Thursday, May 3, 2012

william ayres To Remain at Napa For Now

[Original Post: 05/03/2012 3:07PM PST: DS]
Solveig Ayres, Barbara Ayres
On Thursday, May 3, 2012, there was a hearing for Criminal Case SC064366 relating to the incarceration status of william hamilton ayres who is currently in custody at Napa State Hospital after using an incompetency defense to avoid re-trial for his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide them with psychiatric care. In such cases, where the perpetrator is dangerous, California law requires that the offender be held in a locked mental health facility for a minimum of six months. ayres has now been locked up at Napa State Hospital for six months, give or take a few days.


Jonathan McDougall, ayres’ Scumbag Attorney, says that ayres is struggling with life at Napa, and the minimum incarceration period has now passed, and therefore Scumbag requested today's hearing to establish OUTPATIENT "treatment" for ayres' alleged dementia.

Dementia has not been clearly established, as the court appointed evaluation doctors found him to be competent to defend himself,  based on rigorous testing, and MRI results that did not show markers typical of Alzheimer's. Further, ayres has been videotaped, clearly competent, and having lunch with "very good friend" and psychiatrist, Lawrence Lurie, MD who has published papers on Alzheimer's and its symptoms. The paid doctors who testified at the competency trial in ayres' defense apparently used less rigorous, more subjective "testing." The jury in the competency trial could not ultimately decide between the unbiased, court appointed doctors and the biased defense doctors, and the jury ended deadlocked. On August 22, 2011, the DA gave up the fight, and stipulated that ayres was not competent to defend himself, in spite of the court appointed doctor's conclusions and the videotaped evidence of ayres' competent behavior. ayres managed to manipulate the court and the DA for a bit longer, and stayed out of Napa State until October 25, 2011.

Last week (April 25, 2012) Solveig Ayres, the child molester's vapid, supporting wife, was in probate court to appoint her daughter, Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, to be the conservator for medical decisions for ayres, so that they'd have all their ducks in a row for today's hearing. The Judge told them that there was no urgency, and they could wait until after today's hearing finishes.

Today's hearing was originally scheduled to take place on April 27th, 2012, but was held over largely due to  ayres' attorney Scumbag McDougall's very late filing of appropriate paperwork, and none of the witnesses for the defense or prosecution were present in court. On April 27th, Scumbag did request that the medical reports be sealed until today's hearing. It was reported to the press that included in the documents provided by Scumbag were letters from Robert Ayres and Barbara Ayres, the pig-shit son and daughter of ayres, talking about how hard things are for their child molester daddy.


molester william hamilton ayres’ scumbag attorney’s request to release him into the population -- so that he can get better care by not being under continual watch because he’s so demented that he needs outpatient care, but with medical conservatorship -- was heard:

In court today were quite a few people.

Solveig and Barbara Ayres were present, and there were about three other people with them, I believe that it’s possible that one or more of them were doctors who were hired by the defense. Also present were at least two doctors from Napa State hospital. There were at least 4 people observing for the victims.

At 9:55 william hamilton ayres, the child molester, was brought into the courtroom. He was walking in using a walker. No wheelchair this time.  The molester was wearing an orange prison jumpsuit with a chain around his waist, and a large padlock at the small of his back.  There were handcuffs attached to the chain on both of his sides, but he was not cuffed to them at the time.  He was looking thin in his arms, but still somewhat bulky in body. His beard was not unkempt as was reported in the fishwrappers last week, and again this afternoon. It may have been trimmed somewhat shorter this week. Honestly I don’t remember his beard seeming unkempt last week, and it DEFINITELY was very neatly brushed today. I think this is more than just a bit of bias on the part of the press. They seem to be buying into the whole "demented" story, and are seeing and incorrectly reporting stereotypes that are not present. 

When ayres sat down in his chair, one of the sheriffs came over and locked him in place.

Judge Grandsaert set the tone for today’s hearing: “I have now read the papers for each side, and…  I have to say, Mr. McDougall, I’m just not sure…  what the purpose of the hearing is.”

Defense Testimony:

I think McDougall was more than a little unprepared for this kind of opening statement.

He spent a good deal of time narrating past history, and talked about the 90 day report from Napa, and hearing, followed another report 6 months from the 90 day report.  He went into a complicated and convoluted description of the purpose of all of these hearings and related statutes.  He complained that Napa was late in providing the 90 day report, and that the follow-on report should not be delayed even more because of the lateness of the 90 day report. McDougall says that there is a conflict between the 180 day MINIMUM and the fact that it’s really at least 9 months, since there is a 90 day report and then another report six months after that.  (I’m not sure what MINIMUM means to McDougall. Perhaps he’s confused.)

McDougall spent some time talking about two cases revolving around the constitutionality of holding a demented person in lockup indefinitely if there is no likelihood of return to competency.  McDougall talked at convoluted length about 1603 and 1370 (AIF) penal codes.  The statutes seem to have some built in conflict about when a person becomes available for outpatient treatment, and whether the purpose is to return a person to competency or not, at least if you try to understand it as McDougall attempts to explain it...  He wanted to reset the second report to 30 days from today, rather than in late July / early August as scheduled. 

McDougall states: “There is no argument that he has dementia” and “I don’t think there’s an argument that he can be returned to competency

McDougall says that the 90 day report doesn’t indicate that he could be returned to competency, but he says that it DID indicate that ayres "needs to be more cooperative" (McDougall is doing some VERY creative paraphrasing here, as you'll see in a moment...) and that he needs another neuropsych report.  

McDougall bottom lines: Follow 1603 procedure, and to adjust the report date to meet the 9 months minimum. 

Prosecution Testimony:

The prosecution argued that the late 90 day report date isn’t overly relevant, and she also said that she thinks that McDougall is confused about what 1603 and 1370 mean. She states that 1370 means that outpatient treatment is intended to be used IF RETURN TO COMPETENCY IS EXPECTED

She states that at 90 days, if the DIRECTOR of the facility reports that the person can’t be restored to competency, THEN he can be returned to court, and conservatorship can be pursued. If the 90 day report does NOT say that he can’t be restored to competency, then he has the right to reports at 6 month intervals after the 90 day report.  Each six month report follows the same pattern.  Her explanation was very clear, and logical, especially when stood up against McDougall’s jumble of confused posturing. 

Essentially what I take from McKowan’s argument is that ayres will have a report every 6 months until he is either determined to be competent , or that competency is not possible, at which point ayres will probably be released, either to go to trial if he is competent , and the DA wants to persue charges, OR to be set free and placed under medical conservatorship, as a person with dementia. 

My take is that he will remain locked up at Napa only for as long as it takes for them to adequately evaluate him, or to work on curing him, if they determine that he can be restored to competency. 

McKowan argues that McDougall can’t just haul in doctors from Napa, or his own paid doctors, because the statue only asks for a report from the director of the facility, and nothing else is relevant. FURTHER: She implies that the constitutionality only comes into question if the person is reported to be NOT RESTORABLE TO COMPETENCY.

McKowan states that this is not what the 90 day report indicates! 

The report says that he was not being cooperative, he was not taking medication, he was not sleeping because he refuses to use his CPAP machine (usually used for sleep apnea patients), he was refusing to participate in group sessions, he was not participating in restoration planning.  The report DOESN’T say anything about whether or not he can be restored to competency, because the doctors need to be able to evaluate him, but he’s not cooperating. 

McKowan said that she talked to (the doctor appointed by the director (?) to write the report), and he said that there seems to be some indication that ayres could be returned to competency. 

McKowan says: I don’t believe that the court has anything that we can act on today.”

McKowan says there is no violation of due process and puts the blame for any delay squarely on ayres’ shoulders with his “failure to cooperate” and his “pointed intention NOT to be restored to competency.” “By his own actions, he missed his opportunity.”

Back to the Defense:

Scumbag McDougall was shaking his head throughout the prosecutor’s presentation, and was clearly upset with what McKowan had said about the blame being laid on ayres’ own shoulders.  

He said that it was OUTRAGEOUS to suggest that someone with dementia was purposely trying to prevent restoration to competency!

I happen to agree with McDougall here… I don’t think that someone with dementia would purposely try to prevent restoration to competency unless they were actually competent, and were trying to prevent doctors from declaring him “restored” if he was going to face prison for child molestation. (Wait for it, because it's coming.....)

McDougall states that the court has information that “shows” that ayres is not a danger to society. 

I have no idea what form this proof could take. Perhaps magical faeries have managed to read ayres mind, and determined that somehow his sexual arousal triggers have changed, and now only vapid old trolls are attractive to him, and suddenly, after probably 60 years or so, he’s no longer turned on by little boys --  McDougall needs to share whatever’s in his crack pipe… ‘cause that’s some damn fine shit.

Back to Prosecution:

McKowan  then countered by stating the following about what the report indicates: 
The doctors report that ayres was INTENTIONALLY not cooperating:
1) Because his lawyer told him not to.
2) The doctors specifically stated in the report that at one point Solveig tells her husband, to “Just go ahead and give it a try” to do what the doctors request and see if it works. Ayres’ reply was “Why, so I can go to prison?”  (And there you have it folks....)

McKowan says that court should be able to infer from the report that ayres was expecting to go, spend his six months, and then be released. 

McKowan indicated that the victims should be given the opportunity to make a statement at the time that ayres is expected to be released from Napa.


McDougall tried to argue more that he should still be released. Discussion went back and forth. Everyone tried to nail down a date for the next hearing.

The judge said that he’s reviewed the statues, and that provisions of 1603 have not been met. He adjusted the date to July 25, 2012 so that it falls 9 months after lockup. He said that the report should address 1603 and have some conclusion about whether or not restoration of competency can be done, and to the extent that it can be done at Napa State Hospital. He said that if the director’s report can be done early, it should be done early. 

They set the next hearing date for July 25, 2012 at 8:45am so that they can look at the report, and determine next steps. 

Finally, McDougall complained that after last week’s hearing, the judge ordered ayres to be transported back to Napa, but that he wasn’t… instead he was left in county lockup for the week!  

McDougall complained that the sheriffs had simply ignored the judge’s order. McDougall whined that it’s contributed to ayres’ further decay. McDougall told the court to order ayres returned TODAY to Napa State Hospital.

The judge smacked McDougall back, saying that he had reviewed his record from the hearing last week, and that there was actually no order, therefore no violation.  The judge then ordered that ayres be transported back to Napa at the earliest possible convenience of the sheriff’s office. 

NONE of the witnesses present were called to testify, nor were the pleading letters of ayres' dumb shit children considered, as their testimony was irrelevant. 

The San Mateo County Times has their news report up. <pdf> There’s not much meat there though. 

An article in the San Mateo Daily Journal <pdf> states in no uncertain terms that william hamilton ayres ""who is 80 and has Alzheimer’s-related dementia, is trying to avoid a second trial by refusing his medication and is also very uncooperative with the staff at Napa State Hospital where he was sent last year for treatment"


  1. Ha ! Ha! Left in County lockup for a week!! Last time he was in jail one of his former victims ran into him and ended up testifying against him in the trial.

    Somebody raised Ayres to be a spoiled willful brat who has tantrums when he doesn't get his own way. When some of his young boy patients refused to undress for him, he simply told the mothers there was "nothing more " he "could do for them." It is unheard of for a child psychiatrist to do this.

    The female secretaries who worked at the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry used to complain that he was nasty to them and treated them like dirt. ..

    Well, well, well. Karma time for Ayres.

    Interesting that he said he would go to prison.... Isn't that kind of an admission of guilt?

  2. Solveig looks weirdly happy in this photo. Perhaps she's relieved he's not getting out?

    Ayres is a notoriously difficult person.

    1. They were mostly joking as they came out... in a later frame, Barbara can be seen having a good chuckle.

      They were pretty disgusted to see us there.

  3. I think some of the people might be the children of Ayres' sister- the ones who live in Santa Cruz.

  4. Deep, Great week in our jail nice...keep up the good work I know it's not easy.

    Michael Stogner

    1. Thanks!

      Yeah... I must admit, I was a bit inappropriate and chuckled out loud when McDougall whined about ayres being left in lockup... McDougall really had his panties twisted today... lol

  5. I'm a bit confused. Mckowan told numerous people in August 2011 that Napa was NOT the place for Ayres to go, and that he should go to some rest home. She said he shouldn't go to Napa because he wouldn't get better there.

    Bottom line is: DA's office didn't want to retry Ayres because of money and lawsuits.

    1. I think that's basically what she's still saying...
      When the report comes out, and it says that they can't do anything to fix him, he'll be let go.

      UNLESS... The report says that he's not cooperating.. then they either keep him locked up, and do this every six months, OR if the report says that he's NOT demented, and that he's malingering, then he might face trial again... I'm guessing slim chance.

  6. I think we need to keep helping the Boston Police with their investigation into Ayres. They would see right through Ayres' little "dementia" act.

  7. the pig-shit son and daughter of ayres.....very
    good description. looks like ayres is really loosing out on all aspects. that makes me, a former patient of ayres in boston, very happy. the week long lock-up was good medicine for him. i really hope things turn out for another trial and ayres ends up in prison, where he belongs. if this were the 'old' days in the USA, ayres should be locked up, head and hands, put in the town square and be allowed to be stoned by the victims and the citizens! that would be proper punishment for what he has done for sooo many years. whipping would be a good punishment as well. here's hoping that at least he be locked up in prison for the rest of his miserable life. good work by you, victoria, you deserve honors for bringing this perverted, life ruining, dickwad to the public for the horrors he has created for so many young, innocent boys. great job!!...joel silver

  8. I'm thinking he has shown his ass as my southern Drill Seargents used to say when I screwed up.
    He is showing consciousness of guilt by not participating with the prescribed program at the hospital. By being able to discuss it coherently in public and remarking "Why so I can go to prison?" when asked to correct his behavior he shows it is recalcitrance and not the alleged dimentia. His own words and actions verify the independent reports that found him fit for trial.
    How is it our system is so broken no person with authority has stoop up and ended this travesty by ordering he be tried by a different prosecutors office?
    Maybe we should start a campaign to get Boston to extradite him. I agree they'd be less likely to allow the BS that has kept him free so far. Even though he's under lock and key in Napa, he's free until he gets convicted in my mind.
    The county should turn this over to the AG or another county to prosecute as they have a conflict in this case, being the accused accomplice.
    Its only just hit home for me that fact. The San Mateo County Prosecutors office and the County Judiciary are Ayers defacto accomplices.
    Is that something or am I just thinking too hard?

  9. Is that Barbara the big gal in the middle? Looks a lot like ayres.....poor thing.

    1. Barbara is third from the left, holding the smaller blue notebook. Solveig is on the left, holding the larger blue notebook.

      If you click the picture, it blows up larger, and you can see detail better.

    2. All five people were together. I'm not sure who the others are. The weird hat guy appears to be blind or mostly blind; he seemed not too timid in following everyone, but he did feel for the steps with his cane, although very subtly.

  10. Well Barbara looks a tad unpleasant. But her build and height surely resembles ayres. Great photo, perhaps it's time to add Babs to the montage.....

    1. Well, I've held off because she's been quiet, but since she's now placed herself into the public record with her assinine letters to her child molester daddy...

  11. Anonymous, May 3 at 7:07 is right.

    The DA is complicit in this. All last summer prosecutor Mckowan told anyone who would listen that the DA was NOT going to retry Ayres as "no jury would ever find him to be competent." She told people Napa was NOT the place for him as he would not get better.

    Then DA Wagstaffe, when finally cornered by a mother of an in-statute victim in late August 2011, told the mother IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT THEY WERE NOT EVER GOING TO RETRY AYRES BECAUSE THEY "COULDN'T JUSTIFY THE EXPENSE OF A RETRIAL TO TAXPAYERS." He also told the mother that the fact that prosecutor Mckowan had been blabbing to various people all summer that Ayres was NOT going to Napa was "improper" and that she should not have done this and that he was going to speak to her about it. Bet he didn't... Wagstaffe is a liar.

    Wagstaffe also said that he would not be "helpful to a jury to show that Ayres was using a walker."

    Wagstaffe is terrified of the fact that his precious County paid Ayres close to half a million dollars for more than forty years to rape and molest boys in court ordered sessions and is terrified of these lawsuits if there is a conviction. Well, get ready Wagstaffe, because the juveniles who were raped by Ayres and bargained with in court ordered sessions are preparing to sue the County..

    The County and judges had dozens of complaints from victims- including from former juveniles. This could have been stopped back in the 1960s, when boys first started to complain about Ayres. But the DA's office hired Ayres, Childrens Services and probation and the courts and Private Defenders and all of the juvenile judges hired Ayres. Marta Diaz knew the police were investigating Ayres and yet there is documented evidence that she continued to send boys to him for FIFTEEN MONTHS after the police started investigating Ayres. She's under investigation too.

    Now - after saying for three months last year that "NO JURY WOULD EVER FIND AYRES TO BE COMPETENT AND WE WILL NOT RETRY AYRES" the prosecutor is now accusing Ayres of trying to not act competent to avoid a trial. The DA's office speaks out of both sides of its mouth. Do not trust them.

    Wagstaffe has been adamant that he is not going to retry Ayres. So someone's lying here. Wagstaffe and his henchmen lie to the public constantly,

    Wagstaffe and the prosecutor have said he will not be retried. Do not fall for the DA's little act. Because of lawsuits, they do not want to retry Ayres.

    But the lawsuits are coming down the pike anyway as we speak.

    And Ayres better get ready for the Boston victims who will be coming forward. The Boston Suffolk DA's office are much tougher on pedophiles than San Mateo County is. They don't give a rat's ass who he is or that he worked for San Mateo County.