By Robin Sax
Huffington Post - June 25, 2009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-sax/people-v-ayres-wheres-the_b_220910.html
Why are the prosecutor and the defense attorney in cahoots to keep a journalist from observing the Dr. William Ayres child molestation trial in Redwood City? Yup, you read correctly. A journalist who is simply reporting on the trial for the San Diego Reader and who is writing a book has been excluded from the proceedings under the auspices of a subpoena to appear in court as a "witness" that was handed to her by Doron Weinberg, the defense attorney in the case. But, is Balfour really a witness? Or is the exclusion of Balfour merely a ploy to keep the public from knowing about and hearing about the trial? If you ask Balfour she will tell you what she told me, "I am being punished by Weinberg and have been betrayed by the District Attorney's Office."
This is an issue I became aware of about two weeks ago, and I was hoping that the prosecutor, the defense and the court would do the right thing before I opened my big mouth -- but apparently it wasn't going to happen.
So, here's the backstory: In the case of People v. Ayres, Dr. William Hamilton Ayres, now 77, is accused of sexually assaulting dozens of preadolescent male patients from as far back as the 1970's. Some of you may wonder how a 77-year-old can be facing charges from so many years ago. Well, there's a reason why we can put a longtime predator behind bars:
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, CALIFORNIA
The reason this case can be prosecuted is the section of the penal code that allows for a lengthy period of time to file child sexual assault charges. Each state has its own prescribed length of time during which a case can be brought. In California, you can file felony child sexual assault charges for up to ten years after the event, and an extension can be granted if certain legal hurdles are overcome.
This extension has been an accepted part of case law because it is well known that children can delay disclosing sexual abuse for many years. Through the extension of the statute of limitations and the corroboration of various victims, Dr. Ayres is now facing 10 counts of felony molestation.
VICTORIA BALFOUR, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST
Victoria Balfour, an investigative journalist and former reporter for People magazine, brought attention to the case of Dr. Ayers to insure that justice was done. Thanks to Balfour's investigative leads as a journalist, she was able to turn her contacts over to the District Attorney's Office, who then filed the case.
So here we find the case filed -- with the statute of limitations on the prosecutor's side -- thanks to the work of a committed journalist to insure justice. Ayres is now on trial, and one would think that Victoria Balfour would be hailed for her good work. But what thanks does the noble Balfour get? A big fat "exclusion order."
Yes, you read correctly. The very journalist who helped bring the case to justice and now wishes to simply report on the case to the public is being excluded under the auspices of a BS subpoena handed to her by the defense attorney.
An exclusion order in a criminal case is handed down if a person is a potential witness. It's meant to prevent that witness from basing his or her testimony on that of others, and to make sure the integrity of one witness's examination is not tainted by the statements or perceptions of another witness.
Yes, attorneys can legally request that witnesses can be excluded based on the fact that they are "potential witnesses." But even a loose use of "potential witness" still requires some basis for calling that witness. And what testimony would that be, Mr. Weinberg? Ms. Balfour isn't a witness -- she's a journalist covering the story like so many others!
Mr. Weinberg, you haven't interviewed, spoken to, or even asked Balfour a question. There is nothing that she can say that can possibly help you or your client. So why are you doing keeping her from doing her job?
The legalese doesn't fool us. Could it be that you don't want the public to see another one of your clients get convicted -- especially so soon after your client, Phil Spector, was convicted of 2nd degree murder nearly a month ago.
Turning to the prosecution now -- Melissa McKowan, where are you? Why aren't you standing up for the reporter who has been there for you? Where is your request for an offer of proof in terms of why Balfour is being called? What are you afraid of? Why aren't you even putting up a fight? And perhaps more important, what axe do you have to grind with Ms. Balfour? Is there a similar issue with any of the other "potential witnesses" watching the trial? Why isn't the victim's mother not a potential witness?
We all know that the prosecutor has a say -- a powerful say. So use that voice of yours and put the screws to the defense and the court. Go ahead, Ms. McKowan, and give those answers that people are waiting to hear!
From this trial will arise messages that the public needs to hear. And if not for journalists who take the time to write articles and books, the stories will remain locked within the four walls of a courtroom. The public needs to know that justice delayed is still justice. The public needs to know that boys were victimized. The public needs to understand how people in positions of trust manipulate their authority to gain access to kids.
Child sexual assault is already a crime that occurs behind closed doors. Let's end that legacy by tearing down those doors and giving "the people" the information that they need. By keeping Victoria Balfour out of court, the system is victimizing the public and denying us the access to the information that we so desperately need.
_______
UPDATE: There's a very strange comment under Robin Sax's post on the Huffington Post from a "HugoBall." "Hugo" just joined this month and the language has all the earmarks of a Solveig Ayres opus.
Here's the post:
Not only does this prosecutor indulge in an entirely unconstitutional presumption of guilt, but has she looked into Victoria Balfour and her background at all? Has anyone? I know Balfour was a guest on Sax's show, and maybe that's enough for Sax, but a friend of mine who follows the case says there's significant evidence Balfour is a Scientologist who has been pursuing an anti-psychiatrist agenda hidden beneath all her pro-survivor activism. Don't take Balfour, this torch-and-pitchfork case, or Sax for that matter for granted. When emotions run high, the mind must take an ever higher road.
_______
We've seen enough of Solveig aka "Joglars" and "GleeClub" to know her writing style anywhere. Hi, Solveig !! Who is this friend of yours that says that Balfour is a Scientologist ? Is it the society dame who's had some work done who showed up on opening arguments and then never showed up again? We thought she looked sickened at the details of the abuse that the prosecutor outlined. Where has she gone?
We've seen that particular Victoria Balfour who is listed as a Scientologist on Google too but there's gotta be 15 different Victoria Balfours on Google. The journalist Victoria Balfour is not only not a Scientologist but is a big fan of psychiatrists. In fact she is a big fan of her own Columbia University Medical School -trained psychiatrist, who was one of the first people she told about what Dr. Ayres was doing to Steve Abrams back in 2002.He told Balfour that what Ayres had done to Abrams was "disturbing", "appalling" and "very serious." He told Balfour that he believed she could nail Ayres with her investigative skills. That was seven years ago. He's been following this case ever since and is rooting for the victims.
Maybe we need to rethink our budding sympathy for Solveig.
Wow! Great job, Robin Sax !! Balfour seems to have been caught up in a Kafkaesque nightmare.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very well written piece, sometimes when you are struggling for the words someone else just captures them so well!
ReplyDeleteThere is no way to even top this article!
Best ever, I urge everyone to forward a copy to your elected officials hint hint....Jim P. Fox!
Pass it on to Waggy, I mean Wagstaffe.
If you notice even in all the commentary about a certain pop "stars" death today they always start out with his accomplishments, but then right at the end talk endlessly about his civil settlement in a child molestation case.
ReplyDeleteSo no matter who you are it seems that "stain" of being a child molester never wears off!
Even in his death the pop star is remembered as a pedophile.
I am sure they same fate will come to Ayres. He can throw his plaques around all day long, not worth the cheap wood the brass is glued to, in the end all anyone sees is a BIG pedophile.
If only his book collection was admitted into evidence. But again our DA couldn't even write a search warrant the correctly!
Great article! As I have been listening to all of the accolades for the recently deceased pop star, I have been thinking first and foremost that he was first and foremost a pedophile. I have kept Dr. Ayres right there next to him all this time too! What is going on with the ADA? I do not want a nice little friendship between DW and the ADA. I want flare and fire and total astonishment as there was between Alan Jackson and DW when he would pull one of his
ReplyDeletemany little childish tricks each day. Unless this ADA is killing him with kindness, I am confused. More than anything, why turn her back on Victoria Balfour? Is that another little chess play that we are all just not clever enough to pick up on? Thank you for the blog, stay true and keep on keepin' on. We need you!
This comment over at Huffington Post is hilarious:
ReplyDelete"A friend of mine who follows the case says there's significant evidence Balfour is a Scientologist who has been pursuing an anti-psychiatrist agenda hidden beneath all her pro-survivor activism"
_________________
There is a Victoria Balfour on Google who is a Scientologist but it is not this Balfour in question. Like many people in NYC, the journalist Victoria Balfour has seen a psychiatrist for many years. Not only has he changed her life but he has helped her find the courage to speak up for other victims.
Sprocket just did another great post on the trial.
ReplyDeleteA big thanks to Sprocket's Trials and Tribulations for keeping the focus and heat on the Ayres case. Caligirl, the author, is a veritable powerhouse of information. Plus, she is a brilliant writer
http://www.sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/
A voter in San Mateo County received a very defensive letter from Chief Deputy DA Steve Wagstaffe on this matter. He said that his office had no control over the exclusion of Balfour. Balderdash ! It was McKowan who pointed Balfour out to Weinberg.
ReplyDeleteAlso he put down prosecutor Robin Sax who wrote the article. Here's what he said:
Finally, I have read the words written by Los Angeles prosecutor Robin Sax.
I do not know and have not heard of this attorney before, but it is my view
she has a very basic misunderstanding of the legal and ethical boundaries of
the role of a prosecutor in court. I have been a prosecutor for 32 years
and a member of the Board of Directors of the California District Attorney's
Association; District Attorney James Fox has been a prosecutor for 39 years
and the President of both the California District Attorney's Association and
the National District Attorney's Association. We are both amazed at the
statements of Ms. Sax. Beyond that, I will not speak ill of her.
Sure sounds he's speaking of ill of her when he says he's never heard of her. Heck, Sax has been on Larry King. Has Wagstaffe?
Yes, I finally did hear from Mr Wagstaff late Saturday afternoon.
ReplyDeleteIt appears he was in the office during our heat wave. He offered the apologetic sorry didn't answer your emails, have been out of the office for a week.
Most surprising is what he did say about Robin Sax:
"Finally, I have read the words written by Los Angeles prosecutor Robin Sax. I do not know and have not heard of this attorney before, but it is my view she has a very basic misunderstanding of the legal and ethical boundaries of the role of a prosecutor in court. I have been a prosecutor for 32 years and a member of the Board of Directors of the California District Attorney's
Association; District Attorney James Fox has been a prosecutor for 39 years and the President of both the California District Attorney's Association and
the National District Attorney's Association. We are both amazed at the statements of Ms. Sax. Beyond that, I will not speak ill of her."
Mr. Wagstaffe also stated he is mystified at the outrage at Ms. McKowan and his office!
I found that his remarks in general were very pejorative.
The fact that Jim P. Fox has been in office for 39 years is part of the problem.
I have many personal reasons for already being angry at Fox and Wagstaffe. They are the reason many years ago my personal case of falsified medical records were turned down for prosecution. The police investigated the issue, but when it was put before the DA's office the crime was only considered a misdemeanor, a violation of California Penal Code 471.5. I was told the DA turned down my case because it would require an expert witness and we (the Da's office) don't invest that kind of money for a misdemeanor offense. Well, why does California have Penal Code 471.5?
It reads:
471.5. Any person who alters or modifies the medical record of any
person, with fraudulent intent, or who, with fraudulent intent,
creates any false medical record, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
Why do we even have the law?
Move forward to nearly eight years later I discover the whole court system covered for Ayres, even referred kids to him.
They lower his bail so he is free to roam the streets for TWO years.
The DA drops the ball on the search warrant or whatever went wrong and the pedophile books Ayres had are not admitted as evidence.
Victoria Balfour is treated like shit! Excuse me......
Robin Sax is an author, on Larry King, Nancy Grace etc. and Wagstaffe thinks he will throw a little jab at her for writing about the case!
I get some BS email about how great they are for 39 years and 32 years.
Yeah, I can help take some of the mystification out of the outrage a few registered voters are feeling!
Very telling that Wagstaffe left out that according to John Halley, Balfour's lawyer, McKowan was "hostile" to the idea of letting Balfour into the courtroom.
ReplyDeleteThere's something really off there. Talk about acting out on some old issues !
In fact the book Robin Sax wrote:
ReplyDeletePredators and Child Molesters: What Every Parent Needs to Know to Keep Kids Safe (A Sex Crimes DA Answers 100 of the Most-Asked Questions)Foreword by Marc Klaas
I have all the respect in world for Robin Sax & Marc Klass.
The perpetrator who took the life of Mr. Klass's daughter was in San Mateo receiving charity from the Samaritan House before he headed up to Petaluma and took the life of Polly Klass.
I don't think scientologists are anti-psychiatrist, maybe just anti-medication.
ReplyDeleteEither way I am pretty sure scientologists don't much believe in pedophile child molesters.
That is a whole different thing than a shrink anyways.
Ayres is not on trial for being a scientologist, no one uses the word doctor with his name anymore, lic. suspended.
He is on trial for being a child molester.
So I wouldn't worry about the scientology thing. Unless the first book they give you when you join is "The Coming of Age" by McBride!
No, scientologists HATE psychiatrist. That's their big platform.
ReplyDeleteSome of them post pretty regularly on the Glenn Beck episode on Ayres on Youtube. To them, all psychiatrists are evil. They have a whole watchdog site devoted to exposing the misdeeds of psychaitrists.
I'm closing comments on this thread. No problems with content.. just want to make it easier to manage; feel free to continue discussion on the more recent blog entries.
ReplyDelete