Town Square

Post a New Topic

Dr. William Ayres Competency trial.

Original post made by Michael G. Stogner on Jun 16, 2011

The Jury has the case now as of this morning.

Comments (39)

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 16, 2011 at 4:36 pm

Thanks, Michael. Very interesting court day yesterday with Ayres blaming everyone else for his predicament- San Mateo Deputy Police Chief Callagy; his former lawyer Doron Weinberg; prosecution witness Dr. Lynn Ponton and advocate Victoria Balfour, whom he called a "Scientologist reporter."

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 17, 2011 at 10:32 am

I just want to go on the record, as many of you know I have been very critical of the District Attorneys Office for their lack of prosecution (1987) and many mistakes made when they finally did prosecute William Ayres.

In THIS competency trial, no matter how it turns out I think DDA Melissa McKowen put on a very good case for the people.

Michael G. Stogner

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 17, 2011 at 7:38 pm


Web Link

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:08 am

The victims of Ayres and their families are furious with the San Mateo District Attorney's office for this mistrial.

Parents who attended this competency trial report that Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall was better prepared; had better witnesses (seven of them) and outsmarted prosecutor Melissa Mckowan. Reports are that she was not prepared, had only two witnesses (one of whom was brought in at the last minute and was very weak) and often fumbled.

Meanwhile around the country, dozens of doctors who were arrested for molesting children AFTER Ayres was arrested in 2007 have long since been tried and sentenced to prison. In one case in Ohio in 2009, identical twin pediatricians Dr. Scott and Dr. Mark Blankenburg were convicted of 79 child counts of child molestation, possession of child pornography and bribery just NINE months after they were arrested.

The first criminal trial for Ayres was supposed to be a slam dunk, according to experts, but the DA messed that up too by never bothering to check Ayres' bogus assertions that he was trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy in Boston.

Ayres was arrested in April, 2007 and is still free. This is a joke and a terrible travesty.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:20 am

Thank you, Steve Wagstaffe for totally screwing up this case and for not having anyone monitor the prosecutor in the first criminal trial:

Web Link

"If prosecutors decide against a second competency trial, it could mean the end of the case against Ayres. He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent. And because dementia is a progressive disorder that attacks a person's memory, it is an unlikely he will get better."

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 7:20 am

It is my understanding that this mistrial means Ayres is competent. He was competent before this trail and McDougal had to get a jury to find him incompetent.

That did no happen.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 7:55 am

At this point, it is beyond the point of no return, competency or no. The San Mateo DA's office has fumbled this from the beginning, right from the jury selection of the first criminal trial, where jurors reported that the prosecutor didn't seem to "give a rat's ass" about who she was picking; rushed through the process and barely asked prospective jurors anything. It's not going anywhere.

Why is that other DA's offices from around the country have been able to criminally convict pedophile priests who are much, much older than Ayres but the San Mateo DA can't seem to convict Ayres on what legal experts agree was an airtight case?

Some have their theories, like San Mateo County Times Executive Editor Glenn Rabinowitz, who told a reporter in 2010 that the San Mateo DA's office has been "ambivalent" about the Ayres case from the beginning and have sent mixed signals about convicting him.

Although Steve Wagstaffe has told many people that the DA's office never used Ayres to evaluate boys, that is a false statement. Ayres himself has said that the DA's office has hired him over the years. Rabinowitz of the County Times believes that the DA's office fears a slew of lawsuits if Ayres is convicted.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 11:15 am

More coverage of this case over at: It's run by one of Ayres' many victims.

Ayres complained about this website ( among many other things) to a doctor who examined him, as proof that people were "out to get him."

This mistrial is just heartbreaking for the victims, who have been let down by the San Mateo DA's office over and over again.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:06 pm

The William Ayres blog has just published a letter from Tim Wulff, sent by Michael Stogner on the Ayres mistrial.

Wulff's letter:

"This news article written by Joshua Melvin smacks of bias, distortion and misrepresentation of fact.

This was NOT a competency hearing. It was an incompetency hearing. Competency is presumed. Incompetency is not presumed. The statement 'He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent' is a false statement. He will or will not be retried solely on the determination and decision of the DA's Office.

The fact of the mistrial on incompetency will raise issues on appeal. That will be the DA's concern.
Further, in spite of the utterly unusual events surrounding the declaration of mistrial and the basis for it, not one word of comment is made by the reporter on this subject. Why?

How often does such a high profile case terminate its deliberations so quickly? Yet not a word from this person reviewing the event.

Further, although on-site observers of the trial are unclear as to whether there was a public hearing of the mistrial event, as has always been the case in my experience, there appears to be the possibility that the entire event was conducted in private. This would be extraordinary if true, and certainly newsworthy.

We all know from having seen events like this repeatedly, that it is common practice for a judge to admonish the jurors, consult and advise them according to the law and send them back to try again time and again. Yet, in this case, the judge seems eager to accept the mistrial path and waste the taxpayer's hard-earned money. Why?

None of these issues are addressed by the reporter and editor who seem to my mind intent on creating misinformation in an attempt to mislead the public. If this is the case, it is reprehensible and irresponsible in the extreme.

There has already been a long series of events in this case of questionable actions and behaviors on the part of both Bay Area News Groups characterizations in their reporting of this horrid trial, as well as those of the DA's Office and the Courts in the conduct of this case.

Does Dr. Ayres have knowledge of the conduct of others within the government and judiciary of the County of San Mateo that requires those in power to take steps to collaborate in efforts to protect him from the obvious consequences of his actions? One can only speculate.."

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:19 pm

In August, 2010, in a personal meeting with a citizen, San Mateo County Times Executive Editor Glenn Rabinowitz stated that he had worked in "many states around the country as a reporter, but San Mateo County is the most corrupt county he's ever worked in." Rabinowitz stated to the citizen that his paper should "really start investigating the San Mateo DA's office." However, despite the efforts of citizens this winter to alert Rabinowitz to the FBI investigation into Wagstaffe, as well as turning over pertinent documents, the San Mateo County Times hasn't made a single call to investigate the corruption in this county.

Steve Wagstaffe "courts" reporters; turns on the charm; and makes them believe that his office is transparent and accessible. In fact, the DA's office has withheld information on criminal misconduct by San Mateo County employees that would reflect badly on the County. Case in point: a San Mateo County counselor named Cardell Brown pled guilty to raping boys in County group homes in 2007. But Wagstaffe never told the press about it- undoubtedly because he didn't want other victims coming forward and more lawsuits against the County. The only reason it came to light is because a citizen received a call from a civil lawyer representing the victims, asking for help in looking for other victims. God knows how many other cases Wagstaffe has hid from the taxpayers.

I am glad the FBI is investigating Wagstaffe. I hope they nail him.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 20, 2011 at 5:26 am

Wendy Murphy, legal analyst for the Today Show; MSNBC and Fox News has been following the Ayres case since the beginning. Her opinion: "District Attorney's offices throwing cases is not new. Even the IDEA of Ayres being incompetent is so silly- it seems like a setup."

Posted by Wagstaffe is poison, a resident of another community
on Jun 20, 2011 at 5:49 am

Wagstaffe is just part of a good old boys network and doesn't care about victims. He has associated with, befriended and defended well-known corrupt law enforcement figures such as Carlos Bolanos, Corrabivez, Glen Neilson, Bob Brennon and Mike Guerrera.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 20, 2011 at 8:31 am

More on the Ayres competency mistrial from Wendy Murphy, legal analyst on MSNBC, Fox and the Today show: "The interesting thing is - it's supposed to be an issue for the COURT to deal with, not the prosecutor, so even having it structured as a fight between the prosecutor and defense makes no sense.

Competency is about capacity to function in the system and is not supposed to be subjected to an adversarial process in the typical sense."

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 20, 2011 at 6:11 pm

For four decades, Ayres told everyone in San Mateo County- police, Children's Services, his medical partners and parents that he was "trained" to give genital exams to boys in therapy at a place called Judge Baker Guidance Center in Boston. Ayres' medical partner told the San Mateo DA's office this after Ayres was arrested.

But the San Mateo DA couldn't even bother to check that simple fact for the criminal trial.

But long before the trial, a reporter at the William Ayres blog had tracked down more than 40 child psychiatrists who had trained at Judge Baker with Ayres, and every single doctor said Ayres was lying, and that if anyone had been caught touching a child under any circumstances in therapy, they would have been fired. The reporter turned over some of those names of the doctors to the San Mateo police and PD. The DA never called as witnesses any of the doctors who had been trained with Ayres to refute his assertions.

And so many jurors actually thought he had been trained to touch boys in therapy.

What's even more disturbing is that the stories coming directly out of the San Mateo DA's office during the first criminal trial and afterward are all over the map about whether they actually contacted the Boston doctors. The stories have changed with the wind. On some occasions the prosecutor said she spoke to the doctors but they "couldn't confirm anything." On other days she they never called her back and she never spoke to them. On another occasion she said she spoke to one doctor but she was physically unable to travel.

Only trouble is, this said doctor said she was never contacted by the DA's office at any time and in fact travels all over the world to attend medical meetings. This doctor said if she HAD been contacted by the DA's office, she would have adamantly confirmed that they were not trained to touch children in therapy.

Why did the DA have so much trouble verifying this so easily verifiable fact about Ayres training? Why have the stories changed so many times about whether they actually tried to contact the doctors who trained with Ayres? Did the DA's office unconsciously throw this trial out of fear of lawsuits?

What's really sad is that in this competency mistrial, the prosecutor mentioned that Ayres' new lawyer could not find a single doctor who could say that Ayres was trained to give genital exams. But hey, at least Ayres' lawyer tried to find out... unlike the San Mateo DA's office.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 20, 2011 at 6:19 pm

There's a new story on the Ayres' mistrial in the SF Chronicle today, "Competency Jury Splits on Molest Case- Psychiatrist"

Even the readers over there are wondering why the San Mateo DA didn't bother to check out whether Ayres said about his being trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy was actually true.

Here's a comment from a Chris Thorne ( and no, it's not by me):

"Ayres testified that as a psychiatrist, he was also a medical doctor and that he used physical exams to help determine what was ailing his patients."

Earlier in his career, when that strange habit of his was remarked upon and questioned by his local professional peers, Ayres claimed that he had been trained to do this during his psychiatric residency back East.

No one had the good sense to actually contact that program to verify his claim.

When later asked about it, the doctor who had run the residency program at the time Ayres had attended it said that conducting "physical exams" on psych patients was absolutely _not_ something they trained residents to do, and in fact it ran completely counter to their doctrine.

That right there should be a big red flag, that Ayres was making deliberate misrepresentations regarding his creepy clinical practices."

Read more: Web Link

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 24, 2011 at 8:12 am

In 2010, Boston Globe reporter Mike Rezendes, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his work on the priests sexual abuse scandal, called up Karen Guidotti at the San Mateo District Attorney's office for info on a front page story he was doing on the Dr. William Ayres case.

When he asked Guidotti which reporter in the Bay Area had done the best work on the Ayres case, Guidotti said, "Michelle Durand of the San Mateo Daily Journal."

Rezendes - who'd seen the superficial, error-ridden stories Durand had done - thought Guidotti's statement showed very poor judgement.

No kidding. The San Mateo Daily Journal, as well as the papers in the Bay Area News Group have become sycophantic enablers of the San Mateo District Attorney's office.

At least one criminal defense attorney, Geoff Carr of Redwood City- has not been afraid to call the SM Daily Journal out on its cozy relationship with the DA's office.

In a scathing letter to the paper last year he complained that Durand had written a piece about a domestic violence law based solely on Karen Guidotti's opinion of it.

Carr wrote," Has your paper become a propaganda organ for the San Mateo County District Attorney's office?"

He concluded the letter by saying,"I might suggest from previous experience, that the author of this article has simply become too closely aligned with the DA's office to objectively report on criminal justice issues. "

Carr's letter is here:

Posted by Free the Press, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 24, 2011 at 11:53 am

Lurker--at least your lucky enough to be able to discuss this issue here on an Almanac blog.
[Portion removed; stick to the topic and don't state unfounded allegations as fact.]
How can we free the press to be able to function as a balance against an entrenched political machine and it very own private army who insist on operating with no questions asked?

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 24, 2011 at 12:11 pm

It was quick this morning...short continuance....I didn't get the will be in the papers later.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 24, 2011 at 12:44 pm

Next hearing is Wednesday, June 29 to determine whether there will even be another competency trial. If there is another competency trial, the lawyers bounced around the date of August 22.

Don't hold your breath. Prosecutor Mckowan told the mother of a victim this morning that "there probably WON'T be another criminal retrial."

Judging from their apathy, it's clear the DA's office wishes the Ayres case would just die on the vine. Many have suggested that they fear lawsuits if they had won.


In Delaware yesterday, the notorious pedophile pediatrician Dr. Earl Bradley, who was indicted in February 2010 on 470 counts of raping and molesting children was CONVICTED yesterday - a mere SIXTEEN MONTHS after his indictment.

Here in San Mateo County, the Ayres case is now dragging into its FIFTH year.

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 25, 2011 at 6:44 am

It is up to the defense to prove Ayres is incompetent, that has not happened yet.

Web Link?

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 25, 2011 at 8:04 am

Last night San Mateo Deputy Police Chief Mike Callagy told a victims' advocate that there will not be a retrial for the mental competency. He also said he is sorry that justice was not achieved for the victims.

Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Jun 25, 2011 at 2:52 pm

The San Mateo County criminal justice system leaves a lot to be desired...

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 26, 2011 at 9:35 am

The biggest mistake in the Ayres case was the San Mateo District Attorney's choice of their inexperienced prosecutor, Melissa Mckowan.

When Ayres - a former President of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry was arrested, it was covered by the New York Times; the Washington Post; the LA Times and papers all over the country and in England.

A person I know who works for the Manhattan District Attorney's office says that if the Ayres case had been tried in New York City, prosecutors would have "been fighting to prosecute Ayres" and that they would have put their "most experienced prosecutor" on the case.

Instead, the San Mateo DA's office picked the highly inexperienced Mckowan.

Mckowan was a bartender in Alaska for years before becoming a lawyer at age 40. When she got the Ayres case, she had only been trying cases for eight years.

Here's a snapshot of Mckowan's work on the case, as reported by jurors; victims; their parents and prosecution witnesses.

- Did almost no prep work for the case. Told witnesses that she didn't like to prep much and just liked things "to flow" during the trial. Prepped a key expert witness for the first time on the morning of their testimony. Then afterwards, when she lost the case Mckowan yelled at this witness and said "I blame you for losing the case."

- Did almost no preparation with a mother of an in-statute victim named Steve. When this mother was on the witness stand, Mckowan held up a photo of Steve and asked the mother how old Steven was in the photo. When the mother said she wasn't sure if her son was nine or ten, the prosecutor snapped at her and said, " Do you even know what year your son was born?" (Doesn't this sound like something Ayres' lawyer would have said?)

- Did a slapdash job of picking the jury, and according to jurors, rushed through the process -"not giving a rat's ass about the process". Chose a young LAWYER to sit on the jury, who sided with Ayres' lawyer during the deliberations.

- Most egregious: Mckowan never bothered to investigate whether Ayres was trained to give genital exams to boys in Boston- his core argument. Despite telling at least nine different stories to victims and witnesses about her efforts to contact doctors who had trained with Ayres, even describing conversations she said she had with them on a blog - these doctors maintain that they were never contacted by her and never spoke to her at all.

Tragically, it was Ayres' second lawyer, Jonathan McDougall who actually investigated Ayres' claim about his training, and found it to be false.

- During the first trial, a mother of a victim called Steve Wagstaffe to complain about Mckowan's erratic behavior and statements. Wagstaffe said, "Sometimes Mckowan goes off on tangents and we have to rein her in."

The person I know in the Manhattan District Attorney's office says that they would have pulled someone like Mckowan off this for the second criminal trial. Yet inexplicably, the DA's office continues to cover for Mckowan.

- After the first criminal trial, when one parent of a victim contacted Mckowan's boss, Karen Guidotti, to complain about what she believed were false statements made by Mckowan about evidence, the mother reports that Guidotti "exploded" at her.

Why did the DA's office put Mckowan on in the first place?

-Why was there absolutely no supervision of her on the criminal trial? Why put a prosecutor on a high profile who "goes off on tangents and has to be reined in?"

Why did they keep her on after she lost a slam dunk case and then only to to have her lose what should have been a fairly easy mental competency case?

Is it because they didn't want to win this case at all, because of the threat of lawsuits against the County?

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 26, 2011 at 11:32 am

In February 2010, a juror from the Ayres criminal trial saw a man in a baseball cap by himself, ogling young boys in their bathingsuits at the Peninsula Jewish Community Center in Foster City. He was trying to hide his face but she believed it was Ayres. Although this incident was reported to the police, we don't believe Ayres was ever put under surveillance.

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 30, 2011 at 4:23 pm

Web Link

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jun 30, 2011 at 7:01 pm

"District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the decision should come the week of July 18. For now, attorneys have set an Aug. 22 date for the competency retrial.
"I certainly understand the feeling that justice has not been able to be achieved in this case," he said. "That's how we feel too."

Really, Steve? Why are so many parents of victims and victims coming forward now to say that the prosecutor on the case, Melissa Mckowan and the DA's office "never gave a s*** about the victims and are describing the prosecutor as "incompetent" "slipshod" "disorganized " and "highly unprofessional?"

Most importantly: Why on earth would a DA's office keep a prosecutor on this case who was the subject of a internal investigation last fall because of allegations that she deliberately withheld inculpatory evidence about Ayres' training that would have proved Ayres' guilt and then tried to cover it up?

Many observers of this fiasco are speculating that it's possible that the DA put Mckowan on the case and then failed to supervise her because they KNEW she'd blow the case. Perhaps San Mateo County Times Editor Glenn Rabinowitz is right in his theory that the DA doesn't want to win this case for fear of lawsuits against the County.

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Jun 30, 2011 at 7:32 pm


Those are all very good questions.........

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:28 am

This comment concerning the DA's reluctance to convict Ayres from a reader today over at the Ayres blog makes a ton of sense:

Anonymous said...
Have you ever tried to sue a county? It may as well be a felonious offense to even think about filing a claim.

No, what the county is really worried about is appeals and the overturning of all of those cases where youths were remanded into custody on the word of the pervert doctor, who probably threatened to withhold positive reports unless there was an appropriate production of youthful seminal fluid.

Juvenile cases, CPS cases, every one of them that he has touched for years and years and years and years would be subject to judicial review -- and rightfully so.

The already fiscally burdened county would collapse under the weight of this mess.

Better to have all of the good old boys slap each other on the back, do a little "Oh, shit -- he's senile" wink-wink, nudge-nudge deal, with the side promise to Ayres that he won't get locked up, so that he keeps his trap shut.

July 1, 2011 10:18 AM

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Aug 10, 2011 at 10:26 pm

We have just learned that yet another molestation victim of San Mateo child psychiatrist Dr. William Ayres has committed suicide, this past Sunday.

Although prosecutor Melissa Mckowan told a sister of a victim this week that no jury will "ever find Ayres to be competent to stand trial", doctors have reported seeing Ayres within the last two weeks driving a car on his own and holding forth in restaurants, looking and acting mentally competent. But the DA just isn't interested in hearing about this.

To that end, there will be a strategy meeting for Ayres victims; their parents and other concerned citizens this Saturday, August 13 at five pm in Redwood City. Email or for details on meeting place.

Also a national crime blog, Sprocket-trials. blogspot has just written about the Ayres case "The Child Abuse Case that Keeps on Giving"
Web Link


"I have been asked to inform T & T readers about a strategy meeting to be held in Redwood City this coming Saturday, August 13, 2011, at 5 p.m. If you or someone you love is a victim of Dr. William Ayres "psychiatric services" at any time during his career (which started in Boston and continued in San Mateo County), you are encouraged to contact organizers of the meeting. This meeting is not a support group meeting—it is a strategy meeting for victims of Ayres to voice how they feel the case should proceed. Your anonymity will be fully protected at the meeting, and your voice will be heard. Please contact or for information regarding the specific location.

The San Mateo County District Attorney's office has not announced or made a decision regarding the continued prosecution of this case, even though the same six men who testified the summer of 2009 are all ready to take on round two of justice. Unfortunately the issue of competence must be resolved before the criminal trial can be re-heard.

There are rumors that Ayres has been seen out and about town, driving himself hither and yon, enjoying his life free from his crippling dementia. If any local residents have any Ayres sightings while he is out-and-about in the community, seemingly unimpaired, snap a photo and please contact or"

Deep Sounding's blog:

Posted by Jack Kirkpatrick, a resident of another community
on Aug 23, 2011 at 9:46 am

Have the grand jury convene to decide what failures occurred in the investigation of this case and they can make recommendations to establish written protocols to support existing laws, rules, procedures and policies. In addition, the District Attorney's Office can be question about the accusations of the letter written to DA elect Wagstaffe. However, it is noted that when one does not get the results they require for their agenda, the truth again become embellished, parsed to support their position and the public does not have the right to ride roughshod over government employees simply because there is a difference of opinion or because emotions are frayed.

I think that the Ayres case is one of the most important cases brought to the People of California, but it is one of the worst cases presented simply because it was many times over, poorly investigated and staff was not dispatched to eastern locales to check the written records or get court ordered deposition and that is "not good enough for government work."

Dismiss this case with prejudice and fix the investigative arm of our county law enforcement personnel!

Posted by Jack Kirkpatrick, a resident of another community
on Aug 23, 2011 at 9:50 am

Dr. Ayres, Deserves Local Treatment & Supervision for his dementia...!

Dr. Ayres, if Incompetent, Deserves Local Treatment & Supervision - there are no known in-statute victims with credible proof of his alleged criminality other than the last incident that resulted well over 10 years ago 10+ and that suggests, he may not be a serial pedophile coupled with and no unanimous criminal convictions stemming from current in-statutes victims and out of statute victims haven't proved their case even if they were afforded a trial.

Dr. Ayres, if Incompetent, Deserves Local Treatment & Supervision - there are no known in-statute victims with credible proof of his alleged criminality other than the last incident that resulted well over 10 years ago 10+ and that suggests, he may not be a serial pedophile coupled with and no unanimous criminal convictions stemming from current in-statutes victims and out of statute victims haven't proved their case even if they were afforded a trial.

Who knows what kind of treatment program may be available if Dr. Ayres is found incompetent to aid in his defense - he may not be institutionalized and very likely will return home under family supervision (which is more likely) and traditional medial care for the aged than to be institutionalized. There is no finding that he is currently a danger to other people's lives and it is doubtful he well flee the court's jurisdiction and he has one hung jury. He can continue to be under geriatric care and it is unlikely that his age, that he will improve his function to aid in his defense.

Web Link

Maybe the best you can hope for now are court ordered reviews of his competency that is fair considering that the criminal justice system is several decades late for a just disposition in these cases. A geriatric... patient living in home care is typical or they go to a local extended care facility. A hospital are dangerous places as is one of our local psychiatric units being investigated at this time. Dr. Ayres deserves to be treated as not proven guilty defendant as that is what he is and his old age in this later status should remain
a local supervision issue and not transferred to the state....

This is very much unlike several criminal defendants that has current violent tendencies and acted out in a violent matter pending on the docket - these defendants are in state mental institutions where guilt is not really in question and they are clearly a danger to others and self and likely to flee if not in custody!

Again, Dr. Ayres, Deserves Local Treatment & Supervision for his dementia...!

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Aug 24, 2011 at 5:29 am

Mr. Kirkpatrick: One victim has alleged that Ayres gave him alcohol laced with a drug and then raped him in his office. He was 13. He stated that Ayres told him, " If you let me do this to you, then I will guarantee you won't go to Hillcrest Juvenile Hall." We believe that this happened to hundreds of other juveniles.

That victim's life became a living hell after that, and he drank himself to death in February at age 44.

This case should never have been tried by San Mateo County. The DA's office hired Ayres for years; Ayres was under contract by the juvenile courts for three decades and now it appears that Ayres may have done work at the place "Colden Gate Regional Center" where they are sending him to be "evaluated."

The evaluation is a sham. The prosecutor on this case has been telling families and victims since June 24 that Ayres will "never go to Napa" and that they are allowing Ayres' lawyer to look for a cushy rest home for him.

Wagstaffe,however has been trying to keep the rest home deal a secret from the public, because he knew they would be outraged. When he found out on August 20, two days before the hearing, that his prosecutor had been blabbing all over the place about their rest home deal - he was furious.

By our count in the six days before the hearing, Wagstaffe told at least seven different stories to people, including a San Mateo Supervisor; two reporters and outraged parents, about what he was going to do with the Ayres case.

To one Supervisor he insisted that a retrial was a strong option. Less than 24 hours later he told the mother of a victim that a retrial was NOT an option because they couldn't justify the taxpayer's money. The next day, the day before the hearing, he told a reporter that they were still seriously considering a retrial.

Posted by Jack Kirkpatrick, a resident of another community
on Aug 24, 2011 at 12:11 pm

Since alcohol has a distinct odor - the child wss 9-13 - I'd think the parents, guardian and others (hospital staff) might know; if they did not, that is really suspecious. Sounds like an embellished story.

Most people know the smell, but then maybe it was Listerne...!

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Aug 24, 2011 at 1:04 pm

Comment flagged to editors for objectionable content.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Aug 30, 2011 at 3:26 pm

The San Mateo County Times calls Wagstaffe changing the time of a crucial hearing to determine the fate of the Ayres case "suspicious"
Print edition headline:
ourt in Session a Little Early - Timing of Ayres Retrial is Suspicious"

Different header in online story but same story. Web Link

The Insider: Ayres hearing time travels

San Mateo County Times
Posted: 08/26/2011 09:36:37 PM PDT
Updated: 08/26/2011 11:08:36 PM PDT

Monday was a day of intense interest for those following or covering the legal pursuit of William Ayres, who is accused of molesting children.

The District Attorney's Office was finally set to announce whether it would retry Ayres, who suffers from dementia, on the issue of his mental competency. Without a finding of competency, the DA's office could not attempt a second criminal prosecution of Ayres, whose first trial in 2009 on charges of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor ended in a hung jury.

District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the hearing in San Mateo County Superior Court Judge John Grandsaert's courtroom would begin at 9 a.m. Grandsaert himself listed the time of the hearing as 9.
So the Insider, and Supervisor Dave Pine, were a bit surprised to learn, when they arrived at 9, that the hearing was already over. It had begun at 8:45, the judge informed us, so he could clear his calendar for other matters that morning.

Pardon us if we find it fishy that a judge, without notice, changed the time of a crucial hearing during which the DA's office would make a decision -- one that promised to be deeply unpopular with alleged victims of Ayres and their families -- to concede Ayres' incompetence and decline to push ahead with a second competency trial.

Wagstaffe professed ignorance after the hearing, saying the judge made the call to move it up unilaterally. Grandsaert told us he wanted to get the hearing out of the
way in case he was assigned a trial. The courtroom was empty at 9. When we returned at 9:30, it was still empty, and the judge had retired to his chambers. Good call, your honor!

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Aug 30, 2011 at 8:13 pm

I personally want to say Thank You to our new Supervisor Dave Pine.
He took his time to show up at the 9:00AM hearing.

"This is the first time that I can recall that a Supervisor has showed any interest in the Dr. William Ayres case."

I was there at 8:30 AM with 3 of the parents and it did start and finish before 9:00 and I was gone before Dave arrived, sorry I missed him.

For those who do know my campaign promise if elected as Supervisor was to make a motion to rescind Dr. William Ayres lifetime award given to him by the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County. I said it would be the first thing I did.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Aug 31, 2011 at 8:28 am

Supervisor Dave Pine has gone beyond the call of duty in his assistance with the victims of Dr. Ayres. In July, he took separate meetings with a victims' advocate and a mother of a victim.

Pine was on vacation in the East Coast in the week before the August 22 Ayres hearing. But he personally called Wagstaffe twice and told him that he had serious concerns about the prosecutor on the case and asked that -given the new findings of competency by the private investigator - that Wagstaffe delay any decision on the case.

Wagstaffe wouldn't listen.

Pine is continuing to monitor the situation and is offering assistance to the victims and families.

On the other hand Don Horsley couldn't be bothered to return the call of the same mother of a victim who met with Pine or to get involved.

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Aug 31, 2011 at 1:27 pm

Thank You Lurker,

That is good information to know about how the other Supervisors of San Mateo respond to the parents or the alleged victims. Any others we should know about?

So a short recap.

Supervisor Dave Pine not only returns calls/e-mails gets involved contacts District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe and asked for a delay in any no avail.

Supervisor Don Horsley refuses to return calls/e-mail.

Posted by Lurker, a resident of another community
on Sep 9, 2011 at 9:41 am

Lead, front page story of the print edition of the San Francisco Examiner today on the Ayres case today:
"Driving Accusers Crazy" Livid Families say they have evidence child psychiatrist accused of molestation is mentally competent.

Different headline on-line

Web Link

This is the first story that has talked about the tragedies that have befallen many of Ayres' victims.

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

Palo Alto quietly gets new evening food truck market
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,643 views

See Me. Hear Me. Donít Fix Me.
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 1,813 views

Universal Language
By Cheryl Bac | 2 comments | 1,399 views

Anglo Menlo Park
By Paul Bendix | 0 comments | 436 views

Council election, and then some.
By Stuart Soffer | 0 comments | 167 views