Should Sheriff Munks resign, answer questions, or do nothing? Other Topics, posted by Richard Hine, managing editor of The Almanac, on May 1, 2007 at 6:33 am Richard Hine is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos, who had participated in a law enforcement relay run in Las Vegas on April 21, were discovered at a Las Vegas brothel that night during "Operation Dollhouse," a series of raids by local and federal authorities that followed a two-year prostitution investigation.
Munks and Bolanos were briefly detained and questioned but were not among the six people -- five men and one woman -- arrested by police at the brothel.
Lt. Lisa Williams of the San Mateo County Shefiff's Office said some county vehicles were taken to Las Vegas for the relay.
Sheriff Munks issued a statement (see below), but refused to answer more questions. Click here for a recent story: Web Link
Should the sheriff resign, answer more questions, or do nothing? Comment below.
Following is the statement of Sheriff Greg Munks on April 24, 2007:
"I want to apologize to my family, the Sheriff's Office and its fine men and women, and to the people of San Mateo County for my lack of judgment and the undue attention and embarrassment this incident has caused.
"I believed I was going to a legitimate business. It was not.
"Both the Undersheriff, who was still outside when the authorities arrived, and I fully cooperated with the investigation. We were questioned and released.
"I would not, nor did I, break any laws. Neither did the Undersheriff.
"I hold myself to a high standard and am personally embarrassed by this mistake.
"While this is a personal embarrassment to me, it will not interfere with the important work of the Sheriff's Office on behalf of the people of San Mateo County. I ask for your cooperation in returning the focus of this office to addressing the important public safety challenges that face our community. Thank you."
Posted by Menlo Park resident, a resident of the Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park neighborhood, on May 1, 2007 at 8:02 am
If Munks and Bolanos are innocent victims of circumstances as Munks claims they are, they should not resign but Munks should answer reporters' questions and get past it.
This is patently obvious but by not answering questions, he raises the level of suspicion and doubt.
Maybe he feels that his integrity dictates that he not stoop to such indignities as answering questions about a dumb mistake. If he is what he says he is, his integrity would shine through and erase doubts.
If he is refusing to answer questions simply because he doesn't want to be further embarrassed, that doesn't wash. There is a price to be paid for stupidity and naivete, particularly for an elected official, and particularly for a top law enforcement official who professes not to understand the inference of asking a cab driver to find him a massage parlor in a state (albeit not a county) where prostitution is legal.
Posted by concerned citizen, a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on May 2, 2007 at 10:42 am
Sheriff Munks and Undersheriff Bolanos were staying at a hotel in Las Vegas...a hotel that has a legitimate "spa". This story of driving three miles off the strip, into a seedy area, to an unmarked residential home throws huge red flags! Anybody that beleives the ridiculous statement issued by Sheriff Munks might want to buy my bridge that is for sale! Any person, let alone experienced law enforcement professionals, would have realized where the limo driver was going and stopped him immediately if they were really looking for a legitimate business! Sheriff Munks and Undersheriff Bolanos have some serious questions to answer. Why were they "customers" at a brothel as stated by Las Vegas Metro Police? Who looks for a "massage" at 9:30 at night? The citizens of San Mateo County deserve better than this. Tell the truth gentlemen, you owe it to the public you serve.
Posted by watching from my lawn chair, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on May 2, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Of course he should resign. But for that matter, he never should have been elected. And he might not have been elected if there was an actual election. But there wasn't -- he was the only one running. Perhaps the thought of the Lane family's deep pockets scared away any worthy candidates. One wonders what his father-in-law, Mr. Lane, thinks about this fiasco.
Greg Munks represents everything that is wrong with San Mateo County politics.
On a related note, the Almanac's editorial this week was laughable. This is the same paper that ran a huge fluff piece when Munks took office. Where were the tough questions then - and before? All of a sudden the Almanac sees what the sheriff is all about. Too bad the paper wasn't paying attention earlier...
It might also be noted that Munks and Bolanos were Palo Alto cops together way back when. They've known each other for quite some time, so who knows what other adventures this duo has had together.
Posted by peeved in Portola Valley, a resident of the Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley neighborhood, on May 2, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Resignation is the only option. Let's be frank here, if this involved two Deputy Sheriff's or any lesser rank for that matter, they would have at the least been demoted but most likely terminated! The Sheriff told a bold faced lie. He knew darned well that he was not in a "legitimate business". They got caught. PERIOD. Now it is time to step up to the plate and take their lumps. I cannot beleive the shame and embarrassment those two "top lawmen" have brought to the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office. Recall the Sheriff if he won't resign.
Posted by Sheriff should RESIGN, a resident of the Woodside: Skywood/Skylonda neighborhood, on May 3, 2007 at 2:43 pm
If Sheriff Munks wanted a massage as he claimed, he could have gotten one at his hotel spa. If he can't tell the difference between a brothel (aka "massage parlor") and a legitimate place that where a trained masseuse would give him a massage, then he doesn't deserve to be a Cop. How can we trust him to go after Prostitution rings and Human traffickers if he can't recognize them? Or when he's caught red handed patronizing them? Last time I checked it was illegal to paronize illegal brothels. Why the FBI didn't go arrest the Johns, or the Gregs who contribute to the problem is another issue. Ignorance of the law excuses no man - or Sheriff. He should resign.
Posted by Peeved in Portola Valley, a resident of the Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley neighborhood, on May 3, 2007 at 5:23 pm
According to Las Vegas Metro Police, the "Johns" or customers were not arrested but rather identified and released at the scene. The reason for this is the target people were the prostitutes and those that ran the brothel. There is a recall petition being filed by Michael Stogner. He has had quite a few comments in other periodicals. The Sheriff and the Under Sheriff got "caught with their hands in the cookie jar" Their excuse is basically "we were just putting the cookie back". How stupid does he think the San Mateo County residents are?
Posted by peeved in Portola Valley, a resident of the Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley neighborhood, on May 4, 2007 at 9:29 am
Editor: Michael Stogner posts comments and contact info at www.smdailyjournal.com
Another interesting tid bit...Undersheriff Bolanos has recently completely disbanded the Sexual Assualt/Sex Crimes Investigations Unit for the Sheriff's Office. Hmmm...maybe a bit close home shall we say? This is unacceptable. That is probably the most important investigations unit law enforcement must maintain in this day and age. Please, look into this matter!!
Posted by Rory Brown, Almanac staff writer, on May 8, 2007 at 3:20 pm Rory Brown is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Peeved in Portola Valley:
According to Capt. Don O'Keefe with the county sheriff's office, Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos has done nothing to change how the department investigates sex crimes.
Mr. O'Keefe said the county used to be part of the SAF (sexual assault felony) task force, which was a cross-jurisdictional effort overseen by the California Department of Justice to investigate sex crimes.
In August 2006 (before Mr. Bolanos was named undersheriff), that task force dissolved, due to a lack of resources, Mr. O'Keefe said. He noted the county still has officers dedicated to investigating sex crimes, but they focus on the issue at a county level, rather than working with officers of other jurisdictions to address the issue at a regional level.
Posted by Michael G Stogner, a resident of another community, on Nov 19, 2007 at 9:42 am
For some unkown reason the above link (DELETED) to the CBS 5 video by reporter Robert Lyles on 5/16/07 Titled..."New Questions About Bay Area Sheriff Caught in Las Vegas Brothel Sting." I found it ...it took awhile...seems like it has been deleted for every site I put it on. WHY??? Web Link San Mateo County Supervisor Jerry Hill is interviewed at 4:43 to 5:35 on video. Under the radar......
This could be a job for REACT TASK FORCE......Sherman Hall...
Posted by 5150 hired, a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Apr 9, 2010 at 6:40 pm
These guys have got to be the most "un"streetsmart cops that have ever been in the business! I don't buy the story, and think that answering questions would the accountable and decent thing to do. Pretty ugly situation, women possibly forced into prostition, as well as the possibility that some could be under age. I would want to be as accomodating as possible, especially if I made the yahoo mistake of believing a ghetto apartment building off the strip was a legimate business. Yea...Right!