By Michael G. Stogner
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“The listen-only public access lines are no longer in effect; proceedings are open to the public to attend in person.“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?
Hon Judge Susan Greenberg
Banister, Michael Dennis case number 21SF010162A
|001||PC288(a)-FEL-Lewd Act Upon A Child||Dismissal: Negotiated Plea|
|001||PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony||Stricken|
|002||PC288(a)-FEL-Lewd Act Upon A Child||Dismissal: Negotiated Plea|
|002||PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony||Stricken|
|003||PC288(a)-FEL-Lewd Act Upon A Child||Dismissal: Negotiated Plea|
|003||PC667.5(c)-ENH-Special Allegation-Prior-Any Felony||Stricken|
|004||PC647.6(a)(1)-MISD-Child Molesting||Pled Nolo Contendere|
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.