Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Times Calls ayres Retrial Hearing "SUSPICIOUS"

The print edition of Saturday, August 27, 2011 San Mateo County Times has the following headline:

"Court in Session... A Little Early: Time of Ayres' retrial hearing is suspicious"

The article, a brief "Insider" blurb that got top billing on the paper calls attention to an important issue that I had originally missed. When I first reported on the August 22 hearing, I did not notice the TIME that I got reports from people at the hearing. I heard from them at about 9:10am.  It was actually finished BEFORE the scheduled 9am start time.

Here are some snippets from the San Mateo County Times Article:

District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the hearing in San Mateo County Superior Court Judge John Grandsaert's courtroom would begin at 9 a.m. Grandsaert himself listed the time of the hearing as 9.

So the Insider, and Supervisor Dave Pine, were a bit surprised to learn, when they arrived at 9, that the hearing was already over. It had begun at 8:45

The reporter in the Times goes on to call the behavior fishy, talks about Wagstaffe's excuse, and sarcastically chides Judge Grandsaert's questionable decision.

Go on over to the San Mateo County Times article (pdf) to read about it. Note that the online version has changed the headline to the somewhat less confrontational: "The Insider: Ayres hearing time travels"

Yet more coordinated, suspicious behavior by the molester, the DA, and the Judiciary. It floors me that many don't see the collusion.


  1. Un-fricking unbelievable.

    Wagstaffe told Pine that it was"very unusual" that they would only give a week to evaluate Ayres. No doubt that's because Wagstaffe panicked and asked for it.

    The Attorney General's office and the other government agencies who are investigating Wagstaffe and his little crew for corruption have been duly notified of this latest incident.

  2. I am surprised - but glad- that the County Times is finally standing up to Wagstaffe a bit.

    My guess is that they are still pissed off at him for hiding in his office and not returning their phone calls after the news of the private investigator broke.

  3. From an AP story last week:

    He will likely be sent to Napa State Hospital, where he will be monitored for six months to see whether he regains competency, Chief Deputy District Attorney Karen Guidotti said.

    Let's get this straight:

    Since June 24, prosecutor Melissa Mckowan has been telling victims and families that "no jury will ever find Ayres to be competent".

    Her boss, District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe tells a mother of a victim on August 20, 2011 adamantly that they will not retry Ayres.

    Now Chief Deputy DA Karen Guidotti says they may retry him if he's found to be competent.

    Hogwash. We all know Ayres is competent to stand trial but he will never be tried in San Mateo County.

    In the past week, a number of requests have been made by citizens to the Attorney General's office for a change of venue- based on conflict of interest between the San Mateo DA; Ayres and the juvenile courts

    Ayres is competent.

    Try him now.

    And get a DA's office that isn't being INVESTIGATED FOR CORRUPTION to try him.

  4. Claude Foulk, the director of Napa was convicted of child molestation earlier this year:

    Foulk, the former head of Napa State Hospital, was convicted of 20 counts of forcible oral copulation, nine counts of sodomy and two counts of lewd acts for abuse between 1992 and 2001. He was acquitted of two counts each of sodomy and oral copulation for charged acts that occurred after the victim was 18.

    Read more: http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/ex-napa-state-director-sentenced-to-years-for-sex-abuse/article_227c0a8c-3f86-11e0-8e14-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1WzpwQlKs