Category Archives: Zain Jaffer

Atherton man arrested for Shooting at vehicle with child inside.

Document

By Michael G. Stogner

Michael Yang 37 years old arrested without incident

January 31, 2020 Atherton Police Officers arrested Michael Yang without incident and booked him into San Mateo County Jail in Redwood City for Penal Code sections 664/187 (a) Attempted Murder, 245 (a) (2) Assault with a Deadly Weapon, and 246 Shooting Into an Occupied Vehicle, and 273 (a) Child Endangerment

He allegedly fired a Semi-Automatic Firearm at a car with three adults (one being his brother) and one child inside, on Spencer Avenue, Atherton, California.

Redwood City and Menlo Park Police Departments assisted Atherton Police, which involved a Shelter in Place for several homes in the neighborhood. Excellent Job Law Enforcement this demonstrates it can be done without Injury or Death. He was transported to the Maguire Jail between 8-10 PM Jan, 31 , 2020 where he was booking in Jail.

SMCN.com will publish the Booking Photo as soon as Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos and PIO Rosemerry Blankswade provide it. Don’t hold your breath, We have requested the Booking photo of SMCSO Sergeant Lou Aquino’s DUI arrest Booking Photo for months. 

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>
To:SHERIFFS_PIO
Feb 3 at 9:25 AM
Hello Rosemerry,
Can you please San Mateo News.com with the Booking Photo of Michael Yang?
Thank You
Michael G. Stogner
San Mateo County News.com

 

Update: 2/4/1:30PM

People v. Chihhao Yang

Superior Court Case Number 20-SF-001810-A

Charges: Counts 1, 2,3 & 4 245(B) Felony Assault With A Semi-Automatic Firearm

                Count 5 246 Felony Discharge of A Firearm At An Occupied Vehicle

He will be arraigned this afternoon Jan. 4, 2020 at 1:30 in Dept. 25, Judge Joseph Scott in Courtroom 4-A (custody courtroom) at 400 County Center, Redwood City, California.

 

Remember he was arrested for Attempted Murder.

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateoCounty, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Atherton Police Department, Booking Photo, Citizen Journalist, Google, Menlo Park Police Department, Michael G. Stogner, Michael Yang, Redwood City Police Chief Dan Mulholland, Redwood City Police Department, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Superior Court, Selective Prosecution, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMCSO PIO Rosemerry Blankswade, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Zain Jaffer

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

San Mateo County’s E-mail Deletion Policy, Put on Hold by Mike Callagy

mc_portrait_squareArtboard 1

San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy

San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy has stopped/paused/delayed this policy from going into effect Feb. 1, 2019. May 1, 2019 is the date it will go into effect unless it is rescinded.

I’ll give just a couple of examples of why this is a terrible policy. San Mateo County’s last election had a tax measure W pass in the last couple of days by about 500 votes with more than 270,000 ballots cast. Several elected officials made public statements including Audit/Recall the elections office and officer. That is pretty unusual, it will be important to go back years to find all communications between the elected officials, county counsel attorneys, Supervisors, Assemblymen, Wordcrafters who communicated about placing Measure W on the ballot in the first place, using public monies to promote it etc.

San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office used as a weapon, falsely charging people: Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez criminal case is a perfect example, you will recall Steve Wagstaffe told the world he smuggled a cellphone and drugs to a gang member in jail. That was a lie from day one,

I said falsely charging people: Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas should be considered. Her case is sealed why? 2007 she was in Las Vegas when Operation Dollhouse netted Carlos G. Bolanos at a single family home which had Human Trafficked Sex Slaves including a minor.

San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office Not charging people: Chinedu V. Okobi Murdered by 5 SMCSO Deputies October 3, 2018.

November 7, 2018 one day after the election Retention Policy par. J

This has felt like one of those runaway train movies. Simply to find out Who put this on the County’s Website, Why was it put on and more importantly How to stop/pause it.

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.

J. E-mail Retention

Email messages are temporary communications and the email system (with the exception of archived email subfolders as set forth below) is not intended to be used as a means of records storage. To the extent that email messages which are generated or received through the County’ s computer systems constitute business records to be retained pursuant to the County’ s (or a department’s) records retention policy, such email messages shall be retained as set forth below. Email messages that do not otherwise serve a business purpose (including, but not limited to, draft communications, administrative communications, etc.) shall be routinely discarded. For that reason, each workforce member who uses the County email system has the same responsibility for their email messages as they do for any document they obtain in the course of their official duties and must decide which communications should be retained for business o legal reasons and which should be discarded. If a workforce member has any questions regarding if an email should be retained as a business record, he or she should seek guidance from his/her supervisor and/or department head who may consult with legal counsel as necessary.

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.

Email messages that constitute records to be retained for business or legal reasons may be saved in excess of ninety (90) days in any of the following ways: (1) saved in Rich Text Format (RTF) or Portable Document Format (PDF) and then transferred to electronic filing systems or other media for long-term storage in accordance with the department’s regular filing and storage procedures; (2) affirmatively “dragged and dropped” or “cut and pasted” into email subfolders created by the user (the user must select the particular retention period that applies to any created subfolders (i.e. one year, two years, ten years, indefinitely, etc.)); or (3) printed in hard copy and filed or stored as appropriate. Any email subfolders created by the user within Microsoft Exchange will, along with the user’s in- box including any migrated mail, count toward the user’s 100GB mailbox space limitation as outlined in Section E of this policy.

Workforce members should seek guidance from their department heads to determine the specific time requirements applicable to records and electronic correspondence generated, received and/or maintained by their department in accordance with their department’s records retention policy. Workforce members are strongly encouraged to review the email content of subfolders on a regular basis and to delete any content for which retention is not required.

Regardless of countywide or departmental records retention requirements, email and other electronic correspondence pertaining to a threatened or actual legal action must be retained until the litigation is concluded. It is the responsibility of the department involved, or County Counsel, to notify ISO in writing, of the need for the hold on electronic communications.

The use or creation of local personal archive files (such as Outlook.pst files) is strictly prohibited and may not be configured on County equipment.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #OperationDollhouse, #OperationLooseEnds, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chief Deputy District Attorney Al Serrato, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizens Oversight Committee, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, Jody L. Williams, Juan P. Lopez, Judicial Misconduct, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Matt Grocott, Michael G. Stogner, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Positional Asphyxia, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, RICO, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County Elections Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Zain Jaffer

San Mateo County Government E-mails should be preserved not deleted.

106709_San Mateo County

Why would government want to delete, destroy e-mails? E-mails should be preserved permanently. They show the public the behind the scenes communications between elected officials who have taken an oath, and high ranking appointed officials who are supposed to represent the public’s best interest.

Below is just one example of 4 top SMC Officials communicating their support of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves being used for their personal pleasure, and their distain for the media. All 5 Supervisors shared the same idea.  These e-mails are 11 years old and still current when you add what is happening to Jody L. Williams today in SMC by Steve Wagstaffe, and John Warren.

emails&amp;literature

SMC E-mail Policy November 7, 2018

J. E-mail Retention

Email messages are temporary communications and the email system (with the exception of archived email subfolders as set forth below) is not intended to be used as a means of records storage. To the extent that email messages which are generated or received through the County’ s computer systems constitute business records to be retained pursuant to the County’ s (or a department’s) records retention policy, such email messages shall be retained as set forth below. Email messages that do not otherwise serve a business purpose (including, but not limited to, draft communications, administrative communications, etc.) shall be routinely discarded. For that reason, each workforce member who uses the County email system has the same responsibility for their email messages as they do for any document they obtain in the course of their official duties and must decide which communications should be retained for business o legal reasons and which should be discarded. If a workforce member has any questions regarding if an email should be retained as a business record, he or she should seek guidance from his/her supervisor and/or department head who may consult with legal counsel as necessary.

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.

Email messages that constitute records to be retained for business or legal reasons may be saved in excess of ninety (90) days in any of the following ways: (1) saved in Rich Text Format (RTF) or Portable Document Format (PDF) and then transferred to electronic filing systems or other media for long-term storage in accordance with the department’s regular filing and storage procedures; (2) affirmatively “dragged and dropped” or “cut and pasted” into email subfolders created by the user (the user must select the particular retention period that applies to any created subfolders (i.e. one year, two years, ten years, indefinitely, etc.)); or (3) printed in hard copy and filed or stored as appropriate. Any email subfolders created by the user within Microsoft Exchange will, along with the user’s in- box including any migrated mail, count toward the user’s 100GB mailbox space limitation as outlined in Section E of this policy.

Workforce members should seek guidance from their department heads to determine the specific time requirements applicable to records and electronic correspondence generated, received and/or maintained by their department in accordance with their department’s records retention policy. Workforce members are strongly encouraged to review the email content of subfolders on a regular basis and to delete any content for which retention is not required.

Regardless of countywide or departmental records retention requirements, email and other electronic correspondence pertaining to a threatened or actual legal action must be retained until the litigation is concluded. It is the responsibility of the department involved, or County Counsel, to notify ISO in writing, of the need for the hold on electronic communications.

The use or creation of local personal archive files (such as Outlook.pst files) is strictly prohibited and may not be configured on County equipment.

From: Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>
To: Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019, 11:24:13 AM PST
Subject: Re: Status on the e-mail deletion policy
That might be just fine, but as you can see very few people even know about this and you can stop this for a 6 month review period starting today until you decide the proper time period to hold e-mails like 20 years etc.
Michael
On Saturday, January 26, 2019, 11:09:10 AM PST, Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org> wrote:

Michael,

As I understand it, the policy has been in place for years and that is the info I’m trying to obtain.  I think ISD realized we were not reaching our objective to get rid of the clutter of emails in the system, so this policy was brought back to address that.  I’m trying to find out exactly how this came back up, but it was in the works well before Nov. 2018.
Best regards,

Mike

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 26, 2019, at 10:50 AM, Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com> wrote:

Mike,
It looks like November 7, 2018 is when this 90 day old e-mails are to be deleted Policy was created by ISD, Who came up with this if Not You?

ADMINISTRATIVE MEMORANDUM COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

NUMBER: F-2

SUBJECT: E-Mail Policy

RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Information Services Department (ISD)

DATE: November 7, 2018

J. E-mail Retention

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.
As you and most County Officials and staff know I am a Private Victim’s Advocate and have worked on behalf of several San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies and employees. Just to mention a few, Female Deputy who reported Rape Video on County Computers being viewed and shared with upper management of the Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez being abused by San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers, David Silberman and others including Carlos G. Bolanos,Steve Wagstaffe, John Warren, Sheriff Deputy Heinz Puschendorf who has not been unable to get to his emails. Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas connected to Operation Dollhouse recently criminally charge in SMC. Measure A,K,W e-mails. Zain Jaffer criminal 8 felony case dismissed for lack of evidence, (sure) I can think of 60,000,000 reasons this case was dismissed. Yanira Serrano-Garcia murdered by Sheriff Deputy, Errol Chan Murdered by Swat, Chinedu V. Okobi Murdered by 5 SMCSO Deputies. SMCSO Lt. Kristina Bell DV Call to 911, James McGee 17.5 hour standoff two Swat teams after 911 call for DV no DV charges. Ramsey Saad R.I.P.
That is a short list. Please consider this a formal request to save all emails regarding any of the people and subjects mentioned above.
This subject should be discussed with the public before ANY e-mails are deleted. What is the cost to keep them?
I hope you will stop this today.
Michael G. Stogner
On Friday, January 25, 2019, 6:12:20 PM PST, Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org> wrote:

Michael, I’m still researching this as I want to be clear when this policy started.  The policy, as I understand it, has been around a long time. It is a matter of now enforcing it.  Im trying to determine how far back the policy goes.  We don’t have unlimited storage for emails so there has to be controls in place.  Employees are encouraged to save their emails and put them in files.  It is an easy process.  I will get you the history soon.  Have a nice weekend. Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2019, at 4:30 AM, Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com> wrote:

Good morning Michael,
What is the status on the County wide policy to delete e-mails after they are 90 days old starting Feb 1, 2019?
By your response it looks like it was not your policy, Who’s policy is it?
Thank You
Michael G. Stogner
San Mateo County News.com
Kristina Paszek <kpaszek@smcgov.org>
To:michaelgstogner@yahoo.com
Jan 16 at 4:28 PM

Dear Mr. Stogner,

Your correspondence of January 11 to Carole Groom was forwarded to our office for response.  I also understand that you recently sent a follow-up e-mail today to Supervisor Groom.  This e-mail will respond to both of your e-mails.

The County’s e-mail policy is set forth in the attached Administrative Memo F-2, which was developed (and is revised from time to time) by the County’s Information Services Department, subject to approval by the County Manager.  The provisions concerning the deletion of e-mail were adopted in April 2015 around the time that the County switched from Groupwise to Outlook for its e-mail.

The County’s e-mail policy is distinct from the County and department-specific records retention policies that are approved by the Board of Supervisors.  With respect to what appear to be your concerns, although the e-mail policy reiterates that the County’s e-mail system is not intended to be a means of records storage, it recognizes that some e-mail messages that are generated or received through the County’s computer systems constitute records that must be retained pursuant to the County’s or a department’s records retention policy (or due to threatened or actual litigation), and it details how those e-mail messages are to be retained.  The e-mail policy does not impact each department’s responsibility to retain records in accordance with state law.  As explained in the policy, all e-mails that are determined to be records to be retained for business or legal reasons are to be saved.  There are a number of ways to retain such e-mails, as detailed in the policy, but we expect that in most cases, a user will simply place the e-mail in an e-mail subfolder.  A user can create e-mail subfolders and set a 1-year, 2-year, 10-year retention or mark the folder(s) to be kept permanently.  In addition, a mailbox that is being held for litigation will not be subjected to any automatic deletion until after the litigation is resolved.

Regards,

Kristina Paszek

Deputy County Counsel

San Mateo County Counsel’s Office

400 County Center, 6th Floor

Redwood City, CA 94063

Tel:  650-363-4989

Fax:  650-363-4034

 

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>
To:Kristina Paszek
Cc:Carole Groom,Don Horsley,Warren Slocum,Dave Pine,Dave Canepaand 3 more…
Jan 17 at 5:57 PM
Dear Kristina,
Thank You for your response on behalf of Board of Supervisor President Carole Groom, I’m still not sure why she couldn’t have just answered my questions directly. I now have more questions regarding the policy to delete e-mails after 90 days.  How many of San Mateo County employees have received the memo and how did they get it and when did they get it. How many managers have taken a training course on how to preserve e-mails? How many employees have taken a training course in this policy? What method was used to notify and prepare the employees for this policy?
It might be best for everyone involved to hit the stop/pause button on this policy.
Michael G. Stogner
San Mateo County News.com
Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>
To:Carole Groom,Dave Canepa,Dave Pine,Don Horsley,Warren Slocumand 3 more…
Jan 16 at 10:03 AM

Dear San Mateo County Supervisors,

5 days ago I asked President of Board of Supervisors to tell me if the BOS approved this policy. To this day Carole Groom has refused to answer that simple question.

Again I’m asking who is responsible for this idea and policy? What is the status as of today. There are only 15 days left before this terrible/unlawful policy takes effect.

The Public has a right to know this information.

my previous e-mail 1/11/2019

Hello Carole,

Could you please tell me if the Board of Supervisors approved this and if so what date and agenda item was it. I’m doing a follow up story on this subject and wanted to know who is responsible for this policy.

Thank You

Michael G. Stogner

Co-owner of San Mateo County News

Looking forward to getting a response from any of you today.

Sincerely.

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

1 Comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #Humantraffickedsexslaves, #OperationDollhouse, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Adrienne Tissier, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, Jim Sutton, Jody L. Williams, John Beiers, Juan P. Lopez, Kevin Mullins, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, MTC, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, TBWB, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer

Six4Three vs.FaceBook, Mark Zuckerberg

Update: The idea that Hon. Judge Swope would order Theadore Kramer to surrender his laptop cellphone and Passwords to San Mateo County Authorities by 8PM today is Nuts. Just look at what the Authorities are doing to Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez in his criminal case. R.E.A.C.T. Task force.

Today 2:00 PM in San Mateo County Superior Court 8A Hon. Judge V. Raymond Swope.

ALL PARTIES MUST APPEAR no telephonic appearances. That means people flying in from around the world.

 

30727422_1046328192172159_7715425602097905664_n

San Mateo County Superior Court Hon. Judge Raymond Swope.

Not really sure what is left to talk about at this time since it looks like the Sealed Documents that the Judge ordered three years ago are now in the public domain from Europe. This was a two tiered Non Discloser Protective Order, Why?

To protect a favorite San Mateo County Employer?

San Mateo County Judges, Secret and Illegal Search Warrants, San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez and Jody L. Williams, Vungle x CEO Zain Jaffer criminal cases come to mind.

Here is the court documents:

SIX4THREE v. Facebook, inc

By Michael G. Stogner

CNN Article

Note: I just went to post this on my personal FB page and for the first time in 10 years I was asked to sign in. That is pretty fast for a picture sharing social media platform.

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #MeToo, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, California Bar Association, Carole Groom, Chris Hunter, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Grand Jury, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Jim Hartnett, Judges, Kevin Mullins, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Mark Zuckerberg, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, RICO, Rosanne Faust, SAMCEDA, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Steve Wagstaffe, Theodore Kramer, Those Who Matter, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer

Parliament, San Mateo County, RICO, Facebook, Sealed Records, Judge Raymond Swope etc.

30727422_1046328192172159_7715425602097905664_n

San Mateo County Superior Court Hon. Judge Raymond Swope.

This is nothing new or shocking for the residents of San Mateo County, Iv’e been reporting about this for 19 years. Look no further than Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez, Jody L. Williams and x CEO Vungle Zain Jaffer criminal cases.

Mark Zuckerberg = NO SHOW

Not much coverage in San Mateo County by the 7 advertising businesses, Mark Simon Climate rwc, Jon Mays San Mateo Daily Journal, Dave Price Palo Alto Daily Post, Dave Boyce The Almanac, Clay Lampert Half Moon Bay Review, San Jose Mercury News, SFGATE, etc.

Yesterdays hearings 11/27/2008

Parliament TV

 

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, California State Bar, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Chris Hunter, City of Redwood City, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, Dave Price, David Burruto, DOJ, Don Horsley, Heinz Puschendorf, Jody L. Williams, John Beiers, Jon Mays, Juan P. Lopez, Judges, Kevin Mullins, Mark Church, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Palo Alto Daily Post, Prosecutorial Misconduct, RICO, San Mateo County News, San Mateo Daily Journal, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Silicon Valley, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Whistleblowers, Yes on Measure A 2012, Zain Jaffer

D.A. Steve Wagstaffe never apologized to Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez. Prosecutorial Misconduct.

Steve-Wagstaffe

D.A. Stephen M. Wagstaffe

He did apologize to SFGATE editor. In a Zain Jaffer Misinformation PR piece.

pastedGraphic.pdf pastedGraphic_1.pdf 

From: Bulwa, Demian [DBulwa@sfchronicle.com] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 2:44 PM
To: Steve Wagstaffe
CC: Koehn, Josh; Stone, Erin 

Subject: Jaffer story
Hi Steve, I hope you’re well.
We’ve added a note of clarification at the top of that story online. https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Child-sex-assault-charges-dropped-against-former-13045284.php Thank you,
Demian 

Demian Bulwa 

METRO EDITOR
Office 415.777.7228 • Cell 415-298-6619 TWITTER: @demianbulwa
WRITING: demianbulwa.blogspot.com 

pastedGraphic_2.pdf pastedGraphic_3.pdf 

From: Steve Wagstaffe
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 3:02 PM To: Bulwa, Demian
Subject: RE: Jaffer story 

Hi Demian, 

Thank you very much. I apologize that we made the mistake we did and I appreciate your clarifying it for us. 

Life is great here in San Mateo County; I hope it is going equally for you. 

Thanks Steve 

No Reporters have asked Deputy Lopez how he felt about that.

Case dismissed against former deputy

21253_main

Juan P. Lopez

Juan Lopez

The case against a former San Mateo County sheriff’s deputy being charged for allegedly helping to smuggle cellphones and prescription drugs into county jail was dismissed Friday after a judge ruled evidence that could have showed he did not commit the crime should have been presented to a criminal grand jury.

But District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said Judge Donald Ayoob is imposing a burden on the prosecution that the law does not require. He said prosecutors informed grand jury members of letters an inmate wrote recanting his testimony connecting Juan Pablo Lopez, 54, with a cellphone involved in the case, and were not required to present them unless the jury asked to see them. He disagreed with Judge Donald Ayoob’s ruling that prosecutors had a duty to present the letters, and said prosecutors may consider refiling the case or appealing the decision.

“We feel the judge made a very serious error in his ruling,” he said. “We will assess it the coming days.”

 

On Dec. 16, 2015, Lopez and two county jail correctional officers, George Ismael and Michael Del Carlo, were accused of providing cellphones and drugs to inmate Dionicio Rafael Lopez Jr., who was also indicted along with Leticia Lopez, Amanda Lopez and Roxanne Ingebretsen, according to prosecutors.

On Nov. 17, the case against Del Carlo was dismissed after Ayoob granted his motion to dismiss over strenuous prosecution objection, according to prosecutors.

Once a write-in candidate for county sheriff, Lopez is also being accused of embezzlement, perjury and election fraud based on allegations he used donations from his campaign for his own personal use and lied about his city of residence, according to prosecutors.

Lopez listed his residence as being in Redwood City but allegedly was living in Newark when he filed to run for sheriff in 2014. He is also being accused of misrepresenting his address on a real estate loan, according to prosecutors.

Lopez will next appear in court Jan. 25 to set a new jury trial date for the embezzlement, perjury and election fraud charges and is out of custody on a $170,000 bail bond, according to prosecutors.

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102

(12) comments

MJD
MJD

Anna Schuessler Daily Journal staff has this statement wrong–Lopez will next appear in court Jan. 25 to set a new jury trial date for the embezzlement, perjury and election fraud charges and is out of custody on a $170,000 bail bond, according to prosecutors.
Jan. 25, 2018 is to hear the motion for 2nd case remaining charges.
SM Daily Journal , please contact his attorney for clarification.

MJD
MJD

To correct the San Mateo Daily Journal, former Deputy Juan Pablo Lopez next court hearing is January 25, 2018. I am requesting the newspaper to contact his attorney about this date.

MJD
MJD

Let’s see if the local media covers Mr. Juan Pablo Lopez ( Former SMC Deputy ) on his next hearings.

MJD
MJD

I hope the local and national media will follow the rest of this case, I am sure the rest of the phony charges will be dropped.

MJD
MJD

When will the San Mateo County public/voters going to wake up?
San Mateo County District Attorney’s office is trying to destroy former Deputy Sheriff Juan Lopez.
I hope someone will get this to the national media.
I can only imagine how much money this is causing former Deputy Juan Lopez.
PLEASE HELP GET THIS OUT TO EVERYONE!!!

Grinstead
Grinstead

Let me get this straight. Wagstaffe’s little pal Sheriff Munks and Under-sheriff Carlos Bolanos are caught going into a house of underaged trafficked prostitution in Las Vegas in 2007, for their own recreation. Wagstaffe defends them to the hilt and says they did nothing wrong. He sweeps it under the rug.

But when a clean deputy decides to run against the corruption of the San Mateo Sheriff, Wagstaffe and Munks punish him by cooking up suspect charges that don’t hold up light when examined AND hold a big press conference to announce it? Lopez wasn’t the one caught going into a place with underaged trafficked girls. The fact that someone dared to challenge the corrupt sheriff angered Wagstaffe and Munks. Something is rotten in San Mateo County

MJD
MJD

Great statements!!!!

Jpineapple
Jpineapple

research about Mr. Lopez and San Mateo the last 3 years is quite a story.

Jpineapple
Jpineapple

if the con wrote a letter exonerating Lopez,why was it a case for 3 years?

Michael Stogner
Michael Stogner

The District Attorney’s Office withheld the letters from the Grand Jury, and offered a not so truthful representation of what the Jailhouse snitch actually said. To this day there has been ZERO evidence that Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez was connected to the cellphone/s and drugs, and the DA’s Office has always known that fact. Disgusting behavior.

Michael Stogner
Michael Stogner

It’s about time, After over 3 years of the District Attorney’s lies and false charges against Former Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez and others a Judge finally got to see what the DA’s office has done. It shouldn’t take over 3 years to present your side of a case. This dismissal makes 4 for 4 defendants charges dismissed.

MJD
MJD

San Mateo County D.A.’s office has a long list of cases of injustice, for the people who know, lies are not too uncommon.

Leave a comment

Filed under #CarlosBolanos, #OperationDollhouse, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Chief Deputy District Attorney Al Serrato, Chief Deputy District Attorney Karen Guidotti, Chris Hunter, Citizens Access TV, Citizens Oversight Committee, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, DDA Bryan Abanto, DOJ, Don Horsley, Grand Jury, Heinz Puschendorf, Hon.Judge Donald Ayoob, John Beiers, John Ullom, Juan P. Lopez, Mark De Paula, Mark Simon, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Mike Brosnan, Mike Callagy, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Lt. Andrew Armando, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, San Mateo County Superior Court, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Silicon Valley, SMC, SMCSO Sgt. Jason Peardon, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Uncategorized, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Whistleblowers, Zain Jaffer