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, another community, 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)

Like this comment
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


Like this comment
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


Like this comment
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.


Like this comment
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.


Like this comment
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."


Like this comment
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.


Like this comment
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


Like this comment
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.


Like this comment
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.


Like this comment
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.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Coffeebar opens in Menlo Park
By Elena Kadvany | 2 comments | 5,235 views

Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 827 views

Spring College Fairs
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 779 views

Willow-Gate, and Safe Routes to School
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 461 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 0 comments | 314 views