Monday, March 18, 2013

News Blurb on ayres Prosecutor

There is a brief new article posted in the San Francisco Chronicle (pdfabout prosecutor McKowan, the prosecutor in the william hamilton ayres child molester criminal case.

 The article is similar in detail to other recent news blurbs, but with additional quotes from Victoria Balfour.

Notably, the article reads in a very non-biased manner, at least as far as I'm concerned.

Here's a quote from the article:

Balfour had accused McKowan of a number of transgressions, including failing to contact doctors who trained with former child psychiatrist William Ayres and who, she said, would have strengthened the molestation case against him.

Just to refresh everyone's memory about just a few of the doctors that Balfour chased down and asked if they were trained to perform "medical exams" as part of their therapy:

➲ Dr. Morton Kurland [ Did his child psychiatry residency at Yale New Haven Children Center during  the same time frame that ayres was getting his “training”]: 

Kurland was shocked at the notion of giving physical exams to children and states: “We were taught not to put even a hand on the shoulder of a child” and “For him to use this as an excuse for his behavior is pathetic. The idea that child psychiatrists do this sort of thing is just off the boards."

➲ Stephen Shaffer, [Judge Baker Children’s Center COO]:

"The idea that our psychiatrists were trained to give physical exams like that in therapy is just preposterous. It's absurd. It's horrifying. I've been in the field for a long time and I have never heard of child psychiatrists being trained to do this. We've trained close to 1000 psychiatrists and we have never taught this. I just can't imagine it."

➲ Gordon P. Harper MD, [Did his residency at Judge Baker Children’s Center in early 1970’s]:

"In my Judge Baker training, we didn't even do a neurological exam on children." And "It's a dodge that other child psychiatrists use who are molesting children."

➲ Dr. Lee Willer, [trained WITH ayres at Judge Baker Children’s Center in the 1960’s]: 

"In fact, we were advised not to do physicals on children"

➲ Psychologist Nicholas Verven, [ at Judge Baker at the same time as ayres, and knew both william AND Solveig ayres]: 

"Physical exams of children would not be supported by the training we had. Ayres was certainly not trained to do this at Judge Baker."

➲ Psychologist Irving Hurwitz, [supervisor at Manville School and also remembered both ayres and Solveig]:

“There were very strict rules as to how therapy with children would be done, and physical exams were not done. Any hint that any therapist would be doing physicals would raise serious concerns."

➲ Psychologist Roger Bibace, [worked at Judge Baker in the same time frame that ayres was there]: 

"Nobody was trained to give physical exams at Judge Baker, " he said. "This is revolting! This sounds just like that Mel Levine case!"

➲ Dr William Beardslee, [professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital]: 

Said he “knows of no child psychiatrist either at Judge Baker or anywhere else who was ever trained to give physical exams to kids in therapy.”

➲ Dr. Pauline Hahn, [psychologist and research director at Judge Baker for 54 years recalled "Bill" Ayres]:

States that child psychologists were "NEVER trained to give physical exams."

➲ Dr. Joan Zilbach, [(now deceased) worked with william ayres at Judge Baker]: 

Stated that “Neither she nor Ayres nor anyone else in their group was trained to give "physicals" at Judge Baker.”

➲ Dr. Milton Shore, [On staff at Judge Baker in the general time frame that ayres was there]: 

"Never, never, never did you touch a child in therapy!" he said, forcefully. "It was very implicit. You didn't do physical exams. Period.You just didn't do it !

➲ Dr. Richard Hinckley Wolff, [Did residency at Judge Baker with william ayres]:  

"I never heard of anyone doing a physical at Judge Baker. I never did one myself and I never remember anyone presenting a case where they had done a physical. I've never heard of it."

➲ Dr. David Reiser, [Trained at Judge Baker in 1954-1956]:  

“If there had been any instance in which a child needed a physical exam, the physical exam would have been done at Children's Hospital, which was right across the street.”

➲ Dr Jacqueline Amati Mehler, [Trained with ayres, and remembered him well]: 

"At Judge Baker, child psychiatrists treated the children's minds only.  The pediatricians examined the children. "

➲ Dr Stanley Walzer, [at Judge Baker while ayres was there, Director of Judge Baker in the 1970s]:

“Me, I didn't do physical exams on kids. To suggest we did at Judge Baker is crazy!!” 

➲ Dr. Joseph Mullen, [at Judge Baker while ayres was there]: 

“We didn't do physical exams in psychiatric sessions with children. That's not part of the psychiatric treatment. No way!!” 

➲ Dr. Dan Ditmore, [at Judge Baker while ayres was there]:  

"I didn't do physical exams on children and neither did anyone else there." 


  1. When it comes to solid reporting and professionalism, the Chronicle reporters who've covered the Ayres case have always been miles ahead of reporters in San Mateo County.

  2. "The alleged abuses took place from 1991 to 1996, prosecutors say." However I was a 'client' of Ayres in Boston in 1962-3..fortunately I was too old (17-18)to be molested by Ayres...however from our counciling sessions I knew SOMETHING was wrong w/his continuing line of sexual oriented lines of discuussions/questions. There is NO DOUBT in my mind that Ayres...and all the things discovered by the last several years of investigations...and my OWN experienceS...that Ayres is "GUILTY AS CHARGED!" He needs SEVERE PUNISHMENT for his OVER 50 YEARS! of molestations, coast to coast!! AND the misconduct and right out lies that McKowan and her co-horts have committed, also need to be punished! JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL! Many thanks to Victoria Balfour and her never ending hard work, PRO BONO, over the last several years to see that JUSTICE IS DONE! Tnx so much Vic!!

  3. The Chronicle doesn't mention that several people sent complaints about the prosecutor to the Bar, and that included in the complaints was an incident where the prosecutor falsely accused the poor mother of an Ayres victim of funneling "confidential information" about the Ayres case and feeding it to the William Ayres blog. When the mother denied doing this, the prosecutor insisted that she had, and warned her that the evidence that she was the culprit was in her "files in my office."

    When the mother finally complained to Chief Deputy DA Guidotti about Mckowan's bizarre false accusation, Guidotti said, "We aren't keeping any files on you." Guidotti promised to have the prosecutor apologize to the mother, but it never happened. Almost three years later, the mother is still waiting for an apology.

    Wagstaffe's office doesn't understand that if they don't treat crime victims with respect, that the victims will stop cooperating with the DA's office and won't testify. The DA's office has allowed the disrespect and in some cases abuse of crime victims for far too long

    Wagstaffe, by his refusal to discipline his unethical prosceutor who has committed similar misconduct in two other cases against crime victims and prosecution witnesses is saying, "We don't care about crime victims at all."

    Wagstaffe's office has revictimized the victims' families in the Ayres case.

  4. On this blog, on January 29, 2010, the prosecutor wrote about her contact with doctors who trained with Ayres in Boston. This is one of the things the Bar was investigating her for. Note how here she discredits the doctors that Balfour found, saying that their information was not helpful. She also said one doctor was "physically unable to travel."

    Here's her blog comment. I will then post an article from the Mercury News from October 25, 2011, where she completely contradicts herself on the Boston doctors.

    Melissa McKowanJanuary 29, 2010 at 7:12 AM

    Judge Baker told ME, unlike whoever keeps talking about what their records will show, said there are no records from that time period. The reporter is trying to help to see if that's true. I know it is fashionable on the blogs to discuss your findings and then blame the DA for not discovering these things ourselves. But take my word for it, any "credible" tip that has come in has been looked into. So far, until this particular unattributed blog entry, I have never seen any "independent investigation" that has led to the discovery of an actual witness. For instance, the three (not four) Judge Baker Graduates who would allegedly have debunked Ayres' statements about being trained there--did NOT confirm to the police or the DA what it was alleged in the blogs that they would say. One told me that she had told the reporter who talked to her that she didn't know anything about Ayres and was in school later than him and that although she could say SHE was never trained to give exams, she "couldn't say for sure what his training was." That is NOT helpful. Another one refused to testify and the last one is physically unable to travel and lives in Europe. The blogs through around a lot of claims but trust me, if you have an actual tip (like what I might be seeing here in this particular entry) and you think it might lead to a witness or admissible evidence, please call me and I will be happy to talk to you about why the "evidence" either is or isn't admissible. I have let everyone know that if you come up with anything, I will certainly follow up on it. Many People have chosen to write only on these blogs which, I must say, I NEVER read becuase of the false and hurtful comments that are frequently directed at me, my office and my investigator. the only reason I read this entry today is because one of the victim's mothers sent it to me indcating it finally looked like it might have some good info. She was right. Thank you Barbara.

    Whoever "Trapellar" is, if you want to call me and discuss your "findings", I would be happy to talk to you. Thrilled in fact. The only thing I know for sure is that I am deeply committed to convicting Dr. Ayres for what he did to the boys/men I came to know and adore during the trial. I am also a very competitive person who HATES to lose!! That said, I invite anyone with information that they think will be useful to call me directly at the DA's office (650-363-4774) and talk to me about it. I wish you all well and I hope that I am successful in our mutual goal of convicting a horrible child molester. Thank you. Melissa McKowan, SMC DA's Office

  5. But in this Mercury News story from 10/25/11, the prosecutor, after saying that the Boston doctors weren't helpful or couldn't travel, are now suddenly saying that she had put them on her witness list. Never mind that she told some parents of Ayres victims during the trial that she had never spoken to them and had never called her back.

    By calling witnesses to testify that they were not trained to give physical exams at Judge Baker, the District Attorney's Office could have provided additional evidence that Ayres' practice of doing so was illegitimate, Balfour said.

    "The fundamental question is, was he trained to give physical and genital exams as part of his instruction in child psychiatry at Judge Baker?" Balfour said in a recent interview.
    Balfour tracked down several people who trained there during that period, including Dr. Jacqueline Amati Mehler, who told this newspaper in a recent email, "We were not trained to give any physical exam to psychiatric patients."

    Stephen Schaffer, chief operating officer of Judge Baker, canvassed senior staffers at the facility regarding the issue of physical exams after Balfour contacted him in 2009.
    He said recently that he came away convinced that Ayres would not have received that training.
    McKowan placed Amati Mehler and another person who trained at Judge Baker, Dr. Joseph Mullen, on her witness list for the 2009 criminal trial, but she didn't call them to the stand.
    McKowan told this newspaper that Amati Mehler and Mullen were not necessary to prove her case

  6. For those that do not know. In psychiatric evaluations the Psychiatrist has to first eliminate physical illness as a possible cause for the problem.
    This is ALWAYS done by first interviewing the patient and if they find cause they are sent to an MD for physical exam to rule out any illness that might cause the symptoms they are being evaluated for. While Psychitrists are trained doctors, the Psychiatrist NEVER does the physical exam themself for many fairly obvious reasons. Two that come to mind riught away are, they do not regularly practice physical medicine, they are going to be personally involved with the patient discussion emotional issues about who knows what and the physical nature of Medical Care would make that former relationship uneasy and might inhibit the patient from revealing something important.

  7. At the suggestion of a San Mateo Supervisor, a list of violations of Marsy's Law (the Victim's Right Bill enacted in 2008) by prosecutor Melissa Mckowan in three molestation cases has just been submitted to the San Mateo Board of Supervisors by crime victims' families.

    For the past three years, crime victims' families have written to District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe on these egregious violations of Marsy's Law that have been committed by his prosecutor in three cases. DA Wagstaffe has never bothered to respond.

    Will the San Mateo Board of Supervisors take this matter up?

  8. A high number of men on trial for murder in San Mateo County have reported that San Mateo District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe showed up for their trials to assist the assistant district attorneys on the case every step of the way.

    Curiously, neither Wagstaffe nor Deputy Chief Karen Guidotti ever showed up at the three- week Ayres trial once. No one was overseeing the prosecutor, who was in over her head.

    What does that say about how important the Ayres case was to the San Mateo DA? Is it because the DA's office itself has hired Ayres over the years?

    DA Wagstaffe has had numerous complaints about the prosecutor from crime victims over the years, saying that she doesn't prep witnesses, doesn't bother to look for expert witnesses, and is unprepared and unprofessional. Wagstaffe knows this but still keeps her on the case, despite the fact that she was sued for lying to a judge to get out of trying a case and has just been disciplined by the Bar.

  9. A second complaint has been submitted to the San Mateo Board of Supervisors concerning the Ayres prosecutor's false statements to victims during the Ayres trial in 2009 that victim's advocate Victoria Balfour was actually " working for Ayres' lawyer Doron Weinberg and getting paid by him.: (!!!???)

    Balfour was the person who found all of the Ayres victims whose names were used to get a search warrant on Ayres' home in 2006. Without her turning over these names to the San Mateo Police Department - at their request- there would have been no criminal investigation into Ayres. Years before there was a criminal case against Ayres, Balfour worked to keep the hopes up of victims who despaired there would never be an investigation. She found civil lawyers for some of them, and persuaded them to file complaints with the California Medical Board. Most importantly she got them to go to the police

    Complaints were sent to San Mateo District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe in 2009 and 2010 about the prosecutor's false and outrageous allegations that Balfour was actually working for Ayres' lawyer Doron Weinberg. . As is typical, Wagstaffe never bothered to respond.

    Something needs to be done, fast, about the problem in the DA's office. This is out of control.

  10. Oddly, while Mckowan was telling victims and their families during the Ayres trial in 2009 that Balfour was actually working for and getting paid by Ayres' lawyer Doron Weinberg, acting as some secret double agent or something, AT THE SAME TIME she was making these false accusations, the prosecutor came over to Balfour at the trial and asked for help in checking Ayres' resume to see if it was accurate. This was just a few minutes before the prosecutor was to cross-examine Ayres for the first time. It was clear she herself had never bothered to look at the resume, which was extremely lengthy.

    So a prosecutor asks for assistance from a victim's advocate who she thinks is working as a double agent for the defendant ? District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe was informed of the prosecutor's nutso behavior. He never responded. But the California Bar did!!!

  11. Steve Wagstaffe is a little shit.

  12. Has it ever occurred to anyone that it is odd that Ayres has still not been convicted, six years after his arrest? Jerry Sandusky was convicted just nine months after his arrest. Every pedophile doctor in the US who has been arrested AFTER Ayres was arrested in 2007 has been convicted in less than a year.

    Why did the San Mateo DA put a relative rookie on one of its most important cases to be tried by their office in recent years? The New York Times did a story when Ayres was arrested, but Wagstaffe can't be bothered to show up for a single day at the Ayres trial. It was clear the prosecutor was ill prepared and in over her head, but no one from the DA's office bothered to show up to monitor her.

    Has Steve Wagstaffe deliberately dragged out this case because his own office hired Ayres over the years ?

    It is quite obvious he knows that juveniles who were tried and convicted as adults by his office who were sexually assaulted and shown child pornography by Ayres in court-ordered sessions, who are serving life sentences without parole, may very well succeed in not just getting their convictions thrown out but will also file successful lawsuits against San Mateo County. Is Wagstaffe aware that appellate attorneys whose juvenile clients were molested and threatened by Ayres to keep quiet, are working on lawsuits against the County as we speak?

  13. A Tale of Two California District Attorneys:

    Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen = honest and transparent. Has worked with Northern California Innocence Project to weed out prosecutorial misconduct.

    San Mateo District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe = Protege of corrupt Jim Fox, good ole boy network. Corrupt, uncontrollable liar, defender of cops who commit felonies.


    Santa Clara County DA reins in overzealous attorney

    By Tracey Kaplan
    Posted: 05/05/2011 04:02:50 PM PDT
    Updated: 05/05/2011 07:09:05 PM PDT

    In a move that sends a clear message about reining in overzealous prosecutors, District Attorney Jeff Rosen has yanked an attorney off a complex gang murder case for improperly withholding crucial evidence from the defendants until the brink of trial.


    Prosecutor In Molest Case Disciplined

    McKowan's boss, District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe, said his office completed an internal investigation last year and took appropriate action. He declined to elaborate, saying it was a confidential personnel matter.

    Read more:


    There is NO law that prohibits Wagstaffe from telling the taxpayers how he disciplined his lying and unethical prosecutor. If the Ayres prosecutor had been working for DA Jeff Rosen, she would have been fired by now.

  14. Wagstaffe has been a person of interest to the FBI because he covers up crimes by San Mateo law enforcement... Robert Pronske and D.J. Wozniak: are you there?

    Wagstaffe LOVES certain select criminals. Two weeks ago, he told a relative of a man who has been incarcerated for murder for some years, that he had lost weight, thanks to his working out with a man who had been charged with rape. Wagstaffe told the relative of the defendant that his workout pal was "falsely accused" of rape. Turns out the man is the father of a school friend of one of his son's.

    Yet he can't even be bothered to show up for the trial of a pedophile that his office hired, who has sexually assaulted thousands of boys in San Mateo County.

    NOBODY should be fooled by Wagstaffe's saccharine hail-fellow-well-met schtick he puts on at the office during the week.

    It's a different story on the weekends, where he skulks around Redwood City in a leather jacket, hiding behind a baseball cap and dark sunglasses, with a dark look on his face. What does this dude do on the weekends ? Is he hanging out with San Mateo Sheriff Greg Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos, whom he defended to the hilt when they were caught going into a house of prostitution for underaged girls in Las Vegas?

    Do tell!

  15. Looks like Wagstaffe is about to strangle his wife in this photo on her Facebook page:

  16. Has it ever occurred to anyone that the County KNEW Ayres was molesting and showing child porn to boys in juvenile hall, but continued to send them to him anyway because they saw it as fit punishment for the boys?

  17. Whoa! Prosecutor Mckowan's on a real winning streak - NOT!!

    Second mistrial for her in the molestation case involving Menlo Park businessman Horacio Carlos Teran. Jury deliberated TWELVE days and could not come up with a verdict:

    After 12 days of deliberating, jurors could not agree on whether a Menlo Park man accused of molesting his neighbor’s son is guilty or not – again.

    Eight deemed him guilty, two found him not guilty, and two couldn’t decide, according to San Mateo County District Attorney’s records.

    "When they were brought into the courtroom, they were asked about their ability to reach a verdict," said Karen Guidotti, Chief Criminal Deputy for the County of San Mateo. Jurors said they were having problems arriving at a unanimous verdict, because some of the jurors were not participating in the deliberations, she said.

    “It seemed like the jurors had already made up their mind,” Guidotti said of the sentiment surrounding the claims. Those two jurors were the ones who were undecided, she said. Their inability to agree on a verdict led the courts to declare a mistrial this week. This is the second mistrial declared in the case of the People v. Horacio Carlos Teran.

  18. The Menlo Park/Atherton Patch article says:

    "Teran is a well-funded Menlo Park resident who was charged with five counts of committing lewd acts on a child, according to public records provided by the DA's office."

    Steve Wagstaffe is a longtime resident of Menlo Park. Teran and he are probably good buds. Maybe Teran donated to Wagstaffe's campaign. Or maybe Teran, Wagstaffe and that man who was charged with rape and who is now hanging out with Wagstaffe ( according to Wagstaffe himself) are all working out together.

  19. Sigh... more misconduct and failure to do her job from prosecutor Mckowan, this time on the Horacio Carlos Teran molestation case:

    "The first time the case went to court on Sept. 12, 2012 the case was declared a mistrial, because witness testimony had not been provided to Armstrong, according to the DA’s office. During this year’s trial, the testimony was admitted."

    See original story, where case was delayed numerous times, most recently due to Mckowan's "seasonal illness."

    Original story about Horacio Carlos Teran

    The trial for Horacio Carlos Teran of Menlo Park was delayed again this week, while the prosecution team recovers from seasonal illness.

    This is the fourth setting of the jury trial date, since Teran was arraigned in May 2012.

    See footnote: Editor's Note: On 2/1/13 this story was edited to reflect that the information in this article came from copies of The San Mateo County District Attorney's public records, and not from a conversation with Melissa McKowan.

    Why the correction? Did someone from the DA's office contact the Patch? If so, what are they so worried about?

  20. Here's a blatant wrongful conviction case by prosecutor Mckowan. Did anyone at the DA's office bother to do any real investigative work on this case?

    DA drops fake bomb threat case
    August 26, 2010, 02:29 AM By Michelle Durand Daily Journal Staff

    Prosecutors dropped a felony bomb scare charge against a coastside man who had already pleaded no contest after determining his was not the voice threatening to blow up Caltrain.

    Antonio Derivera Santiago III, 26, of Pacifica, was first allowed to withdraw his no contest plea yesterday and then prosecutor Melissa McKowan asked that the case be dropped outright.

    Prosecutors have believed for more than a year that Santiago called Caltrain out of boredom, telling a customer service representative that there was a bomb on train 101 and prompting an evacuation and full-scale search.

    However, further investigation of the phone records done this summer showed that neither the phone used nor the voice belonged to Santiago, said Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe.

  21. Wake Up, Sheeple of San Mateo County!! District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe is laughing at you. He couldn't give a rat's a** about the Ayres case.

    If he had cared, he would have put one of his top prosecutors on the case - not one who's been sued for violating victim's rights in a high profile molestation case, or who was disciplined by the California Bar for misconduct to crime victims and prosecution witnesses.

    If he had cared, he would have showed up at the Ayres trial in 2009, like he always shows up to assist and support deputy DA's on his precious little murder cases. But Wagstaffe never showed his face once in the Ayres courtroom.

    Sheeple: you have to get rid of Wagstaffe. It's up to you to figure out how !

  22. Both Judge Robert Foiles and Judge Grandsaert were once San Mateo prosecutors who worked on juvenile cases. There is at least one known case where a juvenile that Foiles prosecuted was sexually assaulted by Ayres and that Foiles and his attorney agreed that Ayres would evaluate the boy. Ayres assaulted the boy at Hillcrest AFTER he was arrested.

    Surely it has crossed the minds of Foiles and Grandsaert that the boys they had evaluated by Ayres were molested. Is the fear of having all of this come out is what has made Steve Wagstaffe deliberately drag this case out for years? If he had wanted to he could have put his top prosecutor on the case and attended the trial
    and advised that prosecutor as he always does for his DDA's on murder cases.

    But not to worry Mr. Wagstaffe: those lawsuits against the County that you so fear are coming down the
    pike anyway !! And who knows? We just might see some of your office's convictions overturned !

    What fun! Stay tuned.

  23. Ayres' lawyer wants the case removed from San Mateo County because of media coverage. He's right to ask for this but his reasons for the request are all ass- backwards.

    The reason this trial MUST be taken out of San Mateo is because Judges Grandsaert and Foiles prosecuted juveniles who were evaluated by Ayres and the San
    Mateo DA's office was hiring him at least back to the 1980's.

    Maybe Ayres' lawyer Doron Weinberg was well aware of all the judges who'd worked with Ayres. Maybe he didn't
    ask for a change of venue because he figured, rightly, that the County would continue to protect Ayres.

  24. This drama of prosecutors intentionally abusing victims is not something that occurs only in SM County. In my case back in NJ the prosecutor spent time on the phone putting a guilt trip pon me and making me feel bad because I survived and moved west then told me to get over it. WHen I recovered about 5 days later (anyone else have delayed reaction?) I left him an angry message telling him off. This got me an armed cop at my front door 3000 miles away to tell me not to call him again because he was afraid of me!

    I saw a repeat of SVU last night. The one in which they discover a dead teacher had been abusing boys at a pricey private school. It is the best most genuinely evocative portrayal of the pain of being denied justice I have ever seen on tv or film.
    I recommend any litigators who sue the ocunty use it as a tool to make the jury comprehend the depth of pain and loss that occurs when those meant to help us when we report such things, abuse us instead. Sometimes the pain is worse than the memory of the abuse itself.

  25. Something's Happening Here:

    Robert Foiles once prosecuted a juvenile who was assaulted at Hillcrest Juvenile Hall by Ayres, AFTER the boy was arrested but before his trial.

    Stuart Forrest, just arrested for possession of child porn -also worked at Hillcrest at the same time.

    When Robert Foiles became a judge, he selected Stuart Forrest to be head of probation. The other person on the two person selection committee was Juvenile Judge Marta Diaz who tried to get the police to stop investigating Ayres in 2002, because she said, "Ayres and I are friends."

    And yet Foiles is still actively making judicial decisions in the Ayres case.

    Probation chief under federal investigation for possessing child porn
    December 22, 2012, 05:00 AM By Jon Mays Daily Journal

    Stuart Forrest, chief probation officer for San Mateo County, is being questioned by federal law enforcement officials for possession of child pornography, County Counsel John Beiers confirmed last night. ..

    The U.S. Postal Service Inspection Service is the lead agency in the investigation and is being assisted by the FBI, said U.S. Postal Service spokeswoman Pauline Bellinger. Postal Service inspectors investigate material that is sent through the mail. .

    Forrest began his career in 1976 as a group supervisor at the county's juvenile hall, was formally appointed chief probation officer in April 2009 after recommendation by a search committee of judges Robert Foiles and Marta Diaz.

  26. Here's a photo of San Mateo Sheriff Greg Munks, who was caught going into a house of prostitution for UNDERAGED GIRLS in Las Vegas; Robert Foiles, who prosecuted at least one juvenile who was assaulted by Ayres in court-ordered sessions, and Steve Wagstaffe, who sent sickening and fawning supportive emails to Munks after he was caught at the house with underaged girls, and who has been a subject of interest to the FBI for covering up crimes by San Mateo County employees.

    Sup. Adrienne J. Tissier moderates the "Alternatives to Incarceration" panel during the March 4, 2011, "Women's Criminal Justice Summit: Report Back to the Community." The panel participants, from right, District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe; Superior Court Judge Robert Foiles; and Sheriff Greg Munks discussed programs and options available to those sentenced to the county jail.

  27. Rape defendant gets new trial date
    March 26, 2013, 05:00 AM Daily Journal Staff Report

    Joshua Bringazi

    The convicted sex offender whose attorney in a new statutory rape case caused a mistrial by declaring mid-trial he had a conflict was appointed a different lawyer and received a new trial date in June.

    Joshua Kenneth Bringazi, 28, went to trial in August but a judge declared a mistrial after the prosecutor referred to him as a “felon” during her closing argument to jurors.

    Was this Mckowan's case, too?

    Prosecutors should know better. Who's minding the store over at the San Mateo DA's office?

    How much are these mistrials caused by prosecutorial error costing the taxpayers?

  28. When someone in government asked Wagstaffe recently whether he had seen a copy of Mckowan's Bar complaint, Wagstaffe was evasive. The person in government warned Wagstaffe that if Mckowan had lied to the court when she said that no one else in the DA's office had seen a copy of the report, that she would be in big trouble.

    Wagstaffe changed the subject. GUILTY!!!

    Let's hope Ayres' lawyer can get copies of the emails between Wagstaffe, Guidotti and Mckowan between July 2011 and March 2013, concerning the Bar investigation into Mckowan.

  29. Was Mckowan suspended at one point for her misconduct on the Ayres case?

  30. Some reporters back in 2011 had heard a story that Mckowan had to take a leave for a while, but no one could verify.

  31. When the person in government told Wagstaffe that Mckowan had at first avoided the judge's question about whether anyone else in the DA's office had seen the Bar complaint, and that the judge admonished Mckowan for not answering the question, Wagstaffe DENIED to the person in government that Mckowan had been evasive and had not answered the question at first and had been admonished by the judge.

    Very stupid of Wagstaffe to lie about this to the person in government , as anyone can see from the COURT TRANSCRIPT that the Judge clearly admonished Mckowan for not answering the question about whether anyone else had seen the Bar complaint.

    Guidotti, Wagstaffe- they all saw the Bar complaint. And also, how else could Wagstaffe have held his own parallel investigation into Mckowan if he hadn't seen the Bar complaint?

  32. Wonder how Ayres' lawyer's fight to get the Bar complaint (s) against prosecutor Mckowan is he going?

    In at least two molestation cases, the prosecutor has told a very young molestation victim and her mother and at least one prosecution witness about incidents in her own life that have caused her to be a certain way to certain defendants in the courtroom. She's even stated this in emails... If Ayres' defense attorney gets hold of these, it's game over for the prosecutor, as it shows BIAS.

  33. Meant to say " Wonder how Ayres' lawyer's fight to get the Bar complaint (s) against prosecutor Mckowan is going?"

  34. A citizen who filed a complaint with the San Mateo Board of Supervisors concerning prosecutor Mckowan's violation of Marsy's Law in the Dr. Ayres case and two other cases, has received a letter from San Mateo County Counsel, advising the complainant to "direct the allegations to the Attorney General."

    So be it.

  35. Recently, San Mateo prosecutor Melissa Mckowan was disciplined by the California Bar for unethical behavior on the Dr. William Ayres molestation case. While there have been more than 700 known instances of prosecutorial misconduct in the last 11 years, Mckowan is only the 12th prosecutor in California to be disciplined during that time period.

    Following the news about the Bar's discipline, at the suggestion of a San Mateo Supervisor, several crime victims' families and other citizens have written to the Supervisors about Mckowan's violation of Marsy's Law on THREE cases.

    The citizens have been notified by San Mateo County Counsel that they need to direct their "allegations" about Mckowan to the California Attorney General.

    But the crime victims' families have already gone to the AG, back in August, 2011, after San Mateo District Attorney ignored all complaints about the violations about Mckowan.

    In 2011, the AG told the citizens to go to the California Bar.

    County Counsel stated in a letter to one citizen that a "substantive response to your allegations would involve an inquiry as to the official duties of a district attorney. If your allegations proved accurate, a proper response could include the provision of directions to the District Attorney's office as to how to discharge its official duties."

    Now that there have been news reports about the Bar's discipline, will Kamala Harris take up this case?

  36. This is somewhat off-topic, but I've just visited > Attorney Search > and searched for Melissa McKowan.

    The State Bar's site indicates McKowan has no PUBLIC record of discipline and no PUBLIC record of administrative actions. Assuming that the State Bar disciplined McKowan, why hasn't its site noted that? Just curious.

    I'm beginning to think that the State Bar's site might give an attorney a clean bill of health, but that alone doesn't necessarily mean that the attorney in question really is clean.

    1. My understanding is that it was a confidential sanction, and confidential discipline is not made available to the public.

      From the article linked in the story above:

      "Deputy District Attorney Melissa McKowan acknowledged that she committed "an act of professional misconduct," and a State Bar Court judge ordered that she be "privately reproved" and attend a one-day State Bar Ethics School course, said a letter written by the State Bar to Victoria Balfour, the victims advocate whose complaint prompted the investigation.

      You are correct in your assumption that the State Bar is not a good measure of your attorney's professional behavior.

      Likewise, you should also make the same assumptions about the Medical Board of California, as well as other professions for which a licence to practice is required.

      These organizations are PROFESSIONAL organizations, not independent government oversight bodies. They are self policing, essentially, and allow themselves some leeway in disclosure.

    2. The California Bar PRIVATELY disciplined the Ayres prosecutor.

      Basically, this was a plea deal.

      Subsequently, a complete list of unethical and prosecutorial misconduct by Mckowan on the Ayres case and two other molestation cases that had been originally submitted to the Bar, was then submitted to California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

      A list of incidents where DA Steve Wagstaffe ignored all complaints by crime victims' families on these three cases has also been submitted to Attorney General Harris, as well as an incident where San Mateo Chief Deputy Karen Guidotti sent out a letter to a complainant, telling the complainant not to criticize the prosecutor as it "would accomplish nothing." Guidotti has apparently never heard of the First Amendment.

      The arrogance and violations by the Wagstaffe and company caused the complainants to go to the California Bar.

      Watch for the problems in the San Mateo DA's office to escalate.

    3. Thanks for clarifying, Deep Sounding and Anonymous.

  37. Dr. Kurland is not reliable. He is a member of the very small group of doctors who have been permanently banned from conducting any drug studies by the FDA. Also, he was arrested and convicted of soliciting a patient to burglarize and murder his business partner in exchange for drugs.

    It's more than disappointing that so many journalists, lawyers and investigators over several years can't even turn up the most basic background information on the "experts" testifying in such an important case. What else have they missed?

    1. Thanks for the input on Kurland.

      I think perhaps you've misread the intent/facts of this post.

      Kurland was not an "expert" who testified.

      In fact he didn't have anything at all to do with the prosecution in the case.

      The point of the article was that the (now convicted) child molester was claiming that he was TRAINED at SPECIFIC institutions to do medical exams. The DA did not bring ANY witnesses from those institutions to clarify WHETHER OR NOT that kind of training was done. Members of the jury of the first criminal trial told the press that they needed more information on whether or not psychiatrists were really trained to do medical examinations.

      But a private citizen DID go there and talk to MANY of the people who were there in the same times and places. (THAT is what is documented above.)

      ALL of them (some of them VERY reputable) reported the same thing... they were not trained to do medical examinations as the child molester claimed.

      Kurland may not be reliable, but he reported (on the very narrow line of questioning) exactly the same thing that all of his colleagues reported.

      The DA could have selected from many of the available doctors to provide testimony that would have made crystal clear that ayres was simply lying about his training.

      In fact, the investigation that the private citizen did resulted in information which helped the prosecution to identify a person who was reputable and prepared to testify in the SECOND trial about ayres' training at these places. This is probably one of the reasons that the defense changed their plea and was found guilty.

      Perhaps if you re-read the post and related posts, you'll understand the relevancy.