Town Square

Post a New Topic

Former chief probation officer in county pleads not guilty to possessing child pornography

Original post made on Feb 24, 2013

Former San Mateo County Chief Probation Officer Stuart Forrest pleaded not guilty Friday to two charges of possessing child pornography, according to state prosecutors.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 22, 2013, 10:04 PM

Comments (11)

Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Feb 24, 2013 at 10:07 am

Mr. Wagstaffe said. "We want the public to feel comfortable,"

I think transparency and no special favors would help the public feel more comfortable.

There is no mention in the above article that Mr. Forrest tried to kill himself and was in one of local hospitals on an extended 5150 hold, he was still there when he retired. The court appearance held Friday was described by an editor of the San Mateo County Times as a Secret Hearing not listed or published on the court calendar. (special favor)

This is not the first time that editor has experienced special favors/treatment by our court system for certain San Mateo County defendants.

Like this comment
Posted by Lurker
a resident of another community
on Feb 24, 2013 at 10:55 am

Yes, why no mention of Forrest escaping to the steps of that church in the San Mateo Highlands near Hillcrest, with a knife in hand, and threatening suicide? The San Mateo Daily Journal had a good story on this. He was so out of control that he had to be Tasered by police.

Mr. Forrest was an expert in the martial arts and taught at martial arts schools. Some kids s were afraid of him of him because he was so big and had a bit of a swagger.

So it is quite cowardly of him to run away to a church and threaten suicide.

Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Feb 24, 2013 at 11:29 am

The church mentioned above.

Crystal Springs United Methodist Church
2145 Bunker Hill Dr, San Mateo, CA

Like this comment
Posted by janet
a resident of Menlo Park: Stanford Weekend Acres
on Feb 25, 2013 at 1:24 pm

There was the Ayres case before this. Both men had easy access to at risk kids. Forrest reportedly had 400 kid porno images on a thumb drive and/or laptop that was in his office at the county. How come he felt sufficiently comfortable to bring this stuff to work? How many kids in the county may have been affected? How many more perverts are working for the county? Forrest worked with kids for Peninsula Conflict Resolution - how come they did no background check? There have been problems with Maltbie, Monks, and Bolanos and problems with dep. sheriff's stealing a guy's trumpet, employees ripping off things from decedents' estates etc. etc. There has been scandal after scandal involving county or county related personnel. Something needs to be done to eliminate some of the corruption and cut down on some of the exorbitant salaries and benefits paid out

Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Feb 25, 2013 at 1:31 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"Something needs to be done to eliminate some of the corruption "

We could start by getting rid of the current district attorney and replacing him with someone who has no current or former connection with the county government or local law enforcement. The current DA's first loyalty is to anyone who receives a county paycheck and not, as it should be, to the citizens whom he is sworn to serve.

Like this comment
Posted by Lurker
a resident of another community
on Feb 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm

[Post removed. You need more than hearsay to make these accusations.]

Like this comment
Posted by Janet
a resident of Menlo Park: Stanford Weekend Acres
on Feb 25, 2013 at 3:08 pm

I would hope that any parent, (or attorney that represented a kid that was in Forrest's charge/class/counseling) starts asking their kid some questions. It is also time to evaluate PCRC (who recently got about $half a million to work with at risk kids) to see if there are any more questionable individuals in that organization. Just having pictures (even without doing anything) means that some child somewhere is being harmed. The fact that this individual has been in county employ since (I think) 1977 is horrifying and it is utterly incredible that no one knew. It is equally shocking that Forrest is getting a (huge) pension. Since his office computer was apparently seized, the DA had to have known something was up, yet Forrest still on duty and appearing before the BOS to commend other staff members.

Like this comment
Posted by Hmmm
a resident of another community
on Feb 25, 2013 at 3:24 pm

And speaking of benefits, the County is messing w/the deputy who's a former Half Moon Bay officer suffering from cancer. Even though he was absorbed by SMCSO when they took over, he's told his cancer is a pre-existing condition, based on his employ by HMB PD. It's beyond shameful & city cOuncil members won't lift a finger to help, claiming their hands are tied. Maybe that's the case, but I still smell a lot of rats.

Like this comment
Posted by Holly L.
a resident of Menlo Park: Linfield Oaks
on Apr 9, 2013 at 3:29 pm

What the ????

Stuart Forrest, who had more than 400 images of child porn on his computer, may avoid doing any prison time:

Web Link

San Mateo County's ex-chief probation officer may avoid state prison time in a case where state prosecutors have charged he had child pornography while still working for the county.

Stuart Forrest faces a maximum of three years eight months behind bars if convicted of two felony charges of possessing child pornography, but defense and prosecution attorneys as well as the judge discussed plea bargain options in San Mateo County Superior Court Tuesday that would see him avoid that penalty.

Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Apr 9, 2013 at 8:20 pm

There's a shock. The DA's office trying to protect a corrupt law enforcement official.

Wake up San Mateo County Sheeple. Do you think any of you would receive the same treatment?

Oh, I know, you're all thinking "I wouldn't have child porn." Substitute any other crime or infraction for that one and ask yourself, would the DA give me the same break he gave a law enforcement officer in the same situation? If you're honest with yourself you'll acknowledge the answer is "NO." You can be guaranteed any slack a law enforcement officer is granted in your same situation would absolutely not be given to you.

You can thank our corrupt DA.

Like this comment
Posted by Lurker
a resident of another community
on Apr 10, 2013 at 5:20 am

The Ayres blog has the same take on the Forrest case as Menlo Viter does.

Web Link

So, Judge Robert Foiles was one of the two people to select Forrest for his job.
When he was a prosecutor who tried juveniles as adults, Foiles had at least one case where he sent a boy to Ayres. That biy has contacted his appellate attorney to say he was assaulted by Ayres and shown child porn.

Ayres and Forrest worked with juveniles for years, as did Robert Foiles.

Can anyone explain why Foiles has been making all the recent rulings on the Ayres case?

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

Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 918 views

Eat, Surf, Love
By Laura Stec | 2 comments | 907 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 522 views

Willow-Gate, and Safe Routes to School
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 494 views