Town Square

Post a New Topic

DDA Steve Wagstaffe is protecting R.E.A.C.T. Task force warrant.

Original post made by Michael G. Stogner on May 9, 2010

The world is interested and watching this one.

The search warrant that was issued to San Mateo County Sheriff and R.E.A.C.T. Task force is currently sealed. A large group of media is working on getting it unsealed. Last week I went to get a copy, the manager of the DA's office told me "We don't have it." she didn't say it was sealed.

Steve Wagstaffe in a recent case of an Atherton Police Officer committing a felony against a resident of Atherton has behaved the same. He has protected the Police Officer by failing to even investigate, he refuses to investigate even when he knows its public knowledge. It has even been discussed in Federal Court recently. Everybody knows about it.

Welcome to San Mateo County

Comments (10)

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on May 14, 2010 at 11:36 am

San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Clifford Cretan Unseals Warrant

"The immediacy has passed,"


Right On


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on May 14, 2010 at 11:49 am

Looks like San Mateo County's Next District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe just got caught in yet another LIE.

"Prosecutors had argued that the warrant information should be not be released because it would reveal the identities of confidential informants who were working with investigators. During today's hearing, Cretan said there were no informants and many of the people named in the warrant, including the person who found the phone, had already been publicly named."

Welcome to San Mateo County


Posted by Jon Buckheit, a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on May 14, 2010 at 11:50 am

Interesting article about this:

Web Link

Stephen Wagstaffe actually IS (according to him) investigating the police report falsification issue, much in the same sense that a fox investigates whether a hen house is okay. I have commented before that this is highly inappropriate. He he also confabulated about attorney general opinions that support there being no conflict of interest in this investigation, but when confronted with public records requests to examine them, retracted that statement.


Posted by Melinda Tevis, a resident of Atherton: other
on May 14, 2010 at 12:50 pm

It was announced today that the judge unsealed the REACT warrant. There will be transparency after all!!!
This is wonderful news for everyone because it is an example of exactly what is so crucially
needed to re-establish balance in the way healthy government process is supposed to work.
It not only emphasizes the important role of Judicial Over Sight--but in this case, unlike Mr. Bothan's, it serves to protect the 4th estate--a free an independent press.
Let us all hope, that our next District Attorney eventually learns to appreciate the true value, to all of us, of the lessons learned from this incident.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on May 14, 2010 at 1:07 pm

Just a note: Not one Newspaper or Media supplier from San Mateo County was named as a party interested in getting the warrant unsealed.

This was a great victory for the public's right to know," said Roger Myers, an attorney representing media organizations including the Times, the Associated Press, Bloomberg News, Wired.com and CNET. "And specifically the rights to know about the evidence and the information that was available to law enforcement and to the court when a search warrant was issued to search the home and seize the computer of a journalist."


Posted by Freedom of the press, a resident of Atherton: other
on May 14, 2010 at 5:55 pm

Can anyone confirm for me the version of this story that I have heard twice now that--
The i-phone device had already been returned voluntarily to Apple and the issue completely resolved BEFORE the DA sent the REACT task force to break down this guys door and haul off his computers?
There sure seem to be a lot of unnecessary and excessive force issues that have managed to come to light lately--despite the massive efforts made to obfuscate them. The press editorBothan arrest blunder comes to mind.
Yet another sideways means of sending fear through out the press and with out the public's right to know.
This guy is fortunate that no one decided to "discover" pornography on any of his equipment as a coup de grace.
And we are all very lucky for this Judge's decision not to protect the DA's bad calls in every instance.
Good job and big Thank you for Judge Cretan.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on May 15, 2010 at 12:56 pm

Freedom of the press. That is confirmed.

Looks like on 4/19/2010 Jason Chen returned the phone to Bruce Sewell (Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary) for Apple. Thats 5 days before Search Warrant was issued. Search Warrant omitted the words Journalist, News, reporter etc.

Welcome to San Mateo County


Posted by Jon Buckheit, a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on May 22, 2010 at 2:08 am

Jon Buckheit is a registered user.

There may be interesting journalism that can be accomplished via the commonality between the iPhone search warrant issue (possible infringement on journalistic freedom) and the Bothun issue. I am very sympathetic to Apple's position on this issue having run a technology company myself. The trade secrets are the crown jewels. But breaking into journalist's homes over what they've published is an incredibly slippery slope if you stop to think about it. I agree with the D.A. that journalists cannot commit crimes, but in some sense the crime really can never have to do with what they've written about here in the U.S.A.


Posted by e.grimely, a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on May 28, 2010 at 10:31 am

To all the do-gooders and self-righteous law abiding citizens out there....
Why didn't Chen turn the phone into the owner's of the business where he found it so it could possibly have been returned to its rightful owner once he realized it was missing? Sounds like theft to me....unless you all follow the rule of 'finder's keepers.'
Sure would have saved the tax payers a bundle..... Just a thought.


Posted by Jon Buckheit, a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on May 28, 2010 at 12:42 pm

He didn't find the phone. The person who found the phone sold it to his newspaper.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

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

Touring the Southern California “Ivies:” Pomona and Cal Tech
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 5 comments | 3,110 views

Couples: Parallel Play or Interactive Play?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,368 views

Just say no
By Jessica T | 6 comments | 1,306 views

Getting High in Menlo Park
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 839 views

As They Head Back To School, Arm Them With This
By Erin Glanville | 4 comments | 297 views