Category Archives: Susan Bassi

SMC Sheriff Sgt. Irfan Zaidi Qualifies as a Brady Officer. Is He on the List? Who controls the list? Is there even a List?

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?

District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s Video and Data made public March 1, 2019

LATIMES Article June 6, 2019

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.

By Michael G. Stogner

 

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Associated Press, Attorney Generals Office, AXON, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Body Camera Video, Brady List, California Bar Association, California State Bar, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizen Journalist, Citizens Oversight Committee, City of Millbrae, City of San Carlos, Community Service Officer Joseph Gonzales, D.J. Wozniak, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Deputy Alyssa Lorenzatti, Deputy Bryan Watt, Deputy John DeMartini, Deputy Joshua Wang, DOJ, Don Horsley, Google, Grand Jury, Jamie Draper, John Beiers, John Burris, John Warren, Kevin Mullins, Mark Church, Marshall Wilson, Matthew Graves, Menlo Park Police Department, Michael G. Stogner, Mike Callagy, Millbrae City Manager Tom Williams, NAACP, Organized Crime, Positional Asphyxia, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, Rick Decker, RICO, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Senator Jerry Hill, Sgt. Bob Pronske, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, SMCSO Captain Paul Kunkel, SMCSO PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, SMCSO Sgt. Irfan Zaidi, SMCSO Sgt. Weidner, Steve Wagstaffe, Susan Bassi, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Whistleblowers, Yahoo

Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) gets low marks in Audit.

April 25, 2019
2016-137

The Governor of California
President pro Tempore of the Senate
Speaker of the Assembly
State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814

Dear Governor and Legislative Leaders:

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:

  • It does not consistently take all reasonable steps when it investigates alleged misconduct.
  • Its structure and disciplinary processes do not align with best practices.
  • It has not worked sufficiently to increase its transparency and accessibility.

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.

Respectfully submitted,

ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA
California State Auditor

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, California Bar Association, California State Bar, Citizen Journalist, Citizens Oversight Committee, Governor of California, Grand Jury, Joe Sweeny, John Beiers, Judges, Judicial Misconduct, Kamela Harris, San Mateo County Superior Court, Susan Bassi, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Whistleblowers

San Mateo County – Same Story

When you read Silicon Valley or Santa Clara County think San Mateo County also.

This is Great News for the Victims of Fraud in our Courts. Thank You Susan Bassi.

Link

Real Estate Investor Clyde Berg Supports Silicon Valley Journalism & Media Projects

Handshake Deal Brings Investigative Reporting to Silicon Valley’s Family Courts

CUPERTINO, CA—In a signature handshake deal, driven in part by Santa Clara County’s District Attorney Jeff Rosen’s recent refusal to prosecute another rape case, California real estate investor Clyde Berg has lent support to Bassi Productions for a collaborative project that strives to infuse substantial funding and investment to journalism, local investigative reporting and production projects that seek to bring media attention to Silicon Valley’s most shocking divorce and custody cases.

Historically, the wealth of Clyde Berg, and his activist billionaire brother Carl Berg, has attracted some of Silicon Valley’s most nefarious criminals and scam artists, yet Clyde Berg contends what attorney Bradford Baugh did while representing his former wife in a divorce case was the most elaborate legal scam of all.

As part of an alleged scam, Bradford Baugh partnered with fellow divorce lawyer Sharon Roper, who drafted a bogus post-nuptial agreement that was later determined to have been forged a year before Berg’s wife filed for divorce and made false allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence. Had Berg not challenged the forged agreement and false sexual assault claims during a divorce and related civil case, Ellena may have succeeded in fraudulently obtaining $10 million dollars from Berg’s estate. Ultimately, Clyde was exonerated of all charges and obtained a rarely issued formal “finding of factual innocence”, meaning the crimes Ellena had alleged, and garnered media attention from, never happened, and Clyde, at 73 years of age, should never have been criminally prosecuted based on false claims.

Susan Bassi, a local publisher and court watchdog who experienced her own seven-year divorce case in Santa Clara County, met Clyde Berg on social media after she had facilitated bringing national media attention to the domestic violence and custody case involving Kendra Scott and former San Francisco 49er Ray McDonald. Bassi was especially struck by Berg’s compassion to believe women like Kendra and Neha Rastogi, a former Apple manager who suffered years of abuse at the hands of her powerful immigrant CEO husband, Abhishek Gattani during their 10-year marriage.

Bassi and Berg are united in their criticism of DA Jeff Rosen. Bassi has publicly argued that Rosen has failed victims and wasted taxpayer money by maliciously prosecuting men like Berg, while giving men including McDonald and Gattani a free pass.

For the past five years, Bassi has been pushing local and national news outlets to cover family court cases, where court files are fraught with horror stories that include shocking details involving domestic violence, tax evasion, sexual assault, child abuse, rape, and fraud , all of which are typically ignored by law enforcement agencies and judges.

Mainstream media outlets historically have steered clear of investigating divorce and family court scandals, as it can be virtually impossible to sort out the “he said, she said” allegations that characterize these cases. The Berg-Bassi collaboration will seek to provide support for local reporting and production projects with added support requested from the 49ers, the Oakland A’s as well as tech and social media companies including; Apple, Google, 23andMe, Yahoo, LinkedIn, Oracle, Facebook, and Netflix where employees, investors and founders have been personally impacted by unethical private and government lawyers seeking to misuse the courts and incite conflict in families for profit.

“We live in Silicon Valley where stories arising from family courts should fill local newspapers and provide production content to an area quickly becoming known as Hollywood North. Silicon Valley has the money, drive and technology to support journalism and investigative reporting to watchdog elected officials and court systems. Justice is never served when the media isn’t watching, ” Bassi stated as the collaborative project was announced.

Berg’s support, combined with the support of other tech and social media companies, will allow Bassi Productions to direct funding to journalism projects, social media storytelling and non-profit organizations committed to social justice and bringing much needed transparency to California’s family courts and law enforcement agencies dealing with intimate partner violence, sexual assault and false claims made during divorce and custody cases.

To share a family court story, apply for grants, or to assist in project funding and support, contact: Bassiproductions.com, P.O. Box 2220 Los Gatos, CA 95031, or (831) 320-6421.

Leave a comment

Filed under #San Mateo County, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Citizen Journalist, Citizens Access TV, Citizens Oversight Committee, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Grand Jury, Jody L. Williams, John Beiers, John Warren, Jordan Boyd, Judges, Judicial Misconduct, Kevin Mullins, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, RICO, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, Scott Largent, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Silicon Valley, SMC, Steve Wagstaffe, Susan Bassi, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Whistleblowers, Zain Jaffer

Susan Bassi & Scott Largent critics of “Corruption” Period.

San Jose Mercury News Misleading readers. They omitted Corrupt & Broken.

What can you expect from an advertising business that betrayed Investigative Journalist Gary Webb.

First sentence: Court critic Susan Bassi should read Corrupt Court Critic Susan Bassi.

Title changes words court critic to judicial critic and replaces broken with injured finger. Again omitting the word Corrupt before either Court or Judicial.

Scott Largent, another critic of the local justice system. Should read Corrupt Justice System.

Story all by itself the San Jose Mercury News not interested in. Santa Clara County Sheriff Deputy David Gomez and two other deputies, Jack Solorio and Michael Jacobs, also searched her phone without a warrant. 

That is a Felony.

Lawsuit says Santa Clara County deputy injured judicial critic’s finger in courthouse clash

Susan Bassi claims the County of Santa Clara violated her civil rights when a sheriff’s deputy injured her hand in a confrontation last November, after she refused to stop videotaping inside a county courthouse.

Exterior of the newest Superior Court building constructed in Santa Clara County, the Family Justice Center Court House in San Jose, Calif., on Thursday, September 1, 2016. (Josie Lepe/Bay Area News Group) (Josie Lepe/Bay Area News Group)
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:

SAN JOSE —

Court critic Susan Bassi has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Santa Clara County in response to a November 2017 incident in which she claims a sheriff’s deputy broke her finger and injured her hand for refusing to stop videotaping inside a county courthouse.

The Nov. 14 confrontation was sparked when sheriff’s deputies saw Scott Largent, through a video surveillance camera, snap a photo of a computer screen at the courthouse’s public records office. The office prohibits using smartphones to copy records.

Largent, another critic of the local justice system, stopped taking photos and erased the images at the deputies’ request.

Bassi said she heard Largent yelling and claiming the officers were touching him, so she began recording the incident on her cell phone, according to the complaint.

Deputy David Gomez told Bassi repeatedly to “stop recording” and when she refused he used physical force, breaking her finger and injuring her hand, the lawsuit claims.

Gomez and two other deputies, Jack Solorio and Michael Jacobs, also searched her phone without a warrant after the incident while she received medical attention, according to the complaint.

Bassi, who previously filed a separate excessive force complaint against the Sheriff’s Office, says the county violated her First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The lawsuit also says the phone search and use of force violated Bassi’s Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure of her person and property.

In addition, the lawsuit contends the county has repeatedly harassed Bassi and Largent, two vocal, longtime courthouse critics.

Both the county and Sheriff’s Office declined to comment, citing pending litigation.

Her lawyer is San Jose criminal defense attorney Dmitry Stadlin.

Bassi is also a freelance journalist who contributes to a website called Ex Parte Mediathat exposes issues in California courts, according to her Linkedin profile.

Seven California counties, including Santa Clara, prohibit the use of smartphones to take pictures of otherwise public court records, while seven other counties allow smartphone use.

Contact Thy Vo at 408-200-1055 or at tvo@bayareanewsgroup.com.

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateoCountyNews, David Gomez, Illegal Search of Cellphone, Jack Solorio, Michael G. Stogner, Michael Jacobs, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Santa Clara County Sheriff Office, Scott Largent, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Silicon Valley, Susan Bassi, Victim's Advocate

Susan J. Bassi’s letter to Jeff Rosen SCC’s District Attorney.

card-DA-Jeff-Rosen

Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen

10/31/2018

Yesterday I heard Santa Clara County District Attorney begging the Santa Clara County Supervisors for a raise, in the interest of fairness.

For all the mothers who never saw a raise in their support orders after raising children here for 20 years or more, and for all the fathers who could not afford to pay their child support because they lost their jobs or were fired because of family court……

I wondered what Jeff Rosen thought about fairness when it came to all the people his office prosecuted using harmful error as reported in the Northern California Innocence Project.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about fairness before he maliciously prosecuted two men who had to paid millions of dollars to private criminal lawyers to get a Factual Finding of Innocence.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought it was fair to pressure young Saratoga high school students to take a plea deal in connection with Audrie Pott’s suicide, while he covered up the horrific domestic violence she had endured as her mother and stepfather battled it out in our family courts.
I wondered about all the victims Mr. Rosen failed to serve as he failed to prosecute lawyers, and celebrities like former 49er Ray McDonald, who beat his pregnant girlfriend and still hasn’t been sent to trial for a single misdemeanor.

I wondered if he thought about Deanne Cifuentes-Powers who hasn’t seen her daughter in months because she tried to tell Judge Takaichi and Judge Lie her daughter was afraid of her father who had been convicted of felony domestic violence ( in another state because Jeff Rosen doesn’t prosecute high tech executives).

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about Erin O’Doherty who was destroyed in family court becaue she threw a phone at her ex. She hasn’t seen her daughter in 4 years.

I wondered if he thought about Pam Nudelman, who was married to a former prosecuter, and was left with less than 20% of her community property and support that was less than a $1000.

I wondered if he thought of all the families financially destroyed because Jeff Rosen doesn’t enforce support orders in high assets cases, only cases of the working poor.

I wondered if he thought about how he illegally paid overtime to the DDAs in his office who supported his first campaign, but wasn’t prosecuted for what was certainly a crime.

I wondered if he thought of the former prosecutor who brought him 15 criminal counts against divorce lawyer Bradford Baugh , which Rosen decided not to investigate, or prosecute.

I wondered if he thought about all the women who have reported the horrors of Judge Towery, Judge Lucas, Judge Takaichi and other family court judges rigging divorce cases, and watching Jeff Rosen let them off the hook because of his personal relationship with Judge Towery’s wife. And because Judge Towery got all of his prosecutors out of discipline with the State Bar.

I wondered if Rosen thought about the elderly victims of Terry Houghton and his lawyer wife, Valerie Houghton, who have been under indictment since 2016, and Rosen can’t seem to get to trial, despite Terry Houghton getting taxpayers to pay for his defense through the IDO.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought of all the vicitms of domestic violence who tried to get someone to help them. Someone to pick up the phone in the offie Jeff Rosen supervises.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought of the child who was sexually molested by a repeat child abuser, as his DDA hit on the mom of that child.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about all the dads who were ruined by false child abuse claims.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about all the moms he didn’t believe about child abuse and domestic violence claims.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about how he failed to supervise the employee in Victim Claims, who was abusing his wife and carrying on an affair with a subordinate.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about the man who was found guilty of child abuse in our family courts, but who is now working for Juvenile probation where he has access to abuse other people’s children.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about how the victims and their families would feel about him asking for a raise as they watched him run the DA’s office where prosecutors carry on sexual affairs and stalk the most vulnerable on Tinder and other dating websites.

I wondered if Jeff Rosen thought about the rape victims who still can’t get the results from their SART kits.

And I wondered if Jeff Rosen ever thought about all the support orders for the moms who never saw a cost of living raise after spending years raising children who would form the landscape of Silicon Valley.

It was a long meeting. I could wonder about a lot as Jeff Rosen wanted to whine about topping off his $400K a per plus pension annual perks.

I tried to interview Jeff Rosen after that meeting. Twice he faked that his leg hurt. I wondered if Jeff Rosen ever thought about how it hurt all the people who were punched, kicked threatened or killed by their spouses, intimate partners and parents who should have loved them, because Jeff Rosen is really bad at doing his job.
Mostly I am wondering if Jeff Rosen can read the law, much less follow it.

Maybe Rosen should leave publishing to the professionals.

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateoCountyNews, 911, Attorney Generals Office, Attorneys Blacklisted, Board of Supervisors, Body Camera Video, California Bar Association, California State Bar, DDA Ben Blumenthal, DDA Bryan Abanto, Jeff Rosen, Letters to Editors, Michael G. Stogner, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, RICO, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Superior Court, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Silicon Valley, Susan Bassi, Victim's Advocate, Zain Jaffer