off on December 31, 2018, Became public on March 1, 2019 after the San Mateo County District Attorney made it available on their website. District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe held a Private Press Conference where he gave a 26 minute presentation of the Investigation of the In-Custody Homicide of Chinedu Okobi. HOMICIDE was never mentioned.
We at San Mateo County News.com can just imagine the pressure she must have felt for simply doing the job she was hired to do. The amount of other SMC Employees who had knowledge of her Homicide ruling and Omitted that word is shocking.
Congratulations Heather Diaz.
San Mateo County Deputy Coroner Heather Diaz # 21 stated: “Upon arrival of Paramedics and Fire Personnel Chinedu Okobi was assessed and found to be unresponsive.”
“As the death was the result of multiple measures to subdue Chinedu Okobi by law enforcement, and based on the information contained in the Coroner’s Investigation Report, Toxicology Report, medical records, and multiple videos,
“I have determined the manner of death to be homicide.”
Retired Deputy Mark Melville is running for Sheriff of San Mateo County in 2022.
By Michael G. Stogner
In the 2018 Election Mark Melville got 52,996 votes which was 40% of the 172,168 Ballots cast. 38,140 ballots or 22% of total ballots DID NOT vote for Sheriff according to the San Mateo County Elections Office website. Most of the residents of San Mateo County don’t realize that they are responsible for the behavior and conduct of their Sheriff. The Sheriff Office employees 800 people who are trusted to provide law enforcement services throughout the County. There is ZERO Oversight of this agency.
Melville stands a much better chance to win now that he has the time to get his message out to the voters. That includes the uphill battle to counter the False information provided to the public by the print media. Example SMDJ “Although an initial news report located Bolanos in the brothel with Munks, later reports indicated he was outside the entire time. I have asked Jon Mays to provide a copy of the Later Reports he has not.
Mark Melville was very direct and specific when talking about his boss Carlos G. Bolanos. “He’s a Liar,” That would have been good information for the SMDJ to pass on to their 84,000 readers/voters of San Mateo County. They choose not to and instead said “We Believe Him.”
I don’t know if Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos has any plans to run for re-election in 2022. I do know he didn’t like to attend candidate forums with Mark Melville present.
As far a transparency goes, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos has refused to provide the Booking Photo of Sheriff Sergeant Lou Aquino for his September 14, 2019 DUI Arrest by the Redwood City Police Department. I asked Candidate Melville as Sheriff would he release that photo? His answer was Yes. That was refreshing, it’s pretty simple that Booking Photo is Public Information. Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos has issued several False News Releases regarding the October 3, 2018 In-Custody Homicide of Chinedu Okobi by six Sheriff Employees. He has refused to respond to several requests regarding the False Information.
Contact Information for Mark Melville: email@example.com call / text at campaign cell number 650-730-3187
Update: Next Court Date is Jan 9, 2020 9:00AM S.S.F.
Update: Next court date is November 18, 2019 2:00 P.M. Courtroom 8-C Redwood City.
The San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office is not to be Political or used as a Weapon. Tell that to San Mateo County District Attorney Senior Inspector William Massey.
A reasonable person would think that the Five Supervisors (Carole Groom, Don Horsley, Warren Slocum, Dave Pine, David Canepa) of San Mateo County would do everything in their power to assure the PUBLIC that this could NEVER happen on their watch.
A reasonable person would think that San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers and David Silberman would do everything in their power to assure the PUBLIC that this could NEVER happen on their watch.
A reasonable person would think that San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy would do everything in his power to assure the PUBLIC that this could NEVER happen on his watch.
I know for a fact that all of the above mentioned San Mateo County Leaders are very aware because for the last 20 years I have been keeping them informed. Public comments at the Board of Supervisor meetings, sending them copies of my articles from SMCN.com. This is a Five year case finally soon to be heard by a Jury.
Next Court Date is November 12, 2019, 9:00 AM, 400 County Center Redwood City.
All concerned citizens are welcome to attend as these motions will be heard.
To: Editor San Mateo Daily Journal Nov 2 at 6:58 AM
The public expects criminal charges filed are accurate and honest, Juan P. Lopez case proves that is not true in San Mateo County
November 6, 2019 SSF Court 1:30 PM
X Deputy Juan P. Lopez will inform the court of his response to the District Attorneys Office Offer of No Prison Time if he accepts the deal.
Everyone in San Mateo County remembers Five years ago he was arrested at gun point in front of his son for Smuggling a Cellphone and Drugs to a Hells Angel Inmate at the Redwood City Jail. Big press conference by D. A. Wagstaffe at the time, It was also reported he embezzled up to $400,000 of campaign donations. One small problem with that was he only raised about $400.00. Those charges were all dismissed because of Prosecutorial Misconduct. He is now being offered a deal to plead guilty to charges that came from the BACKPACK that was stolen from his car which was parked at his condo in Redwood City. That theft happened shortly after he filed papers as a Write In Candidate for Sheriff. A search warrant was then created looking for what they already had “Documents that were stolen” Mortgage Fraud the owner occupied box had a check mark in it. The lender never filed a complaint.
Any concerned citizens/residents are invited to join us in court November 6, 2019
Michael G. Stogner
I first met Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez right after he announced he was going to be a candidate for Sheriff in San Mateo County in 2014. I thanked him for giving the residents a choice for Sheriff. I was on the phone with him when he got arrested at gun point at one of his homes. I was with him when the Sheriff’s Office served him with legal papers at his home, I opened the door and greeted the 2 Sheriff Deputies. I was with him and another concerned citizen Lamont Phemister when the Sheriff’s Office ordered him to be at the Gun Range to receive more legal papers. The first time they gave him 90 minutes notice, the second time 4 day notice.
Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez was charged with 14 Felony Counts 5 years ago. The District Attorney’s Office, The Sheriff’s Office and County Counsel’s Office have done everything possible to cause harm to him and those close to him. He has lost 5 years of Income, his last year he earned about $250,000. He has hired 2 Law Firms you can guess that cost is over $200,000.
Now Five Years later the District Attorneys Office Offers a Plea Bargain the day It’s lead Investigator Jordan Boyd was to take the Witness stand. Tomorrow he and his attorneys will inform the Court and all of San Mateo County his response.
I personally think that is Newsworthy I might be wrong.
The law enforcement profession requires integrity and trust and an officer who lies violates that trust and tarnishes the integrity of the profession.
October 3, 2018 at 1:00 PM Millbrae, California, Chinedu Okoki a 36 year old man was walking down the sidewalk on El Camino Real. Within 10 minutes he was Tasered 7 times, sprayed in the face with O.C. spray as six San Mateo County Sheriff Employees were on top of him. He was completely limp, unconscious, and never made a sound again. He died there on the spot in the Custody of the Sheriff’s Office.
San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Zaidi was not one of the Six Sheriff Employees involved in the In-Custody Death of Chinedu Okobi. Nineteen days later, On October 22, 2018 he filed an Official Report with the District Attorney’s Office making knowingly false statements.
” I directed Deputy Lorenzatti to remove the metal handcuffs from the suspect which she did, and the suspect was placed on his back. The Fire Department and AMR promptly began CPR.”
District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe on March 1, 2019 provided a video that he and his Team produced for the public it can be found on his website. The placing Chinedu Okobi on his back and CPR starts at the 18:50 mark. The video shows Deputy Lorenzatti did Not remove the handcuffs.
SMCSO Deputy Lorenzatti made an official statement on 10/04/2018 3:50 PM. to Inspector Eric Suzuki.
“They were like, well let’s get him on his back and start CPR, So then I, you know helped em, bring him to his back.
Question? “Okay and were his Handcuffs off at that point?”
Answer: No they were still on.
Eng. #37 Mazza Statement: “When decedent was lifted onto the gurney, a police officer cadet or trainee removed the Handcuffs from the decedents wrists.”
AMR #94 Retanubun Statement: “They put the decedent on to a “Mega Mover” when noticed the decedent still had handcuffs on.” “Saw police cadet nearby who assisted them with the removal of the Handcuffs.”
AMR #37 Uhland: “So they laid the decedent on his back with the Handcuffs still on his wrists.”
AMR #94 Pham: “Decedent was on his back with Handcuffs on when he arrived.”
AMR #37 Holman: “When they rolled the decedent over to remove the Handcuffs, she noticed several scrapes on his hands and a few small abrasion on his back.” “She was unsure if the injuries were there prior or if caused by the CPR application.”
According to Wagstaffe’ Video, Chinedu Okobi was placed on his back at 18:26 mark.
CPR starts at 18:50 mark with Handcuffs On and Hands behind his back.
Handcuffs Removed at 28:47 mark after almost 10 minutes of Chest Compressions.
What caused Sheriff Sgt. Zaidi to file this Bizarre False Official Statement?
Note: 300 Deputies on the list. Sheriff Alex Villanueva, has called the Brady list a “fake list” and says it was the result of corrupt investigations designed to retaliate against certain deputies.
Should deputies’ misconduct be disclosed to D.A.?
Justices seem split on ruling that bars sheriff from giving officers’ names to prosecutors.
By Maura Dolan and Maya Lau
The California Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday over a ruling that barred the Los Angeles County sheriff from giving prosecutors the names of deputies who have committed misconduct.
During a hearing, the state high court weighed an appeal of a decision that prohibited the sheriff from giving the district attorney the names of deputies with a history of bad behavior, including lying, taking bribes, tampering with evidence, using unreasonable force or engaging in domestic violence.
By law, prosecutors are required to disclose to defendants exculpatory evidence, including information that could diminish the credibility of police officers who worked on a case.
Several justices suggested Wednesday that prosecutors need the information to fulfill their constitutional duty to disclose potentially exonerating information.
That position has been endorsed by defense lawyers, prosecutors and the California attorney general.
Justice Goodwin Liu noted that prosecutors ultimately bear liability for failing to disclose favorable evidence.
If the prosecution is unaware that such evidence exists, convictions — even valid convictions — may eventually be overturned because of a failure to disclose, he said.
“The prosecution can’t take an ostrich-like approach to this very important duty,” Liu said.
But Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye suggested that the Legislature, not the court, might want to take steps to ensure that exonerating information is disclosed to the defense.
She said one possible remedy was to give trial judges sealed lists of law enforcement officers who have a history of misconduct. The judges could review those lists privately in chambers to determine whether the officers’ records were relevant in the case and should be disclosed.
“Doesn’t delivering the list directly to the court under seal … meet the problem without intruding overtly on the officers’ privacy?” she asked.
Justice Ming W. Chin also repeatedly asked whether that path, if carved out by the Legislature or by the court in a future case, could resolve the problem.
The case before the court stems from a lawsuit filed by the L.A. deputies union to prevent former Sheriff Jim McDonnell from turning over to the district attorney about 300 names of deputies with a history of misconduct.
A divided, Los Angeles-based court of appeal ruled in 2017 that the list must be kept secret, even in pending criminal cases in which errant deputies were expected to testify.
The state high court’s decision, due in 90 days, would affect law enforcement agencies throughout the state.
The case pits the privacy rights of law enforcement officers against the constitutional duty of prosecutors to give the defense evidence that might cast doubt on a defendant’s guilt, reduce a potential sentence or diminish the credibility of prosecution witnesses.
That duty stems from a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case, Brady vs. Maryland, which said suppression of evidence favorable to the defense violated due process.
At issue is only whether the names can be turned over to prosecutors, not whether they would become public.
But the presence of the names on a list means deputies could be one step closer to having their disciplinary files scrutinized by a judge and their police work called into question during a court proceeding.
Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuellar noted that the constitutional duty to disclose evidence favorable to the defense trumps state law intended to protect the privacy of law enforcement officers. He suggested the court could “harmonize” the laws.
He called the case “very challenging,” but also noted that “the Brady responsibility is on the state.”
Justice Joshua P. Groban expressed skepticism about the union’s legal arguments.
“You are saying as long as we can bar the door and keep the law enforcement agency from sharing that with the prosecution, then there is no Brady violation?” he asked the lawyer for the union.
Justice Carol A. Corrigan noted that officers whose names were on a list would have less privacy protection than others.
But she also said that a state law intended to protect officer privacy while allowing some disclosures may be hindering the release of information a criminal defendant is entitled to under the Constitution.
Under the system in place for four decades, defense attorneys and prosecutors may ask a trial judge to review an officer’s personnel file to determine whether there is evidence that must be disclosed.
But without knowing an officer’s history, a defense lawyer may not be able to persuade the judge to undertake a review.
“There are cases in which legitimate and material evidence is eluding their review,” Corrigan said.
Justice Leondra R. Kruger asked whether there were legal safeguards that could be imposed to protect officer privacy after the names were disclosed to prosecutors.
Aimee Feinberg, representing the state attorney general, said courts could issue protective orders to ensure the officers’ names were shielded from the public.
Geoffrey S. Sheldon, who argued for Los Angeles County, said he felt “good” about how the hearing went.
“I’m cautiously optimistic that we will prevail in the case,” he said.
Judith Posner, representing the union, said she couldn’t predict the outcome.
“There were a lot of interesting and probing questions on both sides,” she said.
Police departments in at least a dozen counties, including San Francisco, Sacramento and Ventura, have had a regular practice of sending prosecutors the names of so-called Brady list officers.
California’s strict laws protecting officer personnel files — which underpinned the appellate court’s ruling for the deputies union — were dramatically altered by a new transparency law that opened up records of confirmed cases of lying and sexual misconduct by officers, as well as shootings and serious uses of force.
SB 1421, which went into effect Jan. 1, allows the public to see many of the documents at issue in the L.A. County sheriff’s case.
But the new law does not apply to the broader range of misconduct that could put an officer on a Brady list, including domestic abuse, sexual harassment, racial discrimination and bribery.
Sheriff Alex Villanueva, who ousted McDonnell in a stunning upset last fall, has called the Brady list a “fake list” and says it was the result of corrupt investigations designed to retaliate against certain deputies.
October 17, 2018 Senior Inspector Bill Massey receives the AXON data for the Tasers from Sergeant Bob Pronske. It shows 7 deployments from Deputy Wang’s Taser 6 with full 5 seconds discharges and the 7th with a 4 second discharge. So that is 1 Deputy with 7 activations.
Now add at some unknown date Rick Decker who’s boss is Inspector Bill Massey and he changes the story to a few activations.
So we went from Two Deputies to One Deputy with 7 activations, to One Deputy with a few activations.
How does this information keep changing?
All reports can be found pages 53-54 on the District Attorney’s website.
A reasonable person would think that Criminal Charges would be filed against anyone or any group of people including Law Enforcement Employees if they caused a Homicide.
On December 31, 2018 San Mateo County Coroner’s Office determined Chinedu Okobi’s Death was a Homicide. “HOMICIDE PROTOCOL” 36-year old male involved in a physical altercation with San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies. Note: CSO Joseph Gonzales was also involved he is not a Deputy.
There were Six San Mateo County Sheriff Employees not Five. It’s irresponsible and against policy for Parking Enforcement Officer (Meter-Maid) to participate in the takedown and Homicide of Chinedu Okobi. Everybody in Law Enforcement knows that. CSO Joseph Gonzales is a civilian.
Nicole Basurto, A very good and concerned Citizen, Witness not found by Sheriff Office. She called in.“Thought it was odd the Deputies did not try to arrest Decedent Okobi when he was on the ground.”She was fairly certain that he died at the scene.” “A male deputy hit Okobi 3-4 times with a closed fist, seemed directed to his head.”
San Mateo County Deputy Coroner Heather Diaz #21 “I have determined the manner of Death to be Homicide.” December 31, 2018
San Mateo County Sheriff IT Technician Johnson Hang was unable to download Deputy Wang & Sergeant Weidner’s MAVVideo from patrol cars at the crime scene. Why?
Menlo Park Police Officer Joshua Russell unable to download his witness interviews he tried twice, Vie-Vu software owned by Axon.
San Mateo County Criminalist II Anthony Delmonico: District Attorney’s office requesting the Forensic Investigation of an “In-Custody Death.”
Caption in D.A.’s video at the 7:22 mark “ A deputy attempts to subdue Okobi with Pepper Spray, but mistakenly hits his fellow deputies and Sergeant.” Steve Wagstaffe does not identify the sprayer as Deputy Wang, Why? His Expert Jeffrey Martin says it was Deputy Wang. There is only one Deputy it could be and that is Wang. There is one other possibility and that might be why Wagstaffe chose not to identify Wang as the sprayer of Pepper Spray. “At the t 7:18 mark Civilian CSO Joseph Gonzales’s right hand can clearly be seen unholstering and discharging pepper spray.” He then puts it back in his belt and backs away.
Sergeant Weidner calls it a Crime Scene at 11:31 mark. Why is arresting a suspect a Crime Scene? It’s not, but killing an unarmed civilian who committed no crime is.
Sergeant Weidner 13:26 Mark on cellphone “Dude’s alive that’s all you need to know, We’re good.”
Sergeant Weidner 10/03/2018says Okobi was Pepper Sprayed changes story. Why?
14:35 mark says: “He’s been tasered several times and Peppered Sprayed.”
15:03 mark says: “ He’s been tased twice and Pepper Sprayed.”
Weidner Statement to Jamie Draper on 10/04/2018 prepared 10/12/2018
“He was told later it was Deputy Wang who deployed the pepper spray at that point in the struggle; however he did not see him do it.” Sergeant Weidner speculated the pepper spray was possibly directed upward at the subject’s face while he was in a somewhat prone position on the ground which caused the spray to miss the subject completely and instead strike Deputy Watt, Deputy Lorenzatti and Sergeant Weidner.
D.J. Wozniak President of the Deputy Sheriff Association, the Union calls Sgt. Weiner at the Crime Scene audio goes silent. 22:10 mark. Why is he calling Weidner?
Deputy De Martini to Jamie Draper (Sincere report)
“He said he felt a Pulse but said due to the fact he had just been struggling with Okobi he was no longer certain if he felt Okobi’s pulse or his own.”
Also said “ I kind of raised up his head a little bit.”
Deputy Watt to Jamie Draper (Sincere report.)
“Said he was speaking to Decedent Okobi, telling him to relax and breath, But he did not recall Okobi ever saying anything in response.
March 1, 2019 San Mateo County District Attorney held a Press Conference.
The members of the Public were not included.
As you watch this Presentation, remember Steve Wagstaffe knows it was a Homicide. See when he finally acknowledges it at 47:30 mark.
8:20 mark Steve Wagstaffe tells the reporters that the “Cause of Death was Cardiac Arrest.”
47:30 mark, KQED Reporter Julie Small asked “Do you know the manner of death?” Wagstaffe says “The Coroner of this County Labeled it a Homicide.” He went on to say Homicide occurring during interaction with that individual.”
Had Reporter Julie Small of KQED not ask that question Steve Wagstaffe was not going to mention Homicide
I, Michael G. Stogner Co-owner of San Mateo County News.Com asked Steve Wagstaffe @ 37:39 mark.
“After Mr. Okobi stopped breathing, You mentioned in your presentation somebody said get him in a seated position, can you identify which deputy said that?
Wagstaffe said, “It was Sgt Weidner, “He actually uses the words Positional Aphysixation watch for that, But he was breathing and he had a pulse.”
Q. By putting him in a seated position, Did his head not go forward and stop his breathing?” Note: Seated Position @ 10:27 mark
Wagstaffe said “It did not.””The belief was Not, that it did not occur.” “Because they continued to check for the breathing.” check head position at 10:27 mark it did go forward Mr. Wagstaffe.
Wagstaffe said, “But he was breathing and he had a pulse at the time.”“He actual uttered some words.” No Caption at time with words allegedly uttered
Wagstaffe said, “It was a couple of minutes, several minutes after he was turned over to the AMR people.” “Deputies are out of the picture then it’s over to the medical people.”
The video does not support Steve Wagstaffe’s statement.
Video shows AMR #37 Suzanne Holman @17:55 mark giving Sternum Rub, Checking for a Pulse, and tilting head back. If a Reasonable Person takes the meaning of several minutes to mean 3 minutes that would take you to the 20:55 mark.
Wagstaffe said, He was still breathing when the Sheriff Deputies turned him over to the ARM people.” Question, What time was Okobi turned over to the AMR people? Question, Who from the FOUR AMR people is District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe talking about? Here are the AMR people, Suzanne Holman #37, Forrest Uhland #37, Patrick Pham #94 & Ferdinand Retanubun #94
According to Daly City Police Officer Joshua McQuade who interviewed S. Holman on 10/04/2018
AMR #37 Suzanne Holman “She said she did not touch the decedent.”
AMR #37: Forrest Uhland “Did not render any medical aid to decedent Okobi personally.”
AMR #94 Ferdinand Retanubun said “His unit was assigned to treat the injured deputy who was bleeding from the face (Deputy Wang)
AMR #94 Partick Pham said he was assigned to attend to two (2) Sheriff’s Deputies whom he described as an Asian deputy with abrasions to his face, (Deputy Joshua Wang) and a bald deputy who had been exposed to pepper spray (Deputy Bryan Watt).
Wagstaffe said, “You can hear the AMR people say to him, Check the pulse make sure he is still breathing.” That sentence makes no sense at all. A Reasonable Person would have to ask, Who is Wagstaffe calling Him? He can’t be talking about Chinedu Okobi, He has been dead since 9:10 mark.
Wagstaffe said, “You don’t see them taking out their nightsticks.” -5:27 mark
Deputy Wang & Deputy Watt both brought out their Batons. In the DA’s Video at the 10:57 Mark you will see Deputy DeMartini Tampering with Evidence by picking up a Taser and Extended Baton and putting them in CSO’s Sheriff Pick Up Truck.