Convicted sex offender Peter Jeschke is still working our courts. (The District Attorney seems to be ...)
Date: 2010-11-05, 8:49PM PDT
Why is the second trial of convicted sex offender Peter Jeschke taking so long. It seems bias treatment so as to keep him from reporting to Megan’s Law web site, which is right where he belongs!
Posted on November 6, 2010 by magicinsantabarbara
Below are some quotes taken from a feature written by columnist Barney Brantingham that appeared in the Santa Barbara Independent 11/25/09. The feature was titled “Sex is not a sport” and deal with the conviction and sentencing of sex offender Peter Jeschke.
Current Santa Barbara district attorney an than prosecutor in the case Joyce Dudley had this to say;
“In urging prison time, Senior Deputy District Attorney Joyce Dudley said, ” : he is truly the worst groomer-predator that I have ever prosecuted-I say that because he used his position of power (coach), control (18 years older than his victim), and status (he was a star tennis player) to give her drugs and sexually assault her, putting her in harm’s way both physically (driving) and medically (unprotected sex).”
Soft on sentencing California superior court judge Frank Ochoa shared these thoughts;
“In my 27 years on the bench, I haven’t ever had someone try to manipulate the process as Mr. Jeschke did,” Judge Ochoa said.I don’t know what kind of future is in store for the ex-coach. Judge Ochoa will decide on December 7 whether he must register as a sex offender.”
After Jeschke’s conviction, prosecutor Dudley said: “I thought this was a victory for the children of Santa Barbara County. If they come forward (in cases like this), we can bring them to justice.”
Now I started today’s posting sharing those strong views above for a reason. I am simply not happy with the double standards that our Santa Barbara Superior Court the district attorney and her office repeatedly show, it seems almost a daily occurrence. I am further insulted that our district attorney sought the help of our California attorney generals office to keep up her facade about convicted sex offender Peter Jeschke and the terms of his conviction. You may recall that just last Saturday I questioned why Mr. Jeschke was not found on Megan’s Law web page when I ran a search using his name. After all he had been convicted as a sex offender with over 5 felony’s. There was so much dramatics behind whether or not Judge Ochoa would require him to be a registered sex offender. Why was there even a choice in that matter? Not only did the prosecutor of the case and now D.A. Joyce Dudley reply directly to me and my concerns. She than went one step further an had Janet Neeley a California Deputy Attorney General” reply and try to clear up my concerns as well. Neely offered “The answer is that the Legislature determined which offenders would be posted online,” an “ Offenders listed in Penal Code section 290.46 are posted on the web site; those not listed are not”. Now before I get a head of myself one of the reasons I had kept track of Mr. Jeschke and his journey through our Superior Court in the criminal division was because of how long his second case was taking to get to trial. An than after a very brief review of Megan’s law I can clearly see his continued preferential treatment is still on going and that has me mad as hell.
After my brief research on Megan’s Law web page I found that under the right set of circumstances there is actually a form one can fill out requesting an exclusion from Megan’s web site. An if you meet that criteria you will not have violated any terms of your conviction. In fact just about one third or over 22,000 convicted California sex offenders have excluded there having to appear on Megan’s web site by using a simple form. Yes I was very surprised to learn that fact as well. However you can lose your right to exclusion in a variety of ways based the department of justice guidelines. An that is where Peter Jeschke is still receiving illegal preferential treatment by all involved in his second trial an our Justice system an here is why.
(iii) If, subsequent to his or her application, the offender
commits a violation of probation resulting in his or her
incarceration in county jail or state prison, his or her exclusion,
or application for exclusion, from the Internet Web site shall be
terminated.
Now I am covering a lot of ground here but as I see it when our district attorney Joyce Dudley
and her office finally convict Mr. Jeschke in his second trial 2 things should happen.
1- He should be sent to prison to do the time he was able to cheat California citizens out of before.
2- His name should appear on Megan's Law web site which is only right. Not based on my opinion but based on
prosecutor Dudleys opinion that is quoted above!
You may review my findings @ http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/sexreg.aspx
Sex Offender Registration and Exclusion Information
The Sex Offender Tracking Program is responsible for determining if any sex offender registrant who applies for exclusion from the Internet web site qualifies for exclusion. Registrants whose only registrable sex offenses are for the following offenses may apply for exclusion: (1) sexual battery by restraint (Penal Code § 243.4, subd. (a)); (2) misdemeanor child molestation (Penal Code § 647.6, or former section 647a); or (3) any offense which did not involve penetration or oral copulation, the victim of which was a child, stepchild, grandchild, or sibling of the offender, and for which the offender successfully completed or is successfully completing probation. Click here for a copy of the exclusion form, which must be submitted to DOJ and approved before exclusion will be granted. Registered sex offenders who are granted exclusion from the Internet web site must still register as sex offenders.
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/290.46.html
(C) A felony violation of Section 311.1, subdivision (b), (c), or
(d) of Section 311.2, or Section 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, or 311.11 if
the person submits to the department a certified copy of a probation
report filed in court that clearly states that all victims involved
in the commission of the offense were at least 16 years of age or
older at the time of the commission of the offense.
Click here to see the form and criteria used by the sex offenders. D.O.J. application for exclusion from Public Disclosure on Megan’s Law Web Site
To view exclusion form use click on feature only @ http://magicinsantabarbara.wordpress.com/2010/11/06/why-is-the-second-trial-of-convicted-sex-offender-peter-jeschke-taking-so-long-it-seems-bias-treatment-so-as-to-keep-him-from-reporting-to-megans-law-web-site-which-ir-right-where-he-belongs/
I must admit district attorney Dudley did impress me with the ease in which she was able to bring the California attorney generals office into the picture about my concern. I just wish the abused citizens of corruption here in Santa Barbara had the same access to the A.G.’s office an with the same ease. Now after my updating everyone here today do you think Deputy Neeley was not very factual about how she represented the whole situation?
Now based on what I have reviewed there seems to be more involved in who appears and why on Megan’s Law web page than what d
The Santa Barbara District Attorney, Joyce Dudley, has asked me to respond to your question about why some offenders are not posted on the public Megan’s Law web site in California. The answer is that the Legislature determined which offenders would be posted online, based on the offense they committed. Offenders listed in Penal Code section 290.46 are posted on the web site; those not listed are not. If this is something you feel should be changed, you should contact your legislative representative in the Legislature, because it would require a change to that statute.
Sincerely,
Janet Neeley
Deputy Attorney General“
“From: jdudley@
To: sb_magic
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?
According to SBPD records Mr Jeschke is a registered sex offender.
According to the narration portion of the Megan’s law website, not all registered sex offender’s names appear on their website.
Thank you for concern.”
In closing here is the feature that I quoted from to start today’s posting in it’s complete form. If you think I have been fearless with all my concerns of corruption up to this point, get ready there is so much more to come. That is if I am not beaten, shot at, illegally evicted, illegally incarcerated for almost 3 months or stalked by a select few in law enforcement as I was before. Is this really Magic, no common sense and simple math after all that is all I am capable of!
As always I ask that if you find value in my concerns please be sure to share this and all my postings and views with as many others as you can.
Larry “Magic” Mendoza
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/nov/25/sex-not-sport/
Sex Is Not a Sport
On the Beat
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
By Barney Brantingham (Contact)
Crime & Punishment: Tennis seems like such a clean, nonviolent sport. You watch your 16-year-old daughter or granddaughter pick up a racket, knowing that no one is going to tackle her, knock her flat when she goes up for a rebound, or aim a fastball at her head.
You’d don’t expect that her 34-year-old coach will ply her with drugs and have unprotected sex with her. Or that, as is still alleged, after being charged he would get a former team member to send the girl and other teen witnesses threatening messages, urging them not to testify honestly or not to testify at all.
Or that after a jury convicted him a judge would put him on probation for five years instead of behind bars, as Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Frank Ochoa did November 16 with Peter Jeschke, now 36, a former assistant tennis coach at Santa Barbara High School. The Probation Department, however, considered
him a “marginal candidate” for probation and recommended seven years and eight months in prison.
In urging prison time, Senior Deputy District Attorney Joyce Dudley said, ” : he is truly the worst groomer-predator that I have ever prosecuted-I say that because he used his position of power (coach), control (18 years older than his victim), and status (he was a star tennis player) to give her drugs and sexually assault her, putting her in harm’s way both physically (driving) and medically (unprotected sex). He did so for his own pleasure-unconcerned about the irreversible damage he did to her, the male and female tennis team players,” as well as other students, faculty, and administration at the school and elsewhere in the county.
In granting probation, Judge Ochoa said what swayed him the most was a statement by the victim’s mother, who said, “For Peter, we think he has suffered much damage and rightfully so” and that her daughter feels that “she didn’t really want him to spend a lot of time in prison. My husband and I feel somewhat the same : We know he has a little boy, so we hope he can have an opportunity to be a loving father and provider.”
Officials say the five-year-old boy is living with and being supported by his mother. Jeschke said he is broke, jobless, and facing huge debts, including attorney fees. He was also on probation for a DUI in 2007 when the sex crimes occurred.
So Jeschke avoided hard time in prison on the conviction for having sex with and smoking dope with a minor, but he still faces possible time behind bars if convicted on the intimidation rap. This is serious stuff. Judges frown on people playing arrogant games with the justice system as though it was just some kind of freshman kangaroo court.
“In my 27 years on the bench, I haven’t ever had someone try to manipulate the process as Mr. Jeschke did,” Judge Ochoa said. Setting of a date for a preliminary hearing on that charge is scheduled before Superior Court Judge George Eskin on December 9.
One of Jeschke’s former players, now a 19-year-old UCLA student, testified that he asked her to contact the teen girl Jeschke had sex with, and two other witnesses, urging them to change their stories or not testify. The 19-year-old said she initially resisted the idea, but eventually agreed to create a fake Facebook account and used it to send threatening messages to the three teens, who are still in high school.
This young woman is a student at one of California’s best universities? Well, she’s flunked ethics. Worse, when the word got out about her fakery, she was arrested. Prosecutors gave her immunity in return for her testimony at the trial. Her 18-year-old brother said Jeschke also called him, but he sensibly refused to cooperate.
I don’t know what kind of future is in store for the ex-coach. Judge Ochoa will decide on December 7 whether he must register as a sex offender. But Jeschke should know the kind of hell he left behind at Santa Barbara High.
A heavy burden is being borne by many, including a vulnerable young girl who reportedly is strong, has family support, and is moving on, headed for college and a tennis team there. One of her friends, who testified that Jeschke gave alcohol to her and other girls on the team, told of feeling betrayed by the coach.
After Jeschke’s conviction, prosecutor Dudley said: “I thought this was a victory for the children of Santa Barbara County. If they come forward (in cases like this), we can bring them to justice.”
One wonders what message is being whispered in the halls of the Santa Barbara Dons. A coach gives minor girls alcohol, plying one with marijuana and having illegal sex with her several times. Spends pre-trial time in jail, then walks away from any hard time, leaving chaos in his wake.
Jeschke was brought to justice and convicted, but was justice served?
Posted on November 6, 2010 by magicinsantabarbara
Below are some quotes taken from a feature written by columnist Barney Brantingham that appeared in the Santa Barbara Independent 11/25/09. The feature was titled “Sex is not a sport” and deal with the conviction and sentencing of sex offender Peter Jeschke.
Current Santa Barbara district attorney an than prosecutor in the case Joyce Dudley had this to say;
“In urging prison time, Senior Deputy District Attorney Joyce Dudley said, ” : he is truly the worst groomer-predator that I have ever prosecuted-I say that because he used his position of power (coach), control (18 years older than his victim), and status (he was a star tennis player) to give her drugs and sexually assault her, putting her in harm’s way both physically (driving) and medically (unprotected sex).”
Soft on sentencing California superior court judge Frank Ochoa shared these thoughts;
“In my 27 years on the bench, I haven’t ever had someone try to manipulate the process as Mr. Jeschke did,” Judge Ochoa said.I don’t know what kind of future is in store for the ex-coach. Judge Ochoa will decide on December 7 whether he must register as a sex offender.”
After Jeschke’s conviction, prosecutor Dudley said: “I thought this was a victory for the children of Santa Barbara County. If they come forward (in cases like this), we can bring them to justice.”
Now I started today’s posting sharing those strong views above for a reason. I am simply not happy with the double standards that our Santa Barbara Superior Court the district attorney and her office repeatedly show, it seems almost a daily occurrence. I am further insulted that our district attorney sought the help of our California attorney generals office to keep up her facade about convicted sex offender Peter Jeschke and the terms of his conviction. You may recall that just last Saturday I questioned why Mr. Jeschke was not found on Megan’s Law web page when I ran a search using his name. After all he had been convicted as a sex offender with over 5 felony’s. There was so much dramatics behind whether or not Judge Ochoa would require him to be a registered sex offender. Why was there even a choice in that matter? Not only did the prosecutor of the case and now D.A. Joyce Dudley reply directly to me and my concerns. She than went one step further an had Janet Neeley a California Deputy Attorney General” reply and try to clear up my concerns as well. Neely offered “The answer is that the Legislature determined which offenders would be posted online,” an “ Offenders listed in Penal Code section 290.46 are posted on the web site; those not listed are not”. Now before I get a head of myself one of the reasons I had kept track of Mr. Jeschke and his journey through our Superior Court in the criminal division was because of how long his second case was taking to get to trial. An than after a very brief review of Megan’s law I can clearly see his continued preferential treatment is still on going and that has me mad as hell.
After my brief research on Megan’s Law web page I found that under the right set of circumstances there is actually a form one can fill out requesting an exclusion from Megan’s web site. An if you meet that criteria you will not have violated any terms of your conviction. In fact just about one third or over 22,000 convicted California sex offenders have excluded there having to appear on Megan’s web site by using a simple form. Yes I was very surprised to learn that fact as well. However you can lose your right to exclusion in a variety of ways based the department of justice guidelines. An that is where Peter Jeschke is still receiving illegal preferential treatment by all involved in his second trial an our Justice system an here is why.
(iii) If, subsequent to his or her application, the offender
commits a violation of probation resulting in his or her
incarceration in county jail or state prison, his or her exclusion,
or application for exclusion, from the Internet Web site shall be
terminated.
Now I am covering a lot of ground here but as I see it when our district attorney Joyce Dudley
and her office finally convict Mr. Jeschke in his second trial 2 things should happen.
1- He should be sent to prison to do the time he was able to cheat California citizens out of before.
2- His name should appear on Megan's Law web site which is only right. Not based on my opinion but based on
prosecutor Dudleys opinion that is quoted above!
You may review my findings @ http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/sexreg.aspx
Sex Offender Registration and Exclusion Information
The Sex Offender Tracking Program is responsible for determining if any sex offender registrant who applies for exclusion from the Internet web site qualifies for exclusion. Registrants whose only registrable sex offenses are for the following offenses may apply for exclusion: (1) sexual battery by restraint (Penal Code § 243.4, subd. (a)); (2) misdemeanor child molestation (Penal Code § 647.6, or former section 647a); or (3) any offense which did not involve penetration or oral copulation, the victim of which was a child, stepchild, grandchild, or sibling of the offender, and for which the offender successfully completed or is successfully completing probation. Click here for a copy of the exclusion form, which must be submitted to DOJ and approved before exclusion will be granted. Registered sex offenders who are granted exclusion from the Internet web site must still register as sex offenders.
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/290.46.html
(C) A felony violation of Section 311.1, subdivision (b), (c), or
(d) of Section 311.2, or Section 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, or 311.11 if
the person submits to the department a certified copy of a probation
report filed in court that clearly states that all victims involved
in the commission of the offense were at least 16 years of age or
older at the time of the commission of the offense.
Click here to see the form and criteria used by the sex offenders. D.O.J. application for exclusion from Public Disclosure on Megan’s Law Web Site
To view exclusion form use click on feature only @ http://magicinsantabarbara.wordpress.com/2010/11/06/why-is-the-second-trial-of-convicted-sex-offender-peter-jeschke-taking-so-long-it-seems-bias-treatment-so-as-to-keep-him-from-reporting-to-megans-law-web-site-which-ir-right-where-he-belongs/
I must admit district attorney Dudley did impress me with the ease in which she was able to bring the California attorney generals office into the picture about my concern. I just wish the abused citizens of corruption here in Santa Barbara had the same access to the A.G.’s office an with the same ease. Now after my updating everyone here today do you think Deputy Neeley was not very factual about how she represented the whole situation?
Now based on what I have reviewed there seems to be more involved in who appears and why on Megan’s Law web page than what d
The Santa Barbara District Attorney, Joyce Dudley, has asked me to respond to your question about why some offenders are not posted on the public Megan’s Law web site in California. The answer is that the Legislature determined which offenders would be posted online, based on the offense they committed. Offenders listed in Penal Code section 290.46 are posted on the web site; those not listed are not. If this is something you feel should be changed, you should contact your legislative representative in the Legislature, because it would require a change to that statute.
Sincerely,
Janet Neeley
Deputy Attorney General“
“From: jdudley@
To: sb_magic
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?
According to SBPD records Mr Jeschke is a registered sex offender.
According to the narration portion of the Megan’s law website, not all registered sex offender’s names appear on their website.
Thank you for concern.”
In closing here is the feature that I quoted from to start today’s posting in it’s complete form. If you think I have been fearless with all my concerns of corruption up to this point, get ready there is so much more to come. That is if I am not beaten, shot at, illegally evicted, illegally incarcerated for almost 3 months or stalked by a select few in law enforcement as I was before. Is this really Magic, no common sense and simple math after all that is all I am capable of!
As always I ask that if you find value in my concerns please be sure to share this and all my postings and views with as many others as you can.
Larry “Magic” Mendoza
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/nov/25/sex-not-sport/
Sex Is Not a Sport
On the Beat
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
By Barney Brantingham (Contact)
Crime & Punishment: Tennis seems like such a clean, nonviolent sport. You watch your 16-year-old daughter or granddaughter pick up a racket, knowing that no one is going to tackle her, knock her flat when she goes up for a rebound, or aim a fastball at her head.
You’d don’t expect that her 34-year-old coach will ply her with drugs and have unprotected sex with her. Or that, as is still alleged, after being charged he would get a former team member to send the girl and other teen witnesses threatening messages, urging them not to testify honestly or not to testify at all.
Or that after a jury convicted him a judge would put him on probation for five years instead of behind bars, as Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Frank Ochoa did November 16 with Peter Jeschke, now 36, a former assistant tennis coach at Santa Barbara High School. The Probation Department, however, considered
him a “marginal candidate” for probation and recommended seven years and eight months in prison.
In urging prison time, Senior Deputy District Attorney Joyce Dudley said, ” : he is truly the worst groomer-predator that I have ever prosecuted-I say that because he used his position of power (coach), control (18 years older than his victim), and status (he was a star tennis player) to give her drugs and sexually assault her, putting her in harm’s way both physically (driving) and medically (unprotected sex). He did so for his own pleasure-unconcerned about the irreversible damage he did to her, the male and female tennis team players,” as well as other students, faculty, and administration at the school and elsewhere in the county.
In granting probation, Judge Ochoa said what swayed him the most was a statement by the victim’s mother, who said, “For Peter, we think he has suffered much damage and rightfully so” and that her daughter feels that “she didn’t really want him to spend a lot of time in prison. My husband and I feel somewhat the same : We know he has a little boy, so we hope he can have an opportunity to be a loving father and provider.”
Officials say the five-year-old boy is living with and being supported by his mother. Jeschke said he is broke, jobless, and facing huge debts, including attorney fees. He was also on probation for a DUI in 2007 when the sex crimes occurred.
So Jeschke avoided hard time in prison on the conviction for having sex with and smoking dope with a minor, but he still faces possible time behind bars if convicted on the intimidation rap. This is serious stuff. Judges frown on people playing arrogant games with the justice system as though it was just some kind of freshman kangaroo court.
“In my 27 years on the bench, I haven’t ever had someone try to manipulate the process as Mr. Jeschke did,” Judge Ochoa said. Setting of a date for a preliminary hearing on that charge is scheduled before Superior Court Judge George Eskin on December 9.
One of Jeschke’s former players, now a 19-year-old UCLA student, testified that he asked her to contact the teen girl Jeschke had sex with, and two other witnesses, urging them to change their stories or not testify. The 19-year-old said she initially resisted the idea, but eventually agreed to create a fake Facebook account and used it to send threatening messages to the three teens, who are still in high school.
This young woman is a student at one of California’s best universities? Well, she’s flunked ethics. Worse, when the word got out about her fakery, she was arrested. Prosecutors gave her immunity in return for her testimony at the trial. Her 18-year-old brother said Jeschke also called him, but he sensibly refused to cooperate.
I don’t know what kind of future is in store for the ex-coach. Judge Ochoa will decide on December 7 whether he must register as a sex offender. But Jeschke should know the kind of hell he left behind at Santa Barbara High.
A heavy burden is being borne by many, including a vulnerable young girl who reportedly is strong, has family support, and is moving on, headed for college and a tennis team there. One of her friends, who testified that Jeschke gave alcohol to her and other girls on the team, told of feeling betrayed by the coach.
After Jeschke’s conviction, prosecutor Dudley said: “I thought this was a victory for the children of Santa Barbara County. If they come forward (in cases like this), we can bring them to justice.”
One wonders what message is being whispered in the halls of the Santa Barbara Dons. A coach gives minor girls alcohol, plying one with marijuana and having illegal sex with her several times. Spends pre-trial time in jail, then walks away from any hard time, leaving chaos in his wake.
Jeschke was brought to justice and convicted, but was justice served?
- Location: The District Attorney seems to be ...
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment