Equal Justice, San Mateo County Style, $3,000,000.00 Bail vs None

[Michael Stogner]

Currently we have 2 cases in our courts. One an 18 year old female child/young adult, the other a mature male who works for the Federal Government. Both cases involve cars and causing damage to property and persons.The difference is the 18 year old girl did the right thing after crash. She stayed at the scene of the accident.She did not run away, she did not hide. She has a $3,000,000 bail set in her case, some say that is excessive, her actions caused the deaths of three people, but her actions after the crash show she did the right thing.

The other case the man did the wrong thing, he smashed his car into another car with a woman in it, he refused to give her his license and insurance information and fled the scene of the crash. His license plate remained at the crash site. Six days later he reports to the Belmont Police Department....SIX DAYS. Belmont Police recommend he be charged with Felony Hit and Run, with Personal Injury. There is no evidence he has been arrested, No Bail Set, and the District Attorney's Office under the leadership of James P. Fox charged him with a misdemeanor, not the felony.

Doesn't look like Equal Justice

[helper bee]

This second case is very troubling; that victim could be any one of us, the countless that don't make the daily headlines. But is that an everyday occurrence, being the victim of a felony hit and run driver who is a Federal Employee? I don't think so.

The Tongan Royals and their Companion are being given the due respect that our society bestows upon innocent victims.
What about the victim of the hit and run by the Federal Employee?
Where is the public outcry that such an act should command?
Who will speak out on behalf of that innocent victim?

[Michael Stogner]

The Felony Hit and Run with personal injury case, raises several questions.

1) Why didn't Belmont Police go to this man's home and arrest him the night of the crash. He lives in Belmont. They had his license plate.

2) Why didn't Belmont Police arrest this man when he came into the Police Department 6 days later, to talk/admit to the Hit and Run crash.

One of his main concerns was a Felony conviction would effect his PENSION.
He was not concerned about the woman in the car he crashed into.

Why did the DA not charge him with the Felony, the Belmont Police recommended in the Police Report?

Next court date is 8/15/06 8:30 AM

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Why try and reason with you. Did you notice that in one case there were three people KILLLED? The victim of the other car crash did not die and was not severely injured.
Let the courts decide moron. All you bring to the equation are endless questions and a hatred of James Fox. Why don't you start a blog "Why I hate James Fox" and spend your time there entertaining yourself.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe,

I did notice that three people died in the 1st case. That is why I said it caused the deaths of three people.

The victim in the second case was injured and the driver who fled the scene didn't bother to stay to see if she was injured or not.

He also managed to Evade/Hide from the Belmont Police Department for 6 days.

Let the Court decide...That is a GREAT IDEA....The Court can only hear what is brought before it. That is where James P. Fox comes into play. Some one in the District Attorneys Office charged this as a misdemeanor. They wrote it up as if the defendant crashed his car into a parked and empty car, as in no other person injured, and failed to leave a nice note on the windshield.

By not charging this as a Felony per Belmont Police Report Recommendation, the defendant has nothing to worry about re: his Pension as a Federal Empoyee. Since he is not being charged with a Felony there is a 100% chance he will not be convicted of a Felony.

The Court doesn't make the charges, The DA'S Office does.

I do not hate James P. Fox our District Attorney,
I don't even know the gentleman

[Roscoe_Beedle]

No, nope, no way. You're not going to get away with your usual blurring of the facts Stognar.
The girl who CAUSED the DEATH of three PEOPLE was driving wrecklessly at the peril of all.

The other matter is one that happens everday, a traffic accident.

Now before you get your usual hard-on over some pittance, let me also point out that the guy in your scope will be charged with a misdemeanor traffic accident. He may lose his license in part or whole. He also will be in the care of our judicial system if not the penintentiary. Hardly a slap on the wrist but still we cannot overlook this being a traffic accident.

I did note your rather cavalier comment about how the girl who caused the deaths of these three people also "did the right thing". If these three people were in my family, Stognar, I assure you I would not appreciate your bending of the facts to take another shot at James Fox.

And who exactly is complaining that the $3,000,000 bail for this girl is too much? The girl? The girl's family? The DA is doing the right thing Stognar. With what this girl is facing releasing her easily would be a diservice to those that died needlessly.

I think you may have a heart but you definitely have no brain.

[Michael Stogner]

I thought the purpose of bail was to make sure the defendant showed up in court. Flight risk etc. not to be punishment in advance.

Traffic accidents do happen everyday, That is why they are called accidents, after one happens both parties involved exchange information.

That is not what happened in the Smith case. Mr. Smith failed to give his name, license number and insurance information, and he fled the scene, and evaded the Belmont Police for 6 days.

That is what makes the Smith case a Felony not a Misdemeanor. and not a traffic accident. Hit and Run with Personal Injury. That is criminal conduct.

Mr. James P. Fox is personally responsible for all of his DDA conduct, when a case is undercharged as this one was. It is because he allowed it.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

God are you a Dolt

[PayTheMan]

Does this federal employee have any sort of pull in the local gov't? The fact that he wasn't pursued after his license plate was found perturbs me. What was the hold up?

Granted he didn't kill anyone he should've gotten more than a misdemeanor for his actions. Admitting guilt six days later shouldn't alleviate the severity of his felony.

Either this story is purposely kept out of the news, or everyone's too busy worrying about whether or not Barry Bonds used steroids.

[Michael Stogner]

According to the Belmont Police Department report:0601-0500 dated 1/21/06

01/07/06

I was dispatched to the 1100 block of Alameda Avenue on a report of a hit and run accident that had just occurred involving two vehicles.

The Chevy has since left the scene and was traveling south on Alameda. Officer Hussey and Cpl McGuigan conducted an area check for the Chevy with negative results.

From the very begining this was a hit and run case. There is no other search actions reported by the Belmont Police Department regarding finding Mr. E. Smith. who lives in Belmont.

The next time he is mentioned in the report, On 1/13/06 Mr. E. Smith arrived at the Belmont Police Department and made a statement.

I am sure something happened during those six days, but there is nothing in the report.

Belmont Police Stated on page 4 of 4.
V1 caused this collision by being in violation of Vehicle Code Section 22350,
Unsafe speed for conditions. D1 is also in violation of Vehicle Code section 20001(A) felony hit and run.

That is what was sent to the District Attorney's Office,

DDA Sarah Boxer filed the single charge of misdemeanor. She was removed from the case.

This case is being reviewed by DDA Peter Lynch, The victim went to court and asked DDA Pat Flynn to not proceed until he has read the file and please review and charge as a felony per Belmont Police Report.

I have contacted the Belmont City Council and asked them to look into this matter.
Specifically:

(1) Why was Mr. Smith not arrested on 1/7/06?

(2) Why was Mr. Smith not arrested on 1/13/06 when he walked into the Police Department and made his statement?

[Michael Stogner]

To be fair to James P. Fox our elected District Attorney, He has approx. 60 Deputy District Attorneys (DDA) working for him. How could he possibly know if one or more of them were undercharing a case or even NOT charging a case at all.

The DA'S office does not even keep records of all criminal complaints filed with them. So how would anyone know.

There is no oversight of this law enforcement business.

In the Mr. E. Smith case, we see that that Belmont Police made the right recommendation, but for some reason DDA Sarah Boxer chose to file an entirely different charge. No victim included.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe,

"The other matter is one that happens everday, a traffic accident."

Both of these cases are traffic accidents, both happen everyday.

The Smith case, the gentleman was reported as sweating alot and communicating in a language that was not understandable. That is why the six day time period, plus the fleeing the scene of an accident is important.
No blood test.....No Breath Test..... No Arrest.
What would cause a person to flee the scene of a simple auto accident with personal injury?

Belmont Police have demonstrated the ability to arrest people when they want to, a most recent case this month, a minor female 17 yr old. with no known address and no photo ID. reason: warrant failue to appear.
If they can do that they should be able to find Smith at his house or work if they wanted to.


I mentioned some people think the $3,000,000.00 bail is excessive, I can say this I have talked to over 40 citizens from San Mateo County, Not one is related to the case in any way, of that group of people all think it is excessive and one person told me he had a friend who thought it was the right amount.

With our jails full to the max, I believe this is one person who is not a threat to society, and bail should be reduced to an appropriate amount, so she can be out of our jail until she is convicted of a crime.

[Michael Stogner]

PayTheMan,

"Either this story is purposely kept out of the news"

Most of the reporters in San Mateo County depend on the Law Enforcement Business to give them leads and information, stories etc. If for example a reporter had even noticed the Smith case they would have only seen a misdemeanor case, It was written up as a man hitting an EMPTY PARKED CAR.
and not leaving a note on the windshield.

Not a man possibly under the influence of something to cause him to flee.
missing/evading or not, for six days, etc.

Thanks for reading, tell you friends

Michael

[Michael Stogner]

I recently spoke with the victim of the Smith case. She clarified something for me the license was embedded in the back of her car. It had not just come lose and fallen from the crash.

She has not heard from the DA'S Office since she asked DDA Mr.Flynn to review and re-charge as a Felony per Belmont Police Report Recommendation, and per what actually happened.

[Michael Stogner]

It has been 19 days since this post began, over 330 views. Not one newspaper in San Mateo County has reported the Ernesto Smith case story.

The District Attorney has remained silent to the victim who had the courage to go to court and speak with DDA Mr. Flynn and demand it to be charged as it should be a Felony.

No Oversight and No Newspaper coverage,

[Roscoe_Beedle]

You're being ignored.

[PayTheMan]

Justice is being ignored here. I hate it when this sorta stuff happens.

[Michael Stogner]

Not only justice is being ignored, the victim is being ignored by James P. Fox our elected District Attorney.

The least they could do is contact the victim and tell her why they are not going to include her in the case.

[Michael Stogner]

In the INTEREST OF JUSTICE:

CASE SM3440220A

PEOPLE V. ERNESTO DELCASEA SMITH

HAS BEEN DISMISSED ............ Date 8/10/06 by Commissioner McKenna

7/11/06 Hearing Held and the Honorable Stephanie Garratt, Court Commissioner, continued the case to todays date 8/15/06

The District Attorney's Office and Defense Attorney Mr.Philip Barnett have worked something else out. NICE WORK.

[PayTheMan]

What exactly does this mean?

[Michael Stogner]

Equal Justice San Mateo County Style.

What this means is this. The people we trust to enforce our laws equally are not doing it. Under the leadership of James P. Fox and Steve Wagstaffe this case has been dismissed.
No charges against Mr. Ernesto Smith. PERIOD
No arrest by Belmont Police
No Nothing he is as free as a bird.
Game Over.

Don't forget Edith Delgado the 18 year old female child who is still in our over populated jail on $3,000,000.00 bail.

Welcome to San Mateo County

[Roscoe_Beedle]

But the fact that there was no evidence to hold this guy other than your slanted and uneducated deciphering of the 'facts' means nothing to you. You had convicted this man Smith based on heresay you developed on your own.

To lend credence to your claims then the DA, the Police and the Judge would all have to be in on this "miscarriage" of justice. Again, a classic stogner Crock.

When are you going to see that you are a rank amateur?

I'm happy to see they don't convict people in this County based on some fairness doctrine in the mind of stogner.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray

"But the fact that there was no evidence to hold this guy other than your slanted and uneducated deciphering of the 'facts' means nothing to you."

Who in the world said there was no eviedence......Remember the License Plate
embedded in the victims car?
The same license plate missing from his truck. What No evidence!!!
6 days later
He admitted to breaking the law. Sorry he broke the law.

He knew he broke the law. The Police knew he broke the law, everybody knows he broke the law...Its NO SECRET. it is a FELONY to flee the scene of an auto accident that has caused a personal injury. PERIOD..Its the LAW.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray

"To lend credence to your claims then the DA, the Police and the Judge would all have to be in on this "miscarriage" of justice."

The Judge in this case a Commissioner named Kathleen McKenna had nothing to do with this. It is not up to the Commissioner to force the District Attorney to proceed and present a case.

When the District Attorney tells the Commissioner he is not proceeding in the name of Justice, That is it. He didn't say he didn't have enough evidence to convict this man. He said CASE CLOSED.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

You are as usual wrong. And you are as usual too stupid to reason with.

You have convicted this man. The DA has not. And we are to believe you.

By the way, idiot, fender benders are not criminal acts. And your false claim of "felony hit and run" was not factual. Get help moron.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray,

"You have convicted this man. The DA has not. "
That is a false statement, I have not convicted anyone. Also the DA does not convict people, they charge them and bring them to trial. A Judge or Jury convicts people if found guilty after a trial.

"By the way, idiot, fender benders are not criminal acts. And your false claim of "felony hit and run" was not factual. Get help moron."

I am not sure if you have actually read my posts or not,
This was a truck which crashed into the back of a VW with a female driver in it.The VW was stopped behind a car turning left. The speed of impact was around 20 mph. The male driver of truck, acted aggitated and spoke in such a way that the victim could not understand what he said. He then fled the scene of the accident. The victim was injured........

The Felony hit and run, is what the Belmont Police Department Recommended.
to the District Attorneys Office......not my idea
IT IS FACTUAL.

[Michael Stogner]

Belmont Police Report 0601-500 Date: 01/21/06
Officer R.McGriff 55960

Vehicle Code Section 22350 Unsafe speed for conditions.

Vehicle Code Section 20001(A) Felony Hit and Run.

Fact..........not my idea.

[Michael Stogner]

Rocoe..Ray-Ray

"Now before you get your usual hard-on over some pittance, let me also point out that the guy in your scope will be charged with a misdemeanor traffic accident. He may lose his license in part or whole. He also will be in the care of our judicial system if not the penintentiary. Hardly a slap on the wrist but still we cannot overlook this being a traffic accident."

Your assurance of how this case was going to turn out.....DIDN'T.....FACT.

Did the DA'S Office have less evidence on 8/10/06 than they did in Janruary?

Did they think, wow we just don't have enough evidence to convict this Federal Employee, INS agent who is offering anything to us to make this mistake go away.

We only have a female victim/witness, his license plate and his confession to felony hit and run, what JURY in San Mateo County would convict on that skimpy evidence? We have already UNDERCHARGED him to a misdemeanor and the VICTIM showed up to that 7/11/06 hearing asking us to review this case and charge it as the felony it was.

After careful review of the evidence we decided to dimiss this case.

Welcome to San Mateo County.

[Trench]

Mr. Stogner also sent this to me in an e-mail. My response can be read at

http://www.mycrimespace.com/archives/515-We-get-letters....html

[Roscoe_Beedle]

As you can tell Stogner is mis-representing the facts, as usual, and clearly has no grasp of legal procedure. An uneducated fool.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe,Ray-Ray.

Name one misrepresented fact.

[Les Bright]

Help me Michael Stogner! I have in my possession a set of Documents showing that some well regarded members of the Community are regularly engaged in ritual Cannibalism, if not Murder. FACT! You can help me with your skills at Finding Injustice by searching Court Records.

The Documents were obtained from a member of the Group, who gave them to me, apparently not knowing what they contained, or not understanding that her group was engaged in Horrible Crimes. I have them and can provide them to you upon request. WARNING: I have read them all and their contents are chilling.

These Documents shows that this Group gets together Regularly (apparently once a week) to eat the Body of some poor fellow they probably Killed. FACT! They go on and on about how they're eating his flesh and DRINKING HIS BLOOD! FACT! And while they're doing this, they sing songs and have the audacity to talk about the Victim in all of this, a poor Mexican fellow who BY THEIR OWN ACCOUNT certainly didn't deserve to die! IT IS FACTUAL... Together they say nice things about him, while feasting on his Remains. They even call him the "Host" of this sick party!

So far I have told the Belmont, San Carlos, San Mateo and Redwood City police departments that these groups are meeting all over the Peninsula and eating this poor dead fellow. SOME OF THEM EVEN LAUGHED AT ME! FACT! I called the FBI, and they haven't returned my call. Now they deny ever having received my phone call! I have phone records that PROVE I called them, but they're still denying it. The lady who answers the phone says she is tired of my calling all the time, which PROVES that they know that I called them before. IT IS A LIE that they don't know how many times. FACT!

I have talked to 50 citizens of San Mateo County, and all of them say they are DISGUSTED by my vivid, FACTUAL description of this crime! Some of them walk away, shaking their heads sadly! Still, nothing is being done. PERIOD.

Meanwhile, the District Attorneys Office under the leadership of James P. Fox and Steve Wagstaffe is doing NOTHING to stop this! I gave him my files and he said there's "no jurisdiction" over this CASE CLOSED. I'm beginning to suspect they may even be conspiring with them! FACT! The Victim is being totally ignored by our elected DA! There is NO PROOF he has even tried to contact the Victim's family! I asked for this proof and they could not give it to me!
Where is the public outcry that such an act should command?
Who will speak out on behalf of that innocent victim? :eek:

[Les Bright]

Also, it appears from the Documents that the persons responsible for the Victims death were Italian. I checked the Court Records and no Italians have been charged with Murder recently. THIS IS AN ABUSE OF OFFICE. The public should demand some Italians be charged ASAP. PERIOD...ITS THE LAW.
And arent Wagstaffe and Fox Italian names? Hmmm. FACT!

[Les Bright]

Worse yet, the Documents show the VICTIM may have been a child with a birthdate of 12/25/00. I am researching this further and will advise you of developments. Like you, I will not rest until everyone agrees with me THIS IS A TRAVESTY. :mad:

[Michael Stogner]

There is chance that James P. Fox our Elected Official knows nothing about this case.

Why was Mr. Ernesto Smith, a Federal Employee (INS) charged in the first place?

When did the DA come to the conclusion to DISMISS ENTIRELY?

Who's decision was it?

Who ordered it?

What was the action/motivation that caused that result?

In the Mr. E. Smith case, we see that that Belmont Police Department made the right recommendation, but for some reason DDA Sarah Boxer chose to file an entirely different charge. No victim included.

Looks like the charge was placed in order to cause something/action to happen. After that something happened.....CASE DISMISSED


Welcome to San Mateo County

[Roscoe_Beedle]

What a Dolt. He cannot see even the obvious. Devoid of humor, filled with dark conspiratorial fantasies, stogner is one fine example of delusional keyboard fantasies.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray

"let me also point out that the guy in your scope will be charged with a misdemeanor traffic accident. He may lose his license in part or whole. He also will be in the care of our judicial system if not the penintentiary. Hardly a slap on the wrist but still we cannot overlook this being a traffic accident."

Consistant you are. Wrong and misleading, but consistant.

Tell us all how, a dismissal equals what you stated/predicted.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Obviously he received what was appropriate. You, the idiot, convicted this man based on your flawed views. This was essentially a traffic accident.
It's over.
If the "victim" wants to seek further justice let her SUE this man. A remedy we all have at our disposal.

[Michael Stogner]

Today's 9/1/06 Daily Journal page 3 upper left hand corner.

Another Hit and Run case:
A man was arrested by the Millbrae Police for hitting a parked vehicle with his own and then leaving. August 27, 2006 at 3:17 a.m..

The Millbrae Police did what was expected in this case. Good Job.

Now as we all have learned from the Ernesto Smith Hit and Run with Personal Injury case, our District Attorney James P. Fox,and staff Steve Wagstaffe, Peter Lynch, Pat Flynn, Sarah Boxer, Don't Prosecute this crime.

So why do we waste the Police Officers time and energy, and put their lives at risk to enforce the laws?

[Michael Stogner]

Dear Not-So Bright,

If you could somehow show a connection, or involvement of KAVA TEA, or possibly any of the Islanders in your case,

That would help you get James P. Fox's attention.

He really goes for that type of crime or case. A dozen or so cases brought before the court, its been reported that one of our Judges told Mr. Fox that Kava Tea is not an illegal substance, and quit bringing this type of case to court.

That didn't slow our District Attorney down any.

[Michael Stogner]

This explains the Ernesto D. Smith dissmissal on August 10, 2006 5 days early.

Case # SM344020A

BEFORE THE HONORABLE KATHLEEN M. MCKENNA, JUDGE PRO TEM

Mr Philip Barnett: And then I had line 31, Ernesto Smith. In the Smith matter, we had had a pretrial in July where a- - we've been offered by the court an opportunity to civilly compromise the matter, and we had difficulty arranging that. We had to get the insurance company to agree - - both my client and the insurance company to agree to settle with the victim.

So I'd like to present you with an executed - - a document with the victim in that regard, and I can personally attest to the fact that she signed it. She has been compensated by both my client and CSAA Insurance Company and the premises was fully satisified. So based on that I would ask you to dismiss it.

THE COURT: All right And the people concur in this?

MR. FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor, I don't have my file right now.

If I could just take a look at that?

MR.BARNETT: Yeah, If I could explain it to you.

The People did not concur, but the Judge said that it's - - do it over the DA'S
objections - - so I don't want to misrepresent it, but thats what was understood.

THE COURT: Is Mr. Smith here?

MR. BARNETT: He is not.

THE COURT: Okay based on the agreement reached between Mr. Smith Barnett and the victim, this matter having been - - restitution satisfied, I am going to dismiss this matter.

MR. BARNETT: Very Good Thank You

( Whereupon, the proceedings concluded.)

So as we all can see Mr. Barnett knew all along there was a female victim, and we know that DDA Patrick Flynn knew because I introduced him to the victim at the July hearing where she asked him to change the charge back to a felony.

DDA Patrick Flynn didn't even have the file of the case with him when it was dismissed.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

S-N-O-R-E..........zzzzzzzz

[Michael Stogner]

Edith Delgado Bail to be reduced.....FINALLY.....

The First Appellate District Court returned the matter to San Mateo County with an order to SET REASONABLE BAIL.

Prosecutor Aaron Fitzgerald argued the $3,000,000.00 BAIL reflects Delgado's previous disregard of the law by speeding, weaving, racing, and carrying a passenger........

That discribes about 70% of all drivers on 101 and 280 in San Mateo County.
280 aka DO-80


Welcome to San Mateo County

[Roscoe_Beedle]

When do her victims get out of the grave?

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray RS

As we all know they won't, what is your point. Of course the victims of this auto wreck are dead.

What we are talking about in this post is equal justice in San Mateo County.

After Edith Delgado has a trial in this County and if she is found GUILTY of this crime, she should pay a price. Until that time her bail should be reduced to a reasonable amount.

As you will recall the Appellate Court ordered our San Mateo County Superior Court to reduce the bail.

We will find out the answer to the bail reduction this morning.

[Michael Stogner]

Today
Hon. Judge Robert Foiles reduced the bail for Edith Delgado from $3,000,000.00 to $1,000,000.00.

The reality is even if it was reduced to $300,000.00 she probably couldn't get out. Not that many families in San Mateo County have an extra $30,000 for bail.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

"Of course the victims of this auto wreck are dead."

You pitiful deluded idiot. These people did not die of an auto wreck, they were killed by Edith Delgado who caused their car to crash. Notice the difference?

If anyone else (I doubt) is reading this fool's postings just remember he's a used car salesman by profession. He presents himself as a tireless fighter for truth and justice. Yet he does not have even the most elemental grasp of what constitutes prosecutorial proceedures.

This pest should stick to describing rich Corinthian leather and ride stability in a Cordoba before he ventures out into territory where he is clueless.

[wilburt]

Today
Hon. Judge Robert Foiles reduced the bail for Edith Delgado from $3,000,000.00 to $1,000,000.00.

The reality is even if it was reduced to $300,000.00 she probably couldn't get out. Not that many families in San Mateo County have an extra $30,000 for bail.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Now wait a minute; I have read your posts and they just don't make sense. Do you mean to tell me that you want bail reduced on a person who has been arrested for engaging in a speed contest on the highway and, as a result of her racing, killed several people?

We have several dead people here as a result of this horrible accident allegedly caused by this defendant. I would think that it would be best if this reckless speed racer cooled her heels in jail pending the outcome of her case. If I were the judge, I would have set her bail at $5,000,000 to make extra sure she never sees the outside of a jail cell for a very long time unless she is fully acquitted of the charges against her. I do not see where you discussed "flight risk", her safety pending trial, the risk of her having access to a vehicle and driving if she were released on bail, and a number of other elements that a judge would consider when setting bail. Why didn't you mention and discuss these relevant matters during your posting blizzard?

The crimes that this person has allegedly committed are very serious and merit her being kept in jail pending the outcome of her trial. Don't you want to keep a person who is this reckless and dangerous off the streets? If not, why not?

Also, trying to support your argument for reducing this person's bail by comparing her case to a totally unrelated case is ridiculous.

[Michael Stogner]

Wilbert,

"Do you mean to tell me that you want bail reduced on a person who has been arrested for engaging in a speed contest on the highway."

Who arrested her for engaging in a speed contest on the highway???

Are you saying the CHP did that?

[wilburt]

Wilbert,

"Do you mean to tell me that you want bail reduced on a person who has been arrested for engaging in a speed contest on the highway."

Who arrested her for engaging in a speed contest on the highway???

Are you saying the CHP did that?
================================================== =

Unfortunately, you did not quote the complete sentence that I wrote. Therefore, you misquoted me. Here is what I wrote:

"Now wait a minute; I have read your posts and they just don't make sense. Do you mean to tell me that you want bail reduced on a person who has been arrested for engaging in a speed contest on the highway and, as a result of her racing, killed several people?"

Let me rephrase this for you so you don't get confused about the serious nature of this alleged crime that you obviously don't feel is serious enough to merit a high bail:

Strike "for engaging in a speed contest on the highway and, as a result of her racing, killed several people?" and replace with "for vehicular manslaughter and speeding as the result of allegedly driving her Ford Mustang as fast as 100 mph while racing another vehicle when she crashed into the driver's side of the victim's car causing the deaths of three people."

You may also want to familiarize yourself with the case by going to this article:

http://www.matangitonga.to/article/tonganews/royalty/delgado080706.shtml

that contains the following quote:

".....Delgado was driving her Ford Mustang as fast as 100 mph (160 kph) while racing another vehicle when she crashed into the driver's side of Hefa's car, causing it to swerve across several lanes before rolling on its roof, said California Highway Patrol Officer Ricky Franklin."

However, the fact remains, you still haven't answered my question:

"The crimes that this person has allegedly committed are very serious and merit her being kept in jail pending the outcome of her trial. Don't you want to keep a person who is this reckless and dangerous off the streets? If not, why not?"

[Michael Stogner]

Wilburt,

"The crimes that this person has allegedly committed are very serious and merit her being kept in jail pending the outcome of her trial. Don't you want to keep a person who is this reckless and dangerous off the streets? If not, why not?"

If that is the case then why not just go to NO BAIL, status.

Edith Delgado is entitled to a trial, before she is convicted.

Are you suggesting that she is a threat to the public if she were allowed out, and not allowed to drive a car. The allegations remain to be proven.

I feel safe if she were allowed out, and not driving a car. How about you?

[wilburt]

Wilburt,

"The crimes that this person has allegedly committed are very serious and merit her being kept in jail pending the outcome of her trial. Don't you want to keep a person who is this reckless and dangerous off the streets? If not, why not?"

If that is the case then why not just go to NO BAIL, status.

Edith Delgado is entitled to a trial, before she is convicted.

Are you suggesting that she is a threat to the public if she were allowed out, and not allowed to drive a car. The allegations remain to be proven.

I feel safe if she were allowed out, and not driving a car. How about you?
=============================================

Fine, maybe they should go to NO BAIL status. Good to see that you agree with me on this matter.

Any adult who has only had a license for 4 months, and who drives a car at about 100 MPH, while allegedly racing another car, and slams into another car killing 3 people is a serious threat to everyone on the road when they drive a car. As long as this person has access to a vehicle, and could conceivably drive a car, she is a potential threat to every person who drives a car on any road where she drives. The only way that the people of the State of California can be assured 100% that this individual will not be driving a car is to keep her in jail.

You appear to be a misguided individual; so the fact that you feel safe if this person were allowed out [of jail] proves my point that she should not be allowed out of jail because only a misguided individual would make this statement in view of the facts.

[Michael Stogner]

Wilburt,
You wrote:
"Fine, maybe they should go to NO BAIL status. Good to see that you agree with me on this matter."

I'm not sure we do agree on this matter.

$3,000,000.00 equals No Bail

$1,000,000.00 equals No Bail

$300,000.00 equals No Bail

Quite possibly $100,000.00 would equal No Bail.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray, RS. Silviano,

You wrote:"If anyone else (I doubt) is reading this fool's postings just remember he's a used car salesman by profession."


It's new and used cars.

Your not suggesting this profession is somehow less honorable than, say the law profession...Are You?

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Wilburt as you can tell Stogner only concerns himself over the person who killed these people. He cares not one whit about what these now dead people's lives meant to their loved ones, their family, their community. And the great loss this has been to so many people.

He seems to think bail for this person is much more important for our County to worry about.

Misguided is a word for it. So is stupid.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe,Ray-Ray, RS. Silviano, etc.

Spoken like a true prosecutor.....

Bail has nothing to do with the victims, and the loss that has been experienced by their loved ones.

Bail is to ensure the appearance at court. Not to pre-punish.

I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty.
I know you and I dissagree on this.

Welcome to San Mateo County

[wilburt]

Roscoe,Ray-Ray, RS. Silviano, etc.

Spoken like a true prosecutor.....

Bail has nothing to do with the victims, and the loss that has been experienced by their loved ones.

Bail is to ensure the appearance at court. Not to pre-punish.

I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty.
I know you and I dissagree on this.

Welcome to San Mateo County
-----------------------------------------------------------------

In this case, I think there is a very high probability that the defendant will be serving a prison term under either a plea bargain or full trial scenario. Based upon her attorney's activities, her legal fees and other related costs are already quite high. I don't think this defendant is represented by a public defender so, if this case goes to trial, the defendant may end up owing several hundred thousand dollars in legal fees and related costs. Even if she enters into a plea bargain she will probably end up owing about $50-100K or more.

I don't see why her attorney is spending time, money, and effort fighting the bail issue. The bail was lowered and she is still in jail. I certainly hope that the defendant's attorney didn't think that the bail in this case was going to be reduced to zero. I'm sure it was quite expensive appealing the bail. The defendant can certainly get time served credit deducted from her prison term for the time she serves now. The focus of the defense in this case should be on doing everything possible to get the minimum prison term possible for the defendant.

[Michael Stogner]

Wilburt,
You and I agree the defense should be working on getting his client the best possible defense or plea. If the original bail of $300,000.00 had stayed in place, Mr. Moore would have been able to concentrate on the defense of his client, because he would not have anything to argue.

$300,000.00 BAIL is reasonable for the charges.
$300,000.00 BAIL is and was enough to ensure Edith Delgado remain in JAIL.

Judge Thomas McGinn Smith raised Edith Delgado's bail from $300,000 to $3,000,000.00 with no explanation.

Judge Thomas McGinn Smith, was not asked (formally) for bail to be increased.

The Procecutor DDA Arron Fitzgerald did not file a motion for bail to be increased.At that time Arron Fitzgerald thought $300,000.00 was enough.

What caused Judge Thomas McGinn Smith to do that? Who ordered it?

Why would Judge Thomas McGinn Smith make such an obvious reversable order? Makes good PRESS. Distracts the defense from the case.

The Appellate Court called it ABUSIVE DESCRETION! DUH! and ordered it to be reasonable.

Appellate Court stated:
“We see nothing in the record that justifies $3 million bail ... to secure the public's safety and petitioner's appearance at future court dates.”

“The court ordered a trial judge (Hon Judge Robert Foiles) to set bail "in an amount that does not exceed the amount reasonably necessary to ensure public safety and petitioner's appearance at trial."

Note: The three Judges on the Appellate Court seem to think like most of the residents in San Mateo County.

[Michael Stogner]

Here we go again,

The DA Inspector testifies under oath that Edith Delgado was overheard speaking about racing and sideshows.

Overheard by who?

Overheard when and where?

What where the exact words allegedly spoken?

Who was the other person/persons spoken to?

Who is the source of this statement.

Inspector Ivan Grosshouser also testified under oath that Edith Delgado was temporarily banned from parking on high school grounds because of erratic driving......

What date did that happen?

What caused the school to lift the driving/parking ban?

What date did that happen? She only had her license for 4 months.

DA Inspector testifies under oath that English teacher Sharon Holmberg said,
"Delgado missed one Monday during the 2005-2006 school year because she spent all weekend in Oakland at a side show."

It will be interesting to see what English Teacher Sharon Holmberg testifies to.

Finally a Real Eye Witness: Craig Cook, He was actually there......

Testified: Unable to tell if Delgado and the black Escalade were in a speed contest.

But said the two vehicles were traveling fast.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

You complete Moron.

Once again, and maybe you will actually read and learn, THE PROSECUTION IS PRESENTING THEIR CASE. This means the DEFENSE will have their time to refute anything they feel is incorrect. The charges made will be cross-examined - moron.

For you to insinuate that the DA's office is doing something wrong here shows your absolute IGNORANCE of judicial procedure.

I do also notice in all your endless threads about the DA's office you very carefully omit the role of the Jury. It is the jury that convicts, not the DA.

[Michael Stogner]

Roscoe, Ray-Ray, Silviano, RS....etc...

What you call presenting their case,

When a San Mateo County Public Employee willfully and knowingly lies to the jury.

You and others call that presenting the case.

The Jury does not expect the Prosecutor to be the one presenting false evidence or testimony to them...there is a trust issue here.

Who prosecutes the police officer or DA'S witness for committing perjury?

You know very well that no prosecutor's witness has ever been charged with perjury in San Mateo County.

Welcome to San Mateo County.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Name the Lies Big Guy. List them right on here. Then let's see what develops.

Once again you have convinced yourself that this defendant is somehow innocent or non-culpable and the DA is out to get her. As with all the others you will be proven wrong.

I know from watching these same trials over the years that testimony is presented and sometimes it is refuted. Simply stating a "fact" is not enough. It has to be proven. That is why experts are brought in from each side, to prove or refute evidence presented. Beacuse something is refuted does not mean someone "lied". No one in that courtroom was at the scene of the crime. So everything has to be examined and proven for the jury.

And ask yourself the question, Einstein: What is the role of the Judge? And also, What is the role of the jury?

This is simple. But not for you.

[Michael Stogner]

Name the Lies Big Guy. List them right on here. Then let's see what develops.

Once again you have convinced yourself that this defendant is somehow innocent or non-culpable and the DA is out to get her. As with all the others you will be proven wrong.

I know from watching these same trials over the years that testimony is presented and sometimes it is refuted. Simply stating a "fact" is not enough. It has to be proven. That is why experts are brought in from each side, to prove or refute evidence presented. Beacuse something is refuted does not mean someone "lied". No one in that courtroom was at the scene of the crime. So everything has to be examined and proven for the jury.

And ask yourself the question, Einstein: What is the role of the Judge? And also, What is the role of the jury?

This is simple. But not for you.


Roscoe, Ray-Ray, RS, Silviano, etc....

What about a witness who does lie, a witness who was coached by our DA to lie, and in fact does lie under oath. What happens then?

What is the Judges obligation, when he/she is aware of this perjury in court?

Strike the testimony.......

Don't allow the obvious lies in front of the jury.

Now the jury for the most part would not think it possible that a witness, would be coached to lie.

[Michael Stogner]

This explains the Ernesto D. Smith dissmissal on August 10, 2006 5 days early.

Case # SM344020A

BEFORE THE HONORABLE KATHLEEN M. MCKENNA, JUDGE PRO TEM

Mr Philip Barnett: And then I had line 31, Ernesto Smith. In the Smith matter, we had had a pretrial in July where a- - we've been offered by the court an opportunity to civilly compromise the matter, and we had difficulty arranging that. We had to get the insurance company to agree - - both my client and the insurance company to agree to settle with the victim.

So I'd like to present you with an executed - - a document with the victim in that regard, and I can personally attest to the fact that she signed it. She has been compensated by both my client and CSAA Insurance Company and the premises was fully satisified. So based on that I would ask you to dismiss it.

THE COURT: All right And the people concur in this?

MR. FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor, I don't have my file right now.

If I could just take a look at that?

MR.BARNETT: Yeah, If I could explain it to you.

The People did not concur, but the Judge said that it's - - do it over the DA'S
objections - - so I don't want to misrepresent it, but thats what was understood.

THE COURT: Is Mr. Smith here?

MR. BARNETT: He is not.

THE COURT: Okay based on the agreement reached between Mr. Smith Barnett and the victim, this matter having been - - restitution satisfied, I am going to dismiss this matter.

MR. BARNETT: Very Good Thank You

( Whereupon, the proceedings concluded.)

So as we all can see Mr. Barnett knew all along there was a female victim, and we know that DDA Patrick Flynn knew because I introduced him to the victim at the July hearing where she asked him to change the charge back to a felony.

DDA Patrick Flynn didn't even have the file of the case with him when it was dismissed.


The information above came from the transcript that I, Michael G. Stogner ordered. I was suprised to see in the official court records that I represented
Ernesto D. Smith on August 10, 2006.

I am not an Attorney, Nor have I ever said I was.

I was not even in the Court that day. I showed up 8/15/06

Commissioner Kathleen McKenna knows me personally and knows that I am not an Attorney.

Thats right the transcript states, Mr Stogner where I wrote Mr. Barnett.

If this wasn't such a serious matter it would be funny. I have been identified in the Official Court Record as representing the Federal Employee, who was never even arrested for felony Hit and Run, Undercharged to a misdemeanor
and finally dismissed in the Interest of Justice.....

Thats not bad for my first case, I got my client off, he wasn't there and I wasn't there. Thats power.

I will never forget the first time Susan Navratil told me that the transcripts are altered and foged sometimes.

I personally witnessed in the Eddie Rapoza triple Murder trial during Dr. Pablo Stuarts? testimony that DDA Al Gianinni confirmed at least two different versions of transcripts existed of the 10/9/02 8:30 pm taped confession.
Both versions prepared by the Sheriff and the DA Office.

Welcome to San Mateo County

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Once again you cannot list the LIES as you have charged. Only broad generalizations.

And you seem to dismiss the jury as a bunch of idiots easily led by the DA. Drones easily fed information. Not in my experience.

I once sat on a jury. It was made up with some pretty smart people. And they did not swallow everything as you state here. We had a surgeon on there, a ambitious trucker, just a bunch of smart common sense people. Everything was examined carefully and discussed. We did not require a STOGNER to explain things to them.


So your obvious bias, arrogance are the only issue you can raise. Once again.

[Michael Stogner]

Once again you cannot list the LIES as you have charged. Only broad generalizations.

And you seem to dismiss the jury as a bunch of idiots easily led by the DA. Drones easily fed information. Not in my experience.

I once sat on a jury. It was made up with some pretty smart people. And they did not swallow everything as you state here. We had a surgeon on there, a ambitious trucker, just a bunch of smart common sense people. Everything was examined carefully and discussed. We did not require a STOGNER to explain things to them.
So your obvious bias, arrogance are the only issue you can raise. Once again.

Roscoe, Ray-Ray, Silviano, RS Etc.

You and I have had this dance before. You boldly asked me to name names and the alleged crimes. I did name DDA Al Gianinni,Sheriff Detectives Gary Ramos and Joe Farmer and your only response was....... I needed help.

Now you tell us a nice story about your experience as a juror,

What if anything would you personally have done if you KNEW that the DDA
had a witness present what he (the DDA) personally knew was false?

[Roscoe_Beedle]

You still cannot decipher between your baseless accusations and proper evidence handling during a trial. It is the defense's job to challenge what they feel is incorrect testimony or false evidence is it not?

In all these cases you have grandstanded on endlessly you always forget the role of the Judge and the Jury. Your conspiratorial slanted mind cannot imagine that someone other than you can discover all these things you seem to be able to as a hobby.

In the trial I sat on, one witness was deemed to be unreliable. But another one was very credible. Absolutely no one took the first witness as a "plant" from the DA's office. We saw through some imconsistencies in that particular witness's testimony and cross examination. Very standard stuff.

Of course we did not have the counsel of Michael Stogner who would have explained to us carefully that the first witness was part of a vast vendetta and LIE by the DA's office and the Judge was part of the cover up. Not to mention the Police department liars, the Liars in the press and the Liars in the record keeping department.

Perhaps Stogner's profession, car salesman, develops one to rise above Liars, cheats and deception.

[Michael Stogner]

You still cannot decipher between your baseless accusations and proper evidence handling during a trial. It is the defense's job to challenge what they feel is incorrect testimony or false evidence is it not?

In all these cases you have grandstanded on endlessly you always forget the role of the Judge and the Jury. Your conspiratorial slanted mind cannot imagine that someone other than you can discover all these things you seem to be able to as a hobby.

In the trial I sat on, one witness was deemed to be unreliable. But another one was very credible. Absolutely no one took the first witness as a "plant" from the DA's office. We saw through some imconsistencies in that particular witness's testimony and cross examination. Very standard stuff.

Of course we did not have the counsel of Michael Stogner who would have explained to us carefully that the first witness was part of a vast vendetta and LIE by the DA's office and the Judge was part of the cover up. Not to mention the Police department liars, the Liars in the press and the Liars in the record keeping department.

Perhaps Stogner's profession, car salesman, develops one to rise above Liars, cheats and deception.


Roscoe, You bring up some very good points. However you did not address what YOU ROSCOE would have done with the example I gave you.

"It is the defense's job to challenge what they feel is incorrect testimony or false evidence is it not?"

I AGREE with you, You couldn't have said it any better.

This is where the PRIVATE DEFENDER PROGRAM comes into play. What if for some unexplained reasoned the defense attorney doesn't do his/her job?
Example doesn't call the only eye witness (Michael Zerbe) in a triple murder case.

"Perhaps Stogner's profession, car salesman, develops one to rise above Liars, cheats and deception."[/QUOTE]

This car salesman didn't file a false Police Report on October 9, 2002 with the Sheriff's Department. Stating the Sobe Soda Softdrink Bottle was used as a weapon, in an attempted suicide by Eddie Rapoza III. That would be Detectives Gary Ramos and Joe Farmer of the San Mateo County Sheriff's Department.

What do you have against car salespeople. Its honest work, and not paid for by public funds.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

OK, you got me there....I do not have an axe to gring against people who sell cars. I was only making a point for you to consider as you seem to have a real bias, Michael, when it comes to rather routing case management in a court room. You really need to get a grasp, your premises are so full of holes.

In my own perosnal business and professional experience, there were many times I felt completely convinced of an outcome. Just completely sold. Only to find out I was wrong. This did not make me a "Liar" because I was proven to be mistaken. Facts can lead one in different directions, this is human nature.

You don't seem to see this in people. You fly off the handle when you feel someone's rights or case is supposedly mishandled when all that is happening are procedures you are unfamiliar with. I know how juries feel about facts. And they do debate them. I have no doubt in my mind that this Delgado jury will hear both the factual and the emotional of all these issues concerning that death scene. And be able to render a verdict. You may not be satisfied but that is not the standard that must be met to conclude this trial.

Can juries be wrong? Yes. Look at those dolts on the OJ case. They even attended a party OJ threw following the trial. It can happen.

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=67137&eddate=11/18/2006

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articl...ate=07/28/2006

[neverforget]

No, nope, no way. You're not going to get away with your usual blurring of the facts Stognar.
The girl who CAUSED the DEATH of three PEOPLE was driving wrecklessly at the peril of all.

The other matter is one that happens everday, a traffic accident.

Now before you get your usual hard-on over some pittance, let me also point out that the guy in your scope will be charged with a misdemeanor traffic accident. He may lose his license in part or whole. He also will be in the care of our judicial system if not the penintentiary. Hardly a slap on the wrist but still we cannot overlook this being a traffic accident.

I did note your rather cavalier comment about how the girl who caused the deaths of these three people also "did the right thing". If these three people were in my family, Stognar, I assure you I would not appreciate your bending of the facts to take another shot at James Fox.

And who exactly is complaining that the $3,000,000 bail for this girl is too much? The girl? The girl's family? The DA is doing the right thing Stognar. With what this girl is facing releasing her easily would be a diservice to those that died needlessly.

I think you may have a heart but you defnitely have no brain.There is no way the man you are defending here or is it the DA you are defending? is going to the penintentiary or spend any time in county jail and you know it!

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.insidebayarea.com/sanmateocountytimes/ci_5472852

Here we are 9 months later. Bail was raised by Judge Smith to $3,000,000.00 without anyone asking him to raise the bail from the $300,000.00.

Now the newspapers are reporting the speed to be in excess of 80 MPH not the 110 MPH the prosecutor has promised the witnesses reported. And we have a DA Investigator Ivan Grosshauser who has testified that some unnamed high school children over-heard Edith Delgado talking about cars/speeding/racing.....

Wow......thats rare.

Speaking of rare.....80 MPH on our freeways..........

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.paloaltodailynews.com/article/2007-3-17-03-17-07-px-edith

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=66142&eddate=10/27/2006

[Michael Stogner]

The San Mateo Daily Journal has not covered this case in the last two days.
Yesterday the case was in court.

The Redwood City Daily News Covered it.article by Michael Manekin 3/20/07

Also Steve Wagstaffe of the DA'S office is not making comments on the case anymore. Now DDA Kathleen Manjarrez is the spokeswoman.

It might have to do with the 110 MPH promised by the District Attorneys Office...now more like 70-80MPH....kind of normal speed

Also no Drugs and No Alcohol......Just one teenager driver with 4 months behind the wheel.

This could be a TRAGIC ACCIDENT that the DA'S office tried to gain National Attention because of the Royal Family.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

I will assume, as I have not kept up on this case as you have, that there is an empanelled Jury here? And that this jury is made up of ordinary citizens with no connection to the DA or to Edith Delgado? Given this is all true, then let's sit back and have the case heard.

Michael, you mean well, but you throw out so much innuedo and half-truths that you essentially prejudice the case.

Having once served on a jury, I had to force myself to listen carefully at both the prosecutor and the defense attorney. I recall when us jurors retired to the jury room we then went over everything very carefully. We threw out one piece of evidence presented as we felt it was "forced". We reached a decision and the case was resolved. I trust this jury will do the same without your sideline coaching and theatrics.

[neverforget]

I feel we all should remember the 18 year old girl was not drunk or on any other type of drug. Why don't they just put an anckle monintor on her and let the girl go home until she goes to trial? Remember it was a "accident" it could of been your child think about that! I know she is in danger being in the county jail i could not even amagine what it would be like for this girl in prison, if she goes which i pray she does not. I hope her and her family is getting the suport they need right now from there community.
Sincerely;
neverforget

[neverforget]

I will assume, as I have not kept up on this case as you have, that there is an empanelled Jury here? And that this jury is made up of ordinary citizens with no connection to the DA or to Edith Delgado? Given this is all true, then let's sit back and have the case heard.

Michael, you mean well, but you throw out so much innuedo and half-truths that you essentially prejudice the case.

Having once served on a jury, I had to force myself to listen carefully at both the prosecutor and the defense attorney. I recall when us jurors retired to the jury room we then went over everything very carefully. We threw out one piece of evidence presented as we felt it was "forced". We reached a decision and the case was resolved. I trust this jury will do the same without your sideline coaching and theatrics.I feel you are wrong, people need to know about this, if Michael did not bring this discussion to this thread than i would not of known about it. So thank you Michael!

[neverforget]

I will assume, as I have not kept up on this case as you have, that there is an empanelled Jury here? And that this jury is made up of ordinary citizens with no connection to the DA or to Edith Delgado? Given this is all true, then let's sit back and have the case heard.

Michael, you mean well, but you throw out so much innuedo and half-truths that you essentially prejudice the case.

Having once served on a jury, I had to force myself to listen carefully at both the prosecutor and the defense attorney. I recall when us jurors retired to the jury room we then went over everything very carefully. We threw out one piece of evidence presented as we felt it was "forced". We reached a decision and the case was resolved. I trust this jury will do the same without your sideline coaching and theatrics.I feel you are wrong, people need to know about this, if Michael did not bring this discussion to this thread than i would not of known about it. So thank you Michael!

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=72847

Edith Delgado case: No Alcohol...No Drugs
Bail was $300,000 raised to $3,000,000 by Judge Smith without anyone asking him to raise it. The Appellate Court ordered the bail reduced to reasonable...citing Abuse ....
bail was reduced to $1,000,000 by Judge Robert Foiles.

The Richard Tom case: 8 year old Sydney Ng died,
Alcohol involved.
Bail $50,000

[Michael Stogner]

The trial date is set for May 29, 2007

[Michael Stogner]

The trial date is set for May 29, 2007


Todays article.

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=73108

It states that Edith Delgado's bail was orig. $3,000,000.00 and reduced to $1,000,000.00.

That is not acurate. The bail was $300,000 until our Hon. Judge Thomas Smith increased it to $3,000,000 without being asked to. He took it upon himself to increase it and did it. The Appellate Court ruled that his behavior was an Abuse....and ordered the bail reduced to a reasonable amount. Hon. Judge Robert Foiles reduced it to $1,000,000 per the order from the Appellate Court.

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articl...ate=07/28/2006


$250,000 Bail. Hit and Run, drugs, 1 dead, 1 paralized

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=62046&eddate=07/28/2006

[neverforget]

$250,000 Bail. Hit and Run, drugs, 1 dead, 1 paralized

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=62046&eddate=07/28/2006
Your point is well made!!!!! I agree with you on this.

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=72847

Edith Delgado case: No Alcohol...No Drugs
Bail was $300,000 raised to $3,000,000 by Judge Smith without anyone asking him to raise it. The Appellate Court ordered the bail reduced to reasonable...citing Abuse ....
bail was reduced to $1,000,000 by Judge Robert Foiles.

The Richard Tom case: 8 year old Sydney Ng died,
Alcohol involved.
Bail $50,000

http://www.redwoodcitydailynews.com/article/2007-4-18-04-18-07-bcn-18-tom-bail

Bail now set at $350,000.00 as of April 17, 2007

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.redwoodcitydailynews.com/article/2007-4-18-04-18-07-bcn-18-tom-bail

Bail now set at $350,000.00 as of April 17, 2007

another article:
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=73754

[Michael Stogner]

another article:
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=73754

Judge Jonathan Karesh re-set bail at $350,000 for Richard Tom, 45, as long as he abstains from alcohol, doesn’t drive and wears a bracelet that checks his alcohol level regularly.

Edith Delgado didn't have alcohol or drugs involved in her case.

[Michael Stogner]

Judge Jonathan Karesh re-set bail at $350,000 for Richard Tom, 45, as long as he abstains from alcohol, doesn’t drive and wears a bracelet that checks his alcohol level regularly.

Edith Delgado didn't have alcohol or drugs involved in her case.

Hon. Judge Jonathan Karesh NM331789A little known fact.
On March 23,2005 Judge Karesh dismissed a case ...
Reason..Interest of Justice
The defendant's name Susan Solloway,
Susan was arrested on 2/10/05 for prostitution, and meth possession.
At the time of arrest she was on probation.....= vio of probation. She should have been brought to San Mateo County Jail from SF.

The Judge was mislead and lied to by the Probation Officer.

It seems that her valuable testimony in a Triple murder case was important
to Al Giannini. The false and misleading letter to Judge Karesh was prepared right before she testified, and was signed after she testified.

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=75568

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=75624

[Michael Stogner]

Edith Delgado Case....In Hon. Judge John Runde Courtroom

Jury Selection to continue tomorrow at 1:30 PM

[Michael Stogner]

The Jury has been sworn in....

Consists of 9 men and 3 women.

[Michael Stogner]

Today an eye witness testified he was driving northbound on 101....
he says he saw two cars pass him on his right side, he was not sure how fast he was going so he guessed 70 mph, he said the passed him so he guessed at their speed and placed it at 85-90MPH based on if he was going 70 which he is not sure he was going 70mph...

This 85-90MPH is a lot less then the 110MPH that the District Attorneys Office has told the public for almost 1 year. I hope they have another witness to give them the 110MPH they have been promoting all this time.

If this witness was wrong about his speed, and he was only going 55-60 then his guess would be reduced to 65-80 MPH....

Trial resumes at 9:30AM Monday

Don't forget this is the case where Hon. Judge Thomas Smith raised bail from $300,000 to $3,000,000 without anyone asking him to.

[Aion]

Roscoe, why are you so rude ?

Anybody who's read this thread can see that Michael didn't "blur the facts", he stated the facts, and gave his opinion.

Somehow I don't think the hit and run was handled in the standard manner. No arrest, even with the guys license plate and a witness at hand ? What the hell ! People who flee fromt he scene of an accident sometimes do so out of panic, but they also do so BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN DOING SOMEHING ELSE THEY DON'T WANT TO BE ARRESTED FOR.

A traffic accident is NBFD. People have them every day. But people don't RUN from the police every day, adn that's what happened here.

So WHY did this guy get preferential treatment ?

Coming from YOUR perspective, we shouldn't even CARE about THAT question.

What's up with that ?

[Michael Stogner]

July 23, 2007 5:00PM

In a rare court appearance at 5:00PM

DDA Sarah Boxer felt compelled to request bail be set at $500,000 for Michael Thomas Zerbe.

Sarah argued that Michael Zerbe is a threat to the ordinary citizens.... The judge didn't buy that nonsense.

Michael Thomas Zerbe might be a threat to SOME people in the Law Enforcement Industry....

You will remember he was the only eye witness in a triple murder case....and never called to the witness stand.

He also Hand delivered a two page letter to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors dated October 26, 2005 and stamped recieved the same date.

The above mentioned letter was requesting a formal FBI Investigation into certain San Mateo County Law Enforcement Employees witholding key evidence....blue nylon material cooler with strap.....

I think the ordinal citizens of San Mateo County can figure out who might be threatened by Michael Thomas Zerbe

DDA Sarah Boxer is the same DDA who undercharged Ernesto Smith the Federal ICE agent at the begining of this thread...

Felony Hit and Run to nothing.....

Equal Justice San Mateo County Style

[Michael Stogner]

Cardell Brown a Project 90 Supervisor employed for 90 days.

No news coverage of his arrest, or court dates.

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=572

[Michael Stogner]

CHP traffic Lt. Martin Joel Whited
Here the officer assults his wife, causing her to go to the hospital....She is afraid of him.....as she should be. He has showed her how the Law Business in San Mateo County Works.
Women and children are not protected in SMC.

Fox and Wagstaffe undercharged him with Child endangerment instead of Domestic Violence which it was. He keeps his job and his gun.

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=85700&eddate=01/09/2008

Welcome to San Mateo County

[Michael Stogner]

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=87409

Probation recommended 90 days in jail. Jones had previous DUI, being party at fault for an accident and speeding.

Hon. Judge Mark Forcum and Steve Wagstaffe disagreed.

Wagstaffe called the 5 day sentence at the Sheriff Work Program insightful.

[Tommy]

Hey STOGNER!

What happened with the recall you threatened last year?

[Michael Stogner]

Hey STOGNER!

What happened with the recall you threatened last year?

Tommy,
thank you for your interest you are welcome and encouraged to call me to discuss the future recall of Sheriff Greg Munks.

650-921-7001
or
you can e-mail me at michaelgstogner@yahoo.com

If you should have any problems with that e-mail address report it to Yahoo security directly. Several people have had some challenges sending me e-mails.
Edith Delgado and David Tom of the San Mateo County Elections Office to name a couple.

Also just a reminder that this thread is about Egual Justice and I just posted about the Jones sentence of 5 days Sheriff Work Program for the death of one person.

What are your thoughts of that sentence?

I look forward to your response

[voiceinyourhead]

Stogner get your facts straight. Whited WAS charged with Domestic Violence...he PLED to child endangerment (which, depending, carries a stiffer sentence.) Zerbe WAS a threat based on his record (check out the information and his prior convictions.) Jones got 5 days because the widow didn't want jail time and because, if you look at the case, there wasn't really gross negligence involved (not like your dearest Edith).

Get your facts straight before you render an opinion.

By the way, what would YOU have given Jones? I'm curious to know, since you disagree with everyone else's opinion on the matter.

[Michael Stogner]

Stogner get your facts straight. Whited WAS charged with Domestic Violence...he PLED to child endangerment (which, depending, carries a stiffer sentence.) Zerbe WAS a threat based on his record (check out the information and his prior convictions.) Jones got 5 days because the widow didn't want jail time and because, if you look at the case, there wasn't really gross negligence involved (not like your dearest Edith).

Get your facts straight before you render an opinion.

By the way, what would YOU have given Jones? I'm curious to know, since you disagree with everyone else's opinion on the matter.


Inyour, There was no gross negligence in the Edith Delgado case..Only in DDA Aaron Fitzgerald's mind and you know that. So both cases were a traffic accident.
Delgado 70 MPH on 101.

one case gets 5 days picking up trash and one get 3 years.

"By the way, what would YOU have given Jones? I'm curious to know, since you disagree with everyone else's opinion on the matter"

I'm not sure I would have charged him in the first place.
It looks like he made a mistake.

[Michael Stogner]

Stogner get your facts straight. Whited WAS charged with Domestic Violence...he PLED to child endangerment (which, depending, carries a stiffer sentence.) Zerbe WAS a threat based on his record (check out the information and his prior convictions.) Jones got 5 days because the widow didn't want jail time and because, if you look at the case, there wasn't really gross negligence involved (not like your dearest Edith).

Get your facts straight before you render an opinion.

By the way, what would YOU have given Jones? I'm curious to know, since you disagree with everyone else's opinion on the matter.

Inyour,

Michael Thomas Zerbe was a threat to the DA's Office.
He was the only eye witness in a triple murder case (Eddie Rapoza) who was not called to testify in front of the jury.
He also delivered a letter to the Board of Supervisors demanding an FBI investigation, into the with-holding of critical evidence in that case......

[voiceinyourhead]

Edith got 2 years, not three - for someone who was so caught up in it, I'd thought you'd know that.
So turning left into oncoming traffic against the light and street signs is a "mistake" to you, huh? Well maybe that's why he got 5 days then - makes perfect sence.
Driving recklessly and negligently, then causing an accident that kills 3 people - well that's deserving of her time, I suppose.

[Michael Stogner]

Note Edith Delgado was never offered a plea bargain she was overcharged and held to it. Please hold Ayres to the same standard.

Letter of Appeal to the Office of the San Mateo County District Attorney's Office to Retry the William Hamilton Ayres Case
June 29, 2009

Honorable Beth Labson Freeman
Assistant Presiding Judge
Department 3, Courtroom 2L
400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063

Office of the San Mateo County District Attorney
James P. Fox, District Attorney
Stephen M. Wagstaffe, Chief Deputy
400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063

Re: Retrial Hearing William Hamilton Ayres - Currently Scheduled for August 28, 2009 - Criminal Case SC064366

Dear Honorable Beth Labson Freeman, Mr. James P. Fox and Mr. Stephen M. Wagstaffe,

As a concerned citizen and registered voter of San Mateo County I implore you on behalf of all concerned citizens to make it your top priority to retry William Hamilton Ayres.

I would also urge you to reject a plea deal if offered by defense lawyer Doron Weinberg which would let William Hamilton Ayres evade another trial altogether.

There are at last count (at least, if not more than) 41 alleged victims of child molestation which spanned the career of William Hamilton Ayres.

Rather than strike a deal, prosecutors ought to demand a retrial and seek the maximum penalties allowed by law, including incarceration and fines if any.

Please don’t resolve a felony child molestation case without due consideration to the alleged victims in this case, as there are far too many!

If our court system dismisses this case altogether, it could have serious implications for future victims to come forward and speak about their abuse. Dismissing this case would likely perpetuate the cycle of abuse in the medical profession and this would have very serious ramifications for all patients for generations to come.

Thank you for recognizing the gravity of these alleged crimes and for your attention to my concerns. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely, a concerned citizen

Michael G. Stogner
San Carlos, California
650-921-7001
PS. I invite you to call as witnesses in the next trial Dr. David Schwartz, and Jeff Lugerner.

[voiceinyourhead]

It took you a year and a half to respond. Been busy? Of course you have, being in court for the whole Ayers trial.

I'm not going to send a letter because, stated simply:
1) Unlike you, I trust the DA's office, who are well versed in the law and local judicial policy, and with a veteren prosecuter like Ms. McKowan, who would undoubtedly retry this case, I have no doubt that the appropriate remedy will be forthcoming; and
2) Unlike you, I'm not a nutcase who feels like I should interject myself into every case that happens to have some press behind it. Michael, you do not speak for the victims, or the witnesses, or the system, or anything anyone cares about. They speak for themselves, a fact they have shone to the umpteenth regard with the Ayres case. If you hadn't gotten involved with yoru posts and "support," guess what - the case would have gone the same way.

Take a hint.

[nitamac]

It took you a year and a half to respond. Been busy? Of course you have, being in court for the whole Ayers trial.

I'm not going to send a letter because, stated simply:
1) Unlike you, I trust the DA's office, who are well versed in the law and local judicial policy, and with a veteren prosecuter like Ms. McKowan, who would undoubtedly retry this case, I have no doubt that the appropriate remedy will be forthcoming; and
2) Unlike you, I'm not a nutcase who feels like I should interject myself into every case that happens to have some press behind it. Michael, you do not speak for the victims, or the witnesses, or the system, or anything anyone cares about. They speak for themselves, a fact they have shone to the umpteenth regard with the Ayres case. If you hadn't gotten involved with yoru posts and "support," guess what - the case would have gone the same way.

Take a hint.You need to check yourself before you go checking others.

[voiceinyourhead]

You need to check yourself before you go checking others.

I'm missing it, apparently.