I received the following email from Tim Wulff through Michael Stogner:
This news article written by Joshua Melvin smacks of bias, distortion and misrepresentation of fact. This was NOT a competency hearing. It was an incompetency hearing. Competency is presumed. Incompetency is not presumed. The statement 'He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent' is a false statement. He will or will not be retried solely on the determination and decision of the DA's Office. The fact of the mistrial on incompetency will raise issues on appeal. That will be the DA's concern. This Further, in spite of the utterly unusual events surrounding the declaration of mistrial and the basis for it, not one word of comment is made by the reporter on this subject. Why? How often does such a high profile case terminate its deliberations so quickly? Yet not a word from this person reviewing the event. Further, although on-site observers of the trial are unclear as to whether there was a public hearing of the mistrial event, as has always been the case in my experience, there appears to be the possibility that the entire event was conducted in private. This would be extraordinary if true, and certainly newsworthy. We all know from having seen events like this repeatedly, that it is common practice for a judge to admonish the jurors, consult and advise them according to the law and send them back to try again time and again. Yet, in this case, the judge seems eager to accept the mistrial path and waste the taxpayer's hard-earned money. Why? None of these issues are addressed by the reporter and editor who seem to my mind intent on creating misinformation in an attempt to mislead the public. If this is the case, it is reprehensible and irresponsible in the extreme. There has already been a long series of events in this case of questionable actions and behaviors on the part of both Bay Area News Groups characterizations in their reporting of this horrid trial, as well as those of the DA's Office and the Courts in the conduct of this case. Does Dr. Ayres have knowledge of the conduct of others within the government and judiciary of the County of San Mateo that requires those in power to take steps to collaborate in efforts to protect him from the obvious consequences of his actions? One can only speculate..