Dear Santa Barbara District Attorney
I would first like to Thank You for your immediate response on a Saturday afternoon to my concerns about convicted sex offender Mr. Jescke. However I must admit to being more confused now than before I read your reply in regards to his conviction. An to how he was treated by you, your office and our Santa Barbara Superior Court through through out the whole proceeding. One would think by now you must be aware I have many concerns an question the role that local media plays in what I perceive as unethical and bias reporting. Our local media seems to play far to prominent a role in camouflaging unethical actions from our Santa Barbara Legal Community. I do wish your correspondence had helped ease my concerns but the stark reality is you have actually heightened them. This next part is an actual headline taken of the Internet and part of my posting from Saturday that helped stir a response from you. "Peter Jeschke was found guilty last May for having sex with, and giving drugs to a minor and must register as a sex offender. " Now based on our local media coverage of these crimes other concerned citizens have also taken action such as this web site;
" Bad Bad Teacher School Sex Scandals – The Dark Side of Teacher-Student Relations @http://badbadteacher.com/peter-jeschke/.
I cannot speak for everyone but when a headline reads "Must Register as a Sex Offender", the Santa Barbara Community is taking law enforcement at there word and assume he will be present on the Megans Law web site.
I guess with out me having to obtain a law degree if you could please clarify why his charges and conviction were not of the kind that require full public disclosure by law on the Internet? I am also made to wonder why you as the prosecutor did not forewarn the public of the different levels of registering as a sex offender during your prosecution of the case? You see a Montecito family new to the area could have easily hired Mr. Jeschke as a private tennis coach for there minor daughters. An based on your current explanation you can see how easily one might over look checking with the local police station. I must be honest I have a very educated email list that receives my blog posting. In fact that list includes you, our current Board of Supervisors and many local media outlets. An I doubt one in ten realize Mr. Jeschke was convicted of lesser than full charges according to Megans law as you were so kind to reference.
I have observed our local media work in what seems as an orchestrated fashion with our Legal community far to many times in the past. I have questioned the framing of Ricardo Juearez for murder and have documentation from your office that seems to verify my concerns . In the recent Loremzo Carachure Murder trial there were 4 defendants. However there was a simultaneous second an separate trial going on that convicted Ruben Mize only of attempted murder. You see that is were more confusion comes in about the Carachure trial. This is caused in part by my recap of opening remarks from both the prosecution and defense on my blog. I cannot find a media reference to the second simultaneous trial or charges made solely against Ruben Mize in any media reference up until the trial is over. It seems there was some type of shielding from the public the whole truth in regards to court proceedings in the Carachure trial, why is that?
There is one other concern I wish to ask you since you were so kind as to reply to me for the first time this weekend. If Judge Brian Hill was forced to win his Judgeship through the Santa Barbara general election against now Superior Court Judge Sterne within 18 months of his appointment. Why does Superior Court Judge Collen Sterne claim she has been assigned a six year term out the gate. I would file a petition to recall California Superior Court Judge Stern, but after the death of a Santa barbara Superior Court Judge Mc Lafferty there replacement fails to place themselves on the June Primary. Can you please help me understand my mistake here, or was Judge Sterne required to be on last Junes ballot? Here are my concerns with Superior Court Judge Sterne. That an other items are questioned in this following posting.
Larry "Magic" Mendoza
Below are two emails from ci
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:15:26 -0700
Subject: Re: Peter Jeschke convicted sex offender has not registered with Calif as required by Megans law! What is our D.A.'s office doing?
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:24:16 -0700
Subject: Fwd: Sex Registration on Peter Jeschke
Former Tennis Coach Must Register As Sex Offender
Story Created: Dec 7, 2009 at 1:32 PM PDT
Story Updated: Dec 7, 2009 at 6:20 PM PDT
Santa Barbara, CA-- Superior Court Judge Frank Ochoa ordered a former high-school tennis coach to register as a sex offender.
Peter Jeschke was found guilty last May for having sex with, and giving drugs to a minor.
Despite prosecutors claims that Jeschke should serve prison time for the crimes committed, Jeschke was sentenced to 1-year in Santa Barbara County Jail and 5-years probation. That decision being made, after community members and the victim's family asked for leniency.
Judge Ochoa also ruled that Jeschke is not to have any contact with males or females under the age of 18.
The 34-year-old former coach, will return to court on Wednesday to set a preliminary hearing date to face additional charges of witness intimidation.
If convicted of these charges, he could be sentenced to several years in prison.