Town Square

Post a New Topic

Judge pleads not guilty to drunken driving

Original post made on Aug 6, 2014

A San Mateo County judge pleaded not guilty in a Redwood City courtroom Tuesday (Aug. 5) to a misdemeanor charge of driving under the influence of alcohol. He was driving on U.S. 101 in Redwood City during the Memorial Day weekend when he was stopped by police and arrested.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, August 5, 2014, 5:31 PM

Comments (10)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by JulieToo
a resident of another community
on Aug 6, 2014 at 12:11 pm

JulieToo is a registered user.


HOW can this judge enter a Not Guilty plea?!

Thank goodness it will be a Jury Trial. Maybe that is the only way there will be equity in the outcome. I say...only...since who knows what will happen.

Unbelievable. I end my case.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by gunste
a resident of Portola Valley: Ladera
on Aug 6, 2014 at 1:29 pm

Let's see whether justice is even handed and applies equally to all. A slightly inebriated judge is no different from any other citizen. Was it his first arrest for DUI????


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alternate View
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Aug 6, 2014 at 1:51 pm

What if he plead guilty in exchange for an offer from the DA for not receiving the maximum punishment? I think this is called a plea bargain.

Would people not be highly suspicious that the judge received a better deal because of his position? I know I would question it.

Just because he's a judge, he does not waive his right to due process. He's certainly entitled to plead innocent, motion to dismiss evidence, and even have a trial.

I would argue that he's chose a more transparent path than simply taking the DA's offer ... assuming they extended one. We will all now be able evaluate the evidence in a public forum.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Puzzling
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Aug 6, 2014 at 3:51 pm

I agree with Alternate View 100%.

It is puzzling, however, that the San Mateo D.A. hasn't recused himself from prosecuting this case, and the Redwood City judges have not recused themselves. That's what usually happens and what should happen when there is the possibility of conflict of interest or pre-existing relationships getting in the way of justice or, more importantly, the perception of justice.

As for Judge Scott, he made a mistake, is entitled to defend himself just like any of us would if we were in his situation, and will wind up paying a price. It may even make him a better judge to have gone through this.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by SteveC
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 6, 2014 at 3:57 pm

SteveC is a registered user.

Wonderful!!! the Jr. non attorneys are showing their ignorance again. If they had any knowledge of the law they would know this is normal to plead not guilty at the first appearance. But then only his attorney made an appearance on his behalf. Let the case progress and then we can see what happens and the sentence. One always sees the evidence against them prior to proceeding. He has the same rights as anyone else.





 +   Like this comment
Posted by JulieToo
a resident of another community
on Aug 6, 2014 at 4:14 pm

JulieToo is a registered user.


"Wonderful!!! the Jr. non attorneys are showing their ignorance again. "

I plead "Not Guilty"




Report Objectionable Content


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Aug 6, 2014 at 4:36 pm

Michael G. Stogner is a registered user.

He was in the court house that day that's for sure.
Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pearl
a resident of another community
on Aug 6, 2014 at 11:13 pm

pearl is a registered user.

Why has the San Mateo County DA's office (Steve Wagstaffe, DA) not recused itself from this case? This case should have been turned over long ago to the State of California Attorney General's office for prosecution. What is Judge Scott doing these days while he's awaiting his next court appearance? Is he still sitting on the bench handing out sentences to other folks? I sure hope not. I hope Judge Scott has been removed from the courtroom, and will not sit on the bench again until after his case has been heard and acted upon. In my opinion, Judge Scott no longer has any credibility in our community, and needs to resign his position on the bench now. And, someone needs to get through to DA Steve Wagstaffe and tell him to recuse himself from this case, and hand it over to the State of California Attorney General's office before his credibility goes down the tubes, as well. The SMCO Judges and District Attorneys and Attorneys all work on cases together, all know each other well, make up a major part of the good-old-boy network here in our county, so if Judge Scott's case is heard in San Mateo County, it will be one of the major farces of the decade!!! Everyone, please, contact DA Steve Wagstaffe and urge him to recuse himself from this case, and turn it over to the State of California Attorney General's Office.








Why has the San Mateo County DA's office (Steve Wagstaffe, DA) not recused itself from this case? This case should have been turned over long ago to the State of California Attorney General's office for prosecution. What is Judge Scott doing these days while he's awaiting his next court appearance? Is he still sitting on the bench handing out sentences to other folks? I sure hope not. I hope Judge Scott has been removed from the courtroom, and will not sit on the bench again until after his case has been heard and acted upon. In my opinion, Judge Scott no longer has any credibility in our community, and needs to resign his position on the bench now. And, someone needs to get through to DA Steve Wagstaffe and tell him to recuse himself from this case, and hand it over to the State of California Attorney General's office before his credibility goes down the tubes, as well. The SMCO Judges and District Attorneys and Attorneys all work on cases together, all know each other well, make up a major part of the good-old-boy network here in our county, so if Judge Scott's case is heard in San Mateo County, it will be one of the major farces of the decade!!! Everyone, please, contact DA Steve Wagstaffe and urge him to recuse himself from this case, and turn it over to the State of California Attorney General's Office for prosecution.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Familiar
a resident of another community
on Aug 7, 2014 at 7:30 pm


A Not Guilty plea is not a actual statement of guilt or responsibility.

A not guilty plea merely stops the statutory time constraints which gives the defense time to review the facts, evidence and determine if there are issues, errors or questions.

Every single person is just one incident or accident away from the need for a fair judge and an impartial jury. DUI can be a complicated charge with many factors. It may be enhanced by many other factors beyond mere alcohol. Any of us would ask our defense have a chance to present a case before any rush to a conclusion.

In bringing cases before him, I know Judge Scott has always been a fair, impartial and conscientious examiner of the facts. This is exactly the type of jurist needed in the community. Judge Scott would not rush to the judgment as so many have on this forum.

Allow the legal process and any needed rehabilitation an opportunity to proceed, the same as any fair judge would offer to you.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Aug 7, 2014 at 8:01 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

familiar:

the problem here is the appearance of unfair treatment. The San Mateo DA's office needs to recuse itself from handling this case as do any judges in San Mateo County. No matter how fair or impartial any of these entities may act there will ALWAYS be the stench of special treatment of this judge. I agree he deserves the same rights as anyone else, but as an elected official he has to expect that the voters want to be sure he is truly being treated the same as any of them in the same situation. That can't happen if the SMC DA prosecutes this case and SMC judges hear it. That applies whether he eventually pleads guilty or actually goes to trial.

If the Attorney General doesn't take over this case and a judge from outside the county isn't brought in, none of the voters of this county can be assured that this judge did not receive special treatment. Even if he doesn't.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Flirtation
By Chandrama Anderson | 4 comments | 1,558 views

King of the Slides
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 1,200 views

Standardized Test Prep: When to Start and Whom to Hire?
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 885 views

Finger Food and a Blood Lite?
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 741 views

Where the Sidewalk Ends
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 400 views