Tuesday, May 31, 2011

What happen to Peter Jeschke convicted sex offender and his two open criminal cases in Santa Barbara? 7100 links to this blog people are paying attention! Watch me on T.V. June 17th in Santa Maria!

Well I have finally made a commitment to appear on live television two weeks from this Friday June 17th 2011 in Santa Maria. Because of my health I have not been willing to make a commitment but I just have too much that must be shared. I am sure the program that I appear on will be available on You Tub afterwards as well.

The other day I was talking to an old friend of mine and we came to the same obvious conclusion, I still do not understand a damn thing about women. I do not have a clue when they are attracted to me and worse yet when they are not. So I really suck at being single but I am lucky to still be a work in progress just like my blog.

My sentencing structure and grammar need work but on the other hand my research and data are second to none. I bring this up because I think our elected and hired City and County officials are in the same boat as me. It seems that they have yet to deal with the obvious I am not going away and people are paying attention. Other wise how can one explain that there are now almost 7100 links to my postings @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com . Please keep in mind that this number represents about a 58% increase in links in just a little over 4 months.

Here I go again speaking as if I am the authority on this or that, when in fact I tend to ask more question than I answer. My subject matter often includes the questionable actions of our Santa Barbara District Attorneys office. An example of this would be their decision to retry Corey Lyon a third time even though past jury’s have made it clear they have done a poor presentation the previous two attempts and no conviction was in sight. On the flip side how about the lack of attention given to convicted sex offender Peter Jeschke and his two additional cases that date back to at least February of 2008!

Peter Jeschke

Why has the Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley failed to follow through on her own former case load? Than the convicted sex offender picks up additional charges in 2011. I performed a Google search while creating this posting and was unable to find any current news. I did go to our Superior Court Calendaring and could only find a court date for one case. So lets ask the obvious what happen to the second case and why has the media left this case alone. Please keep in mind no less than 4 local media outlets receive my postings by email immediately after they hit my blog. One could say I bring the news to the news media!Please donot forget that Mr. Jeschkes picture is absent on Megans Law web site as well!




06/02/2011 - 8:30 am 1296568 Peter Jeschke R&S/Settlement Conference Jean Dandona SB11

Newer Case with the older case to follow, please take into account there is a third case (the initial charges) that ended in a conviction.

Tennis Coach Convicted of Sex Crimes Back in Jail

Arrested for Allegedly Failing to Register Address and Notify Students' Parents of Sex Offender Status

Friday, January 14, 2011

Peter Jeschke — the former Santa Barbara High tennis coach already convicted on several counts of having sex with and giving intoxicating substances to a minor and facing more charges for allegedly dissuading a witness — was arrested once again Wednesday morning and was still in Santa Barbara County Jail as of Thursday afternoon.

Jeschke — who as part of his first conviction and sentence had to register as a sex offender — was arrested at his residence on Summit Road just before 8 a.m. for failure to register his address with authorities, and for failure to notify parents upon application or acceptance of a position involving children — in this case, giving tennis lessons to minors without telling their parents of his previous convictions, according to Santa Barbara police spokesperson Lt. Paul McCaffrey. The former would be a felony charge.

Charges, which could include a violation of probation related to the new allegations, had not yet been filed by the District Attorney’s Office as of Thursday evening. Prosecutor Tony Davis, who is handling Jeschke’s other case, said he hadn’t received the reports that had come in. Deputy Public Defender Michael Hanley, who is representing Jeschke, said in an email Friday morning that Jeschke would be in court Tuesday. “I'm confident these hearings will provide a fair opportunity to find out what really happened and whether there was a violation of law or a violation of Peter's probation,” he said.

In November 2009, Jeschke, who was facing more than seven years in state prison on the crimes related to inappropriate relationships with his tennis students, was instead sentenced by Judge Frank Ochoa to five years of probation. If found guilty of a probation violation because of the new allegations, however, Jeschke could be looking at prison time.

In May, Superior Court Judge Bruce Dodds found sufficient evidence during a preliminary hearing that Jeschke should stand trial on a conspiracy to dissuade witnesses during his first trial. Authorities allege that Jeschke sent text messages to two people, asking them both to commit perjury on the stand and also to send messages to witnesses in his trial, dissuading those people from testifying against him. Jeschke is supposed to be back in court on those charges February 2.

Older Case

Former Tennis Coach Faces Intimidation Charges

Prosecutors Claim Peter Jeschke Tried to Dissuade Witnesses From Testifying Against Him

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

“Peter Jeschke, a former Santa Barbara High School assistant tennis coach found guilty by a jury in 2009 of seven of 11 counts held against him—mostly sex crimes—will now face trial for allegedly dissuading witnesses who were slated to testify against him at his previous trial.

Judge Bruce Dodds found sufficient evidence that Jeschke could have been involved in a conspiracy to dissuade witnesses at a preliminary hearing Monday afternoon. According to testimony from Santa Barbara Detective Jaycee Hunter, the only witness called by prosecutor Joyce Dudley, Jeschke had been in contact with a former female tennis player who was 19-years-old at the time of communication. Documents of recorded phone calls as well as text messages sent back and forth between Jeschke and the former tennis player were presented to the judge. Hunter, after obtaining a search warrant for the defendant’s phone, found text messages that he said proved the defendant was in communication with the woman as well as her younger brother, also a former player of Jeschke’s.”

Well my initial intention tonight was to write about some new issues I have with the SBCERS pension fund both past and present. An just like so many of my thoughts I will have to save that for another day. All I can ask is that if you find value with my concern please share it with as many people as you can.

Larry “Magic” Mendoza

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors pay 7 million dollars for a Golden handshake incentive given to employees who ALREADY qualified for retirement was that really necessary?

7 million dollars for a Golden handshake incentive given to employees who ALREADY qualified for retirement was that really necessary? Here I am a man ahead of his time questioning the logistics of such a move while the crowd just stood around and nodded O.K. Yet it was just today that it hit me what was really going n back in August of 2009.On one hand you had the County Board of Supervisors offering what than District Attorney candidate Josh Lynn labeled a Golden Parachute deal to Senior County Employees. Than on the other hand the The same Board of Supervisors were making 15 year decisions at the exact same time to deal with the future deficit that move help create including the 2011 Santa Barbara County Budget.

Item 6E Staff Report re SBCERS Investment Losses.pdf This report deals with the SBCAG dealing with having to choose from one of four alternatives on how to deal with future Santa Barbara County obligations to the SBCERS pension fund. These obligations can be as much as 1 BILLION dollars in future unfunded liability depending on what accounting interpretation you read.

Board_Letter_Memorandum_of_Understanding[1].pdf  This letter written at the exact same time  frame deals in a very loose fashion with the cost of the Golden Handshake to the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office and the "Magic" savings it provides the County.

If you are viewing this posting @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
you can go to my other blog where I have parked both this  files on line for your review @

http://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/sbcers/SBCERS%20CAFR%202010.pdf this file shows the exact cost of the above move made over two years ago, these cost have never been made public until I shared them.

“The County of Santa Barbara granted a Retirement Incentive Program that offered two years’ additional service credit (commonly referred to as Golden Handshakes) to 119 employees over the age of sixty or in Deputy District Attorney classifications and who retired by specified dates. The total cost of $6,854,011, as determined by Milliman, the System’s actuary, was paid by the County to SBCERS.”

All I can ask is that you simply look at the two attached files, the date on them and the material in them you too can see they were working in opposite direction. 

A few month back one of my supporters had asked that I removed them from my email list. I explained that my work on the budget as well as the corruption was just as important in there County as it was mine. They have stayed with me and we are getting closer to helping each other in all County's. Money or lack of is why all of our special interest (education, mental health, drug abuse) are under funded by our elected county officials. Lets hold them accountable and see what happens. Below is an old posting in which I challenge the District Attorneys office on several matters including why there felony records which seem fictional at best. I also have questions on several budget matters including Josh Lynn labeling the County early retirement offer a "GOLDEN PARACHUTE".


All I can ask is that if you enjoyed this posting please share it with as many people as possible.


Larry "Magic" Mendoza 

Which brings up the retire/rehire issue like with Santa Barbara District Attorney Senior prosecutor Vicki Johnson. This highly unethical move that continues to violate the peoples trust does not surprise me from Vicki.  You she I can call her by her first name since she filed a felony charge against me for what was nothing more than an alleged disturbing the piece call. Vicki it does not pay to try an abuse me just ask your colleges Mary Barron and Greg Boller, shame shame shame people. I'm kicking your ass and there is NOTHING LEGAL YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. Now maybe you can get me beaten again and rushed to the hospital which should be easier this time around. You see I have been off work and trying to get what ever is going on with my health diagnosed now for 9 months. Well i will save that for another posting but I'm here for you guys.   


DA’s Office Set to Lose Decades of Experience

Big Shoes to Fill

Thursday, October 15, 2009

it will be losing decades of experience when five senior deputy district attorneys step down.
The office’s two longest tenants, Gerald Franklin and Darryl Perlin, have both decided to retire, Including Vicki Johnson


Google retire/rehire and you will see many States are having issues with this abusive practice.

Santa Barbara District Attorney Candidate Josh Lynn Just does not understand Accountability and never presents true Facts.

Now it has come to my Attention Josh Lynn needs to be very careful because a S.L.A.P.P. Action may be in his future. If he continues on his current and only path of consistently misrepresenting Data, first he should be fired but we should control what he is allowed to say. A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition! Now I have already shown that the past data forwarded to the California Judicial Council in no way reflects the actual happenings in Santa Barbara. So in an updated Data report there were over 4000 felonies filed in Santa Barbara last year and get this we go from zero, zip, nada to over 1000 felonies reduced to misdemeanors. Now mind you that was a two year “Alleged” trend of no Felonies reduced as reported by our Santa Barbara District Attorneys office to the California Judicial Council. Now if you believe the steroid numbers Mr. Lynn is constantly throwing out in public. Of the 14,000 misdemeanor and felony charges in our county a total of 80 had some type of misused “Gang Enhancement” so what is that .0000001 and that is his main focus, cheap press. Do you know how to beat Josh Lynn in a election for our District Attorney? Let him speak in public and defeat himself.

“Lynn said the most significant issue facing the office was the budget, and indicated he believed upcoming budget news looked good, partly because he “dedicated a good portion of the last eight months of [his] life” to the budget. Lynn took a swipe at the board of supervisor’s majority — members of which are supporting Dudley — when they cut funding to the DA’s office during Stanley’s time at the helm “apparently because the DA wasn’t herself there” while giving funding to the Public Defender’s office, which traditionally dukes it out with the DA for funding.”
Does Mr. Lynn really want to use the term Golden parachute that was allowed under his watch and cost his office money for Prosecutors? http://www.noozhawk.com/local_news/article/2010_district_attorney_qa_with_josh_lynn/
“When the “golden parachute” retirement offers were made to senior deputies in my office, many long-time deputies retired and were not replaced. This caused the increase in caseloads and the inability to give serious cases the attention they must have to keep our quality of life here. My opponent simply says let’s give more cases to our deputies rather than ask for a restoration of safety resources; this is both dangerous and lacks leadership showing she is aware of her political debt. I will make certain our resources are restored and, as the only one running who understands our complicated budget process, I will do so right away. The future looks bright indeed through the hard work on the budget this year for next year’s cycle. I was a part of that team and I am proud to say we made great strides toward restoration and bettering public safety.”
The next portion below is taken from a Board of Supervisors letter dated August @25th 2009
1,032,621.00 two year savings for the early out offered the District Attorneys office.
I am sorry was there ever really going to be a savings from the Golden Parachute retirement party Mr. Lynn gave?
As for the quote at the top of the page were Mr. Lynn pats himself on the back in regards to his participation with the District Attorneys budget please read the update just recently presented to our Board of Supervisors!
The department experienced eleven retirements including nine who were part of the retirement incentive program with an estimated cost of $1.1 million. Positions are being held vacant to absorb much of the cost of the retirement and the department is diligently controlling expenditures. While the department will absorb nearly half of the costs it is unable to cover the full cost of the retirements. As such, the department estimates using $509,000 from the salary and benefit designation.
Now lt us review the 2008/2009 discrepancies when I compared the Audit that the California State Controller was presented VS. the budget viewed by the public.
The data below was taken from the Proposed Budget State Controllers Schedule 2009/2010 in regards to the Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office;
Salaries and Employee Benefits 16,010,356 16,935,214 16,932,807 15,911,327 15,911,327
Intrafund Expenditure Transfers (-) (255,666) (114,385) (255,666) (37,702) (37,702)
Total 021 Financing Uses 17,921,718 18,752,017 18,622,872 17,423,876 17,423,876
Department Summary
Salaries & Benefits Sub-Total 14,775,323 15,623,425 15,947,891 16,349,198
Operating Sub-Total 16,378,509 17,574,497 17,925,019 18,139,032
Less: Intra-County Revenues (940,838) (1,267,524) (1,272,818) (1,275,666)
Operating Total 15,437,671 16,306,973 16,652,201 16,863,366
Intrafund indifference of over 1.2 Million dollars to the minus. Now how does that happen and can a public department legally run in the red? Please remember the statements in regards to current budget deficits does not reflect the additional funds the county already supplied the pension fund.

Mr Lynn Joyce Dudley has tried her best to keep a professional look to your office please follow her lead. There are 131 total staff to your department Mr. Budget man and 121 are full time. In a time of financial crisis can we really afford anymore of your math?
“Dudley quickly took him to task, disagreeing about numbers Lynn presented to the crowd. Dudley claimed the budget was over by $800,000 (“could be $900,000,” she said)) and staffed with 121 people, while Lynn said there was no such deficit and mentioned a staffing level of 200. “It’s important for the DA and the administration to get their facts straight,” Dudley concluded. She also said Lynn has, in fact, very little to do with the budget, and his trying to take responsibility for it was “sad.”
Joyce Dudley I hope that the people see you for the find character and professionalism you display and elect you the next Santa Barbara District Attorney.
To a Better Tomorrow Today!

Thursday, May 26, 2011

The County of Santa Barbara granted a Golden Handshake Retirement Incentive Program to 119 employees total cost of $6,854,011 Million Dollars WOW!

How come I can find these facts and figures and our local media cannot?  Well my postings have slowed down some but not the time I spend in thought just thinking of all the things I want to share. Yes of course this started because of all the doubt I faced from friends and family, while sharing events I was forced to experience 5 years ago but it has grown to so much more.

 I sit here month after month waiting for you all to define what worth my efforts have created. I can only hope it has a lasting impression. One that says we must all think for ourselves and that common sense will never go out of style.

So let’s get started tonight and talk about numbers that our politicians have decided not to share with Santa Barbara County residents. Well now I have already shared with you how the violent crime rates have dropped in the city of Santa Barbara. I would like to thank the concerned citizen for bringing that to my attention this week.

Do you all remember a few years back when the County offered an early retirement incentive to its employees without sharing the cost with us? What would you say if I told you that the cost of that offer to only 119 employees was almost 7 MILLION DOLLARS?


“The County of Santa Barbara granted a Retirement Incentive Program that offered two years’ additional service credit (commonly referred to as Golden Handshakes) to 119 employees over the age of sixty or in Deputy District Attorney classifications and who retired by specified dates. The total cost of $6,854,011, as determined by Milliman, the System’s actuary, was paid by the County to SBCERS.”

Are you as shocked as I am, I bet the county employees that are losing there jobs are upset too. What about actions taken way back in 2009 that have a profound affect on our current 2011 budget deficit?

“The funding policy for amortizing the unfunded actuarial accrued liability

(UAAL) remains the same as of June 30, 2009. The funding policy calls for a 17-year “open/rolling” amortization period. The Board adopted this funding policy at its September 23, 2009 meeting to be effective retroactive to June 30, 2009.”

The above data was taken from the SBCERS COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010 at the web site above.

SB County budget deficit for 2011 could reach $90 million

Posted: Jan 7, 2011 6:28 PM by Ariel Wesler - Source: KSBY News

Updated: Jan 7, 2011 8:48 PM “County leaders say in the worst case, this year's budget deficit could be as much as $90 million. That's more than double last year's shortfall of about $40 million. The county employs close to 3500 people. Supervisors say changes must be made to employee pensions and benefits.’

I have concerns on so many different levels but we all must remember this; so does every other county in California until we get to the bottom of the alleged lost funds by our pension boards. Below is additional documentation that shows our Board of Supervisors knew in advance just how big this year’s budget deficient would be. Even though they where armed with this knowledge they decided to keep that to themselves and act like this was a recent revelation and surprise to them.

The meeting below discusses actions taken as far back as September of 09


The above document conferms what is reported in the SBCERS 2010 CAFR report;

“The funding policy for amortizing the unfunded actuarial accrued liability

(UAAL) remains the same as of June 30, 2009. The funding policy calls for a 17-year “open/rolling” amortization period. The Board adopted this funding policy at its September 23, 2009 meeting to be effective retroactive to June 30, 2009.”

Why has our County official committed to actions for the next 17 years and yet only release there effect of those actions on a yearly Basis? Did you know there are audits for our SBCERS pension as well as every other California Public Pension as far back as 1978? (I DO)

California Public Pension Funds Yearly Audits from the office of the California State Controller. Pubic pension reports County by County and City by City. @ http://www.sco.ca.gov/ard_locrep_retirement.html

Public Retirement Systems Annual Report

Fiscal Year 2007-08

Fiscal Year 2006-07

Fiscal Year 2005-06

Fiscal Year 2004-05

Fiscal Year 2003-04

Fiscal Year 2002-03

Fiscal Year 2001-02

Fiscal Year 2000-01

Fiscal Year 1999-00

Fiscal Year 1998-99

Fiscal Year 1997-98

Fiscal Year 1996-97 (Summary)

Below is a correspondence from our State Controllers office;

Hi Larry:

The total for 20 years of Public Pension audit reports for the ten counties you have requested came out to be $xxxx. You can make the check or money order payable to: State Controller’s Office. We will process your request upon receipt of payment. Also, the final product will come on a CD with pdf’s of the tables you requested.

For your convenience, I have attached an itemized list of the order, so you can review it and make sure it is correct.


Thank you for your time.
State Controller's Office

Local Government Reporting Section

Why is it I am the only person in the State of California looking into the older audits of California’s public pensions, especially the SBCERS fund?

Dear elected and hired City and County officials;

We can no longer afford to allow you to do as you please. I am aware it is no secret but as it turns out there are others beside me that seek to hold you accountable!

Larry “ Magic” Mendoza

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Take a peek at this web page and all the irregularities with our Santa Barbara Law Enforcement and D.A.'s office.

Take a peek at this web page and all the irregularities with our Santa Barbara Law Enforcement and D.A.'s office.



While it is obvious that District Attorney Tom Sneddon has a vendetta against Michael Jackson, there are other allegations of abuse on Sneddon's part that have been ignored by the mainstream media. The following people have accused Sneddon and his employees of malicious prosecution, conspiracy, abuse of power and civil rights violations.

And these are just the cases that have been made public...

Gary Dunlap
Efren Cruz
Thambiah Sundaram
Slick Gardner
The Adams Brothers
Emilio Sutti
Nuevo Energy Company
Art Montandon
William Wagener
Diana Hall
Members of the SBPD
Police Abuse Lawsuit
The case Sneddon ignored
Druyan Byrne
Conrad Jess Zapien
Anthenasios Boulas
James William Herring
Richard Joal Wagner

Gary Dunlap

In November 2003, Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap filed a $10 million lawsuit against Tom Sneddon, accusing him of racketeering, witness tampering, conspiracy and malicious prosecution. Earlier that year, Sneddon had charged Dunlap with perjury, witness intimidation, filing false documents and preparing false documents in a case that Dunlap had handled. Dunlap was acquitted on all charges but claims his reputation has been irreparably harmed as a result of the proceedings. In an interview with Online Legal Review's Ron Sweet, Dunlap claimed that Sneddon stacked the charges against him in order to get a conviction on at least one count; apparently, this is a common occurrence in Sneddon's office. Dunlap also discussed Sneddon's frequent abuse of power and claimed that there are other lawyers who have seen this. A judge recently upheld most of Dunlap's lawsuit and the case will soon go to trial unless a civil settlement is reached.

In related news, Dunlap's lawyer Joe Freeman recently sent a complaint asking that federal, state and county officials investigate Tom Sneddon and members of the Santa Barbara Police Department for misconduct. "In my opinion, the matters to be investigated are the possible criminal violations of several felony and misdemeanour statutes, including conspiracy, illegal taping, deceiving a court and a prosecutor illegally assisting the defense of a case," Freeman said in his complaint. "I respectfully request that the U.S. Attorney, the California Attorney General, the Santa Barbara County Grand Jury and the State Bar open investigations and seek whatever sanctions are found to be warranted against Sneddon and his staff." In response to the allegations, the SBPD's attorney Jake Stoddard said that Sneddon and his employees are immune from legal action because they are prosecutors.

Back to Top

Efren Cruz

In 2001, a man named Efren Cruz filed a federal lawsuit against Santa Barbara prosecutors accusing them of negligence and conspiracy to keep him in prison. The lawsuit also accused District Attorney Tom Sneddon of malicious prosecution. Cruz was incarcerated for four years after being convicted of murder in 1997. The lawsuit claimed that prosecutors had evidence favourable to Cruz but failed to hand it over to the defense before the trial. After Cruz was convicted, the real murderer was caught on tape confessing to the crime. Regardless, Santa Barbara prosecutors stood by their conviction until the case was taken to a higher court where Cruz was exonerated.

Back to Top

Thambiah Sundaram

Thambiah Sundaram's contentious relationship with Santa Barbara authorities began when he opened a non-profit dental clinic in the county and began to attain political status as a result. After unsuccessfully trying to have the clinic shut down, authorities arrested Sundaram for grand theft, impersonating a doctor and malicious mischief. His wife was also arrested and an employee at the clinic was later charged with committing a drive-by shooting. All three were found not guilty. Sundaram sued Sneddon and his employees for conspiracy, false imprisonment and several civil rights violations. He was awarded almost $300,000 in damages.

Sundaram also attended a private fundraising dinner in 1994 where Tom Sneddon and other government officials allegedly discussed their plans to get rid of certain individuals in Santa Barbara who owned substantial amounts of land. Michael Jackson's property was allegedly brought up during this meeting; Sundaram claimed that authorities wanted to acquire Neverland for vineyards.

Back to Top

Slick Gardner

Slick Gardner is a horse rancher who owns 2,000 acres of land in Santa Barbara. In 2003, Gardner was investigated for animal abuse after his neighbours reported that some of his horses looked unhealthy. Around the same time the allegations hit, Gardner ran for 3rd District Supervisor against John Buttny, Steve Pappas and Brooks Firestone. Firestone - who owns a successful winery in Santa Barbara and who also has political ties to Tom Sneddon and former Sheriff Jim Thomas - won the election by a landslide. As a result of the bad publicity from the animal abuse allegations, Gardner got the least amount of votes.

While investigating Gardner for animal abuse, Santa Barbara authorities also stumbled upon evidence of grand theft. Gardner was charged with 12 felony counts and hired defense attorney Steve Balash to represent him in the case. Balash later backed out of the case saying it was too complicated.

According to Gardner, Sneddon has had a grudge against him for 30 years and is only prosecuting him out of spite. "It just seems like it's almost a vendetta deal. These guys are going so far out of their way to do things to me that normally wouldn't be done," Gardner said.

"The same thing that’s happening to Michael Jackson happened to me. One day Sneddon is going to wake up with a boot up his ass with a white glove in it, and it will be about time."

Judge Rodney Melville, the same judge who will be presiding over Michael Jackson's trial, is also involved in Gardner's case.

Back to Top

Adams Bros. Farming, Inc.

In 1997, the Adams brothers purchased 268-acres of land in Orcutt and began agricultural grading on the site. 95-acres of their land was deemed an "environmentally sensitive wetland" by Santa Barbara authorities, which prevented the farmers from using it.

The brothers filed a lawsuit against the County in 2000, alleging that officials had falsely designated a portion of their land as wetland in an attempt to jeopardize the company's financial earnings. At the request of Santa Barbara County officials, Judge Rodney Melville dismissed the brothers' action. The brothers took their case to an appeals court where Melville's decision was overturned.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the County had violated the company's constitutional right to use its land and that the County and a county consultant had conspired to interfere with the company's income.

Back to Top

Emilio Sutti

Emilio Sutti is a dairyman and farmer who recently filed a $10 million lawsuit against Santa Barbara County, claiming to have been the target of a government conspiracy to interfere with his company's profits. Sutti alleged that Santa Barbara authorities have been targeting his family's land for years. The battle began when Emilio's brother and business partner Ed was sued by Santa Barbara County Planning and Development for alleged environmental and grading ordinance violations.

After winning a partial victory in the lawsuit, Ed Sutti was arrested and indicted for arson, witness intimidation, making terrorist threats, making false statements to an insurer, giving false deposition and four counts of state income tax evasion.

Emilio's Sutti's civil lawsuit was handled by Judge Rodney Melville.

Back to Top

Nuevo Energy Company

According to an article from The Lompoc Record: “Nuevo Energy Company has a launched a three-pronged legal attack on Santa Barbara County, claiming it violated state environmental law in using wrong baseline data in an environmental impact report, wasn't the correct lead agency to prepare the report and wrongly applied mitigation measures in denying the Tranquillon Ridge project.” Judge Rodney Melville presided over the case.

Back to Top

Art Montandon

Santa Maria City Attorney Art Montandon recently filed a claim against the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office, alleging that they falsely accused him of bribing a defense attorney in a case that Sneddon was prosecuting. Montandon had evidence favourable to the defense and prosecutors tried to stop him from interfering by threatening to bring bribery charges against him. A judge later ruled that Sneddon's office had no right to stop Montandon's involvement in the case.

In a letter, Montandon denied any wrongdoing and lashed out at Sneddon and his employees, saying: "Unlike (Assistant District Attorney Christie) Stanley and current and former members of her office, I have never had my license to practice law suspended by the State Bar, have never been convicted of a crime, and have never been terminated from any attorney job."

At the end of his letter, Montandon said he would reveal in court: "the full and complete story of not only the District Attorney's unprofessional conduct, but the inappropriate conduct and motives of others working behind the scenes to cause community conflict."

Recently, Montandon requested that the State Bar investigate Sneddon and his office for obstruction of justice.

Back to Top

William Wagener

William Wagener ran for 5th District County Supervisor in 2002 and was arrested shortly before the election. Because he was a convicted felon, Wisconsin authorities claimed that he had no right to run for political office. As a result, Wagener was arrested by Santa Barbara authorities.

In response, Wagener's attorney John Holland said that his client’s prior conviction should have had no effect on his right to be a political candidate. He also said that because the terms of Wagener's probation had been given to the SBPD in 1998, authorities were already aware of his record when they allowed him to run for office.

The charges against Wagener were dropped and he was released from jail. Still, his attorney accused Sneddon's office of making sure Wagener was: "defamed and ridiculed in the local media in order to destroy his campaign for public office." Wagener filed a lawsuit against the city of Santa Maria, Santa Barbara County and former Police Chief John Sterling, accusing them of violating his civil rights.

The lawsuit alleges that Police Chief John Sterling "had actual, advance knowledge of the plan by other defendants to falsely arrest, inaccurate and violate (Wagener's) California and Federal civil rights." Wagener claimed that authorities conspired against him because they wanted his opponent Joe Centeno to win the election.

Back to Top

Diana Hall

According to Gary Dunlap, when a local judge refused to change her ruling in Sneddon's favour, Sneddon brought bogus charges against her, ruined her career and publicly humiliated her by exposing that she was a lesbian. When it became apparent to Sneddon that this judge would be a witness in the Gary Dunlap case, he threatened to bring more charges against her. The judge in question is Diana Hall.

On September 29, 2003, Hall was acquitted on charges of battery but eight months later found herself accused of violating campaign laws. On January 16th, 2004, she showed up at Michael Jackson's arraignment because she wanted to see how Judge Rodney S. Melville handled motions. Hall told reporters: "I'm not being treated well. This has ruined my reputation, and I'm just not going to take it any longer."

Back to Top

Members of the SBPD

In 2002, Santa Barbara County law enforcement groups filed a lawsuit against Tom Sneddon for threatening the police officers' right to privacy. The lawsuit stems from a policy which allows the District Attorney's office to give information about police misconduct to defense attorneys at its own discretion. According to Sgt. Mike McGrew, "It's confusing. He's an aggressive DA. There are actually no files right now on any officers in Santa Barbara. We really don't know why he did this." Future blackmail material perhaps?

Back to Top

David Allen Richardson, Carina Richardson and George Beeghly

In a civil lawsuit that was settled out of court, David Allen Richardson, Carina Richardson George Beeghly sued Sheriff Jim Thomas and several Santa Barbara police officers for unreasonable search and seizure, false arrest/false imprisonment, excessive force, retaliation for exercise of speech and petition rights, conspiracy to violate civil rights, violation of First Amendment right of association, malicious prosecution, negligence, battery and conspiracy and other charges.

Back to Top

The Case Sneddon Ignored

Is Tom Sneddon a concerned government official seeking justice for an allegedly abused child or is he merely a prosecutor with a grudge trying to get a conviction? Sneddon’s handling of a past child molestation case would indicate the latter.

In 2002, David Bruce Danielson, a forensic investigator for the Santa Barbara Police Department, was accused of molesting a 14-year-old girl. After returning home intoxicated, Danielson climbed into his bed where the girl, who was a guest at his home, was sleeping. Danielson admitted to “accidentally” molesting her, claiming he had mistaken her for his wife. Sneddon closed the case stating that there was no evidence to corroborate the girl’s claims.

The girl involved in the case wrote her feelings down in a letter that was published in the Santa Maria Times. “I am astounded at the stupidity the DA showed by allowing this man to be released of all charges. David Danielson may be free, but I am still emotionally trapped. There is not one day that I don't wish I wouldn't have come clean.”

About Sneddon’s handling of the Michael Jackson case, the girl’s father said, “Maybe it’s because it is high profile… but still, in her mind it’s the same situation. She’s still angry.”

While it seems that child abuse might not be Tom Sneddon’s first priority, the question still remains whether or not he would really pursue seemingly false allegations in order to carry out his own personal agenda. After learning the facts about the Michael Jackson case and reading through the numerous accusations that have been made against Tom Sneddon, I'll let you draw your own conclusions about that...

Back to Top

Druyan Byrne

In September 2003, a drama teacher named Druyan Byrne was arrested after police were told that Byrne had photographs of a partially nude 15-year-old girl on his camera. Although the photographs were taken for an art project and were not sexual in nature, authorities insisted on going forward with their case against Byrne.

The girl in the photographs, who was brought in for questioning on five separate occasions, repeatedly denied that anything sexual had transpired between her and Byrne. In response, police told the girl that she was a liar and that it was "obvious to everyone around here that there is some kind of relationship going on."

Santa Barbara Police Detective Stuart Gardner then lied to the girl, falsely stating that police had proof of Byrne's past sexual relationships with minors. Although no such evidence actually existed, Gardner convinced the girl that Byrne was a sexual predator and that it was up to her to prevent him from harming anybody else. "I’m just telling you the pattern with these guys. And he fits it to a tee," Gardner told the girl. "Do you see how this could happen to other girls? Do you see how important you are that this isn’t going to happen to any other girls?"

After being interrogated for hours, the girl finally told Gardner that she and Byrne had kissed on the lips, a statement that she later recanted. "I felt the only way I was going to get out of that room was to tell [Gardner] what he wanted and tell him something happened," she testified.

The case against Druyan Byrne is still pending. Thanks to MJEOL for the info.

Back to Top

Conrad Jess Zapien

In 1985, Conrad Jess Zapien was arrested for allegedly murdering his brother-in-law's mistress. While jury selection was underway, Deputy District Attorney Gary Van Camp and investigator Harry Heidt inadvertently came across a tape that belonged to Zapien's defense counsel. The tape was in a sealed envelope that bore the name of Zapien's attorney Bill Davis.

Upon finding the package, Van Camp allegedly urged Heidt to open the envelope and listen to the tape. Van Camp later denied ever having made such a statement and both he and Heidt denied ever having listened to the tape, an act that would have violated Zapien's attorney-client privileges. Rather than return the package to Zapien's attorney, Heidt discarded of the package by throwing it in a dumpster.

Zapien's attorney argued that by getting rid of the package, Heidt had "deprived the defense of the only physical evidence it could use to impeach Heidt and Van Camp regarding whether they unsealed the envelope and listened to the tape." For example, if the envelope was unsealed, he argued, such evidence would have contradicted both Van Camp's and Heidt's assertion that they did not open the package. Furthermore, tests could have been conducted on the tape to determine whether or not it had been listened to.

Zapien later filed a motion asking that Tom Sneddon and the entire Santa Barbara County District Attorney's office be recused from the case. Zapien argued that although Sneddon had taken Van Camp off of the case, he failed to properly investigate the violation of Zapien's attorney-client privileges. He further argued that Sneddon brought an auto theft charge against him even though there was no credible evidence to support the charge. Zapien's motion was denied.

Back to Top

Anthenasios Boulas

In 1985, a man named Anthenasios Boulas retained a lawyer after being arrested for selling cocaine. Shortly after hiring the lawyer, referred to in court documents as "Attorney S," Boulas also hired a Private Investigator named William Harkness. On Boulas’ behalf, Harkness got in contact with sheriff’s deputy Scott Tunnicliffe to inquire about a possible plea bargain. In exchange for leniency, Boulas would provide authorities with the names of several drug dealers in the area. “Attorney S” was not aware of this potential deal.

After meeting with Boulas and Harkness, Tunnicliffe broached the subject of a plea bargain to Robert Calvert, the Deputy District Attorney at the time. Calvert said that he would only agree to the deal if Boulas fired his attorney and hired a lawyer that met with his approval. After being convinced by Tunnicliffe that “Attorney S” was a drug addict who could not be trusted, Boulas fired him and attempted to find another attorney. Taking the advice of Sheriff’s deputies, he hired “Attorney C,” who later backed out of the case.

Without a lawyer representing him and under the pretense that he would be receiving a plea bargain, Boulas met with authorities and gave them information about several drug dealers in the area. After giving them this information, Boulas was told by authorities that the plea bargain would no longer be possible.

Several months later, Boulas filed a motion to have the charges dismissed. The court ruled that although “conduct by the district attorney's office and the sheriff's department interfered with his rights to counsel and to a fair trial,” they would not drop the charges against him.

Boulas then took his case to a higher court where the case was ultimately dismissed. According to documents, the court found the conduct of Sneddon's office: “outrageous in the extreme, and shocking to the conscience; we are, thereby, compelled to order the dismissal of the present case.”

Back to Top

James William Herring

In 1993, the Santa Barbara District's Attorney's office was admonished for making racially insensitive comments during the trial of James William Herring, a biracial man who had been accused of rape. During closing arguments, prosecutors described Herring as "primal man in his most basic level... his idea of being loved is sex. He wouldn't know what love was. He's like a dog in heat."

Herring's conviction was overturned because of the highly prejudicial, unfounded comments that prosecutors made about him throughout the trial. Prosecutors described him as a “parasite” and made the inference that because Herring was unemployed, he was more likely to have raped the complaining witness. Furthermore, prosecutors made inflammatory comments about defense attorneys in general, saying: “my people are victims. His people are rapists, murderers, robbers, child molesters. He has to tell them what to say. He has to help them plan a defense. He does not want you to hear the truth.” Such a statement created the false impression that anyone who is accused of a crime is guilty.

The Court of Appeals ruled that "the prosecutor's... statements about a biracial defendant are, at the very least, in bad taste" and that his unfounded remarks about Herring’s defense counsel lead to an unfair conviction. As a result, Herring's conviction was overturned.

Back to Top

Richard Joal Wagner

In the early 1970s, Richard Joal Wagner was convicted in a Santa Barbara court of selling marijuana. He appealed the jury’s conviction, claiming prosecutorial misconduct during his own cross-examination because prosecutors implied that he had been caught dealing narcotics in the past. Some of the questions asked include:

"Q. Isn't it true, Mr. Wagner, that in Alaska you are not only in the business of putting up fences, but you are also in the business ... of furnishing cocaine a drug, for sale, illegally, isn't that correct?

"Q. ... Isn't it true that you have in fact sold heroin?

"Q. ... To your knowledge, at your place of business, is there any illegal sale of narcotic activity going on?

"Q. ... Isn't it true that on December 30, 1971, that you have received ... a shipment of 'pure pharmacy' cocaine?

"Q. ... Now, isn't it true that on December 30, 1971, you had in your possession approximately three kilograms of pure pharmacy cocaine . .?

"Q. ... Isn't it true that those three kilograms of cocaine were in a shoebox?"

Although prosecutors failed to present any evidence of Wagner’s alleged past offenses, they created the impression in the minds of the jurors that Wagner had been involved in the sale of narcotics before, thus leading to an unfair conviction. Sneddon was not the District Attorney at the time but he was one of the led prosecutors on the case. The appeals court ruled that the conduct of the District Attorney's office was prejudicial to the defendant and thus overturned Wagner's conviction.

Back to Top

We should add
Ricardo Juarez
Corey Lyons
Larry Mendoza
Gil Armijo
Eric Frmpong

Santa Barbara County Geography 27.77% or 1,052.07 square miles is water, really?

I was looking up some land law suits and I saw that Santa Barbara County has  used water issues to take property away from private citizens. So as usual I looked up the land to water ratio and was stunned to see the claim that almost 28% is water. What do you guys think about these facts?

Santa Barbara County Geography 27.77% is water really?
According to the 2000 census, the county has a total area of 3,789.08 square miles (9,813.7 km2), of which 2,737.01 square miles (7,088.8 km2) (or 72.23%) is land and 1,052.07 square miles (2,724.8 km2) (or 27.77%) is water.

I find these figures extremely hard to believe. It also makes me wonder who has the rights to all this WATER, the farmers would love it.

Santa Barbara County Geography 27.77% or 1,052.07 square miles is water, really?

I was looking up some land law suits and I saw that Santa Barbara County has  used water issues to take property away from private citizens. So as usual I looked up the land to water ratio and was stunned to see the claim that almost 28% is water. What do you guys think about these facts?

Santa Barbara County Geography 27.77% is water really?
According to the 2000 census, the county has a total area of 3,789.08 square miles (9,813.7 km2), of which 2,737.01 square miles (7,088.8 km2) (or 72.23%) is land and 1,052.07 square miles (2,724.8 km2) (or 27.77%) is water.

I find these figures extremely hard to believe. It also makes me wonder who has the rights to all this WATER, the farmers would love it.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

2010 Violent Crime rates in Santa Barbara on the decline!

EXTRA EXTRA read all about how Crime rates  have been and still are on the way down here in Santa Barbara. Those who are arguing differently and who seek increased funding do so on false pretenses. Our Santa Barbara Police Department, District Attorney's office, Sheriffs, and County Probation should be embracing these facts rather than trying to conceal them These stats do not lie and come down from the top Law enforcement office in the State, our Attorney General's office.

The drop in crime is a direct result of those working hard to assist our youth in all their endeavors. Santa Barbara is far below the State averages for crime and we act like we live in a war zone.

Click on these next to pictures and they will open up to there own window if you are viewing them @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com

View the Attorney Generals Yearly Crime History records for the City of Santa Barbara. There can be no mistaking what these records are showing us. Crime is down, has been down and that our City is a safe one. 

2010 Violent Crimes subtotal was down 31% and Aggravated Assault was down 37% .
We should be praising Law Enforcement instead of playing politics with our youth

 2007 Violent crime subtotals for the City of Santa Barbara equaled 458 and only 38 were labeled as Gang crimes or  0.83% . What this means is that 99 % of all violent crimes committed in the City of Santa Barbra were NOT GANG RELATED!


Santa Barbara Citywide Crime Stats


Gang-Related Offenses

2005 2006 2007

What is the real UAAL for our SBCERS Pension Fund? Please print my chart and lets see if you agree with me.

Now some of you might remember a few months back I created a chart on my own reflecting what I felt the SBCERS pension fund value and LIABILITY should be based on my research.I start in 1989 and base my numbers on a document I found filed on Wall Street in the bond market. That document is included in this posting for your review. How do I come up with a fully over funded SBCERS pension fund that has over a BILLION DOLLARS in reserve? The pension fund obligation was formulated by starting at 225 Million and adding 8.16% percent growth per year.

Value History with the SBCERS Pension Fund

Now I am not sure how many of you have followed in detail my concerns with the Santa Barbara County Employees Pension fund? There are so many documents to keep track of I doubt anyone but me has the time to try and decipher this tangled web of deception. Now there is a document called the White Paper that was written in 2006. County of Santa Barbara Office of the Auditor-Controller County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA (Through June, 30, 2006) an can be found @ http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/Publications/CountyRetirementCosts.pdf
I took me quite a while to understand what was wrong with how the SBCERS fund value was being reported to the California State Controllers office. Please take the time to walk through this posting and understand this very important point I am attempting to make. If you chose you may follow the steps I have laid out below in brackets which will enable you to verify the source of my findings. Or simply skip below the links below and we will continue from there.

(Now there is a picture in this posting and it comes from the California State Controllers Pension summary for June 30th 1998 and is marked page 57. I have created a link to the State Controller web page that list the reports as I have shown. When you are able lease select the report for year 1997-98 and is marked with two *. When you click on that file it will take you to the next link that is marked with 3 *.)

Public Retirement Systems Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2007-08 

AS OF JUNE 30, 1998

NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS $ 1,062,931,561 AS OF June 30th 1998

 BENEFITS  In Trust $ 888,876,118 As of June 30th 1997

In TRUST FOR PENSION Benefits $ 1,062,931,561 as of June 30th 1998


INTEREST Rate 8.0%
SALARY Scale 5.75%

ACCRUED 873,624,000 As of 12/31/98

VALUE 799,539,000 As of 12/31/98

ACCRUED 74,085,000

Ratio 91.5%

The data below was taken from the 20th edition of the Public Retirement Systems Annual Report
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1998
Figure 17
Summary of Average Yields ...............................................1996,1997,1998
Defined Benefit Systems .......................................................Avg. Avg. Avg.
Counties .......................................................................................Yield, Yield, Yield
Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement Association...................14.7% 20.3% 19.3%


.............Funded ratio …..Benefits per beneficiary........assets per member
..................91.5 …......... …....... 15,715............................168,924................ 

AS OF JUNE 30, 1999

NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS $ 1,062,931,561 AS OF June 30th 1999

 BENEFITS  In Trust $ 888,876,118 As of June 30th 1998

In TRUST FOR PENSION Benefits $ 1,062,931,561 as of June 30th 1999


INTEREST Rate 8.0%
SALARY Scale 5.75%

ACCRUED 873,624,000 As of 12/31/99

VALUE 799,539,000 As of 12/31/99

ACCRUED 74,085,000

Ratio 98.7%

The data below was taken from the 21st edition of the Public Retirement Systems Annual Report
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1999
Figure 17
Summary of Average Yields ...............................................1997,1998,1999
Defined Benefit Systems .......................................................Avg. Avg. Avg.
Counties .......................................................................................Yield, Yield, Yield
Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement Association...................20.3% 19.3% 10.9%

.............Funded ratio …..Benefits per beneficiary........assets per member
..................98.7 …......... …....... 16,797............................180,339................

California's Public Retirement Systems Annual Reports for the followig Fiscal Years 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05, 2003-04, 2002-03, 2001-02, 2000-01, 1999-00, 1998-99, 1997-98, Made by the office of the Controller.

Now the other part of my posting yesterday was with the SBCERS pension fund has me patting myself on the back. There are still so many areas to research in greater detail but what I have already shared should be a wake up call for us all. Blindly I was able to construct a ten year model based on data I had obtained on my own to create a fund value that we can verify as correct. Even though we are talking about over a one billion dollars my fund value model was within 20 million dollars of there’s . So than I ask you all this; How can the first ten years of my value model for the SBCERS be spot on and the next ten years differ 2 billion dollars? Presently we are told that the pension has a value of almost two billion dollars with a future unfunded value of one billion dollars. Worse yet many experts feel that shortfall is here to stay at least until 2028( I will provide a chat that reflect just that) Yet my model and value says not only should we be 100% fund but that we should have a surplus of about a billion dollars.
We'll get back to that in just moment but for now I have some good news to share. While reviewing the California State Controllers Public Retirement Systems Annual Report for 1998 I was stunned to find at that there are actually 20 years of prior reports that are currently archived. I have already mailed the Controllers office and am in the process of finding out what is required to obtain those 20 years of additional reports. That will cover 1978 through 1997, how exciting is that? You can go to the link below to see what is currently available.

Controller for the State of California Public Retirement Systems Annual Reports
Fiscal Year 2007-08 
Real quick here let me give you a seven billion dollar contradiction of values for another California pension fund. The LACERA pension fund shows a 30.3 billion dollar value in the chart below for the year ending 06/30/00. Well I was able to find that 4 years earlier on Wall Street the County of Los Angles was claiming a pension value in the 26 billion dollar neighborhood. So I multiplied the 26 billion by 14.7% for 4 years and the fund value for 2000 should exceed 37 billion dollars and not 30 billion. I will do a posting showing my research but do the math for yourself there is a seven billion dollar error. California needs teachers and law enforcement counselors and relevant educational opportunities for out children . We should not to be be funding and refunding something the tax payers have already paid for.

California Counties With Assets In Excess 0f $800 Million
Annualized Returns for Period ending 6/30/00
Combined the Counties below had a yearly investment rate of return over a 5 year span of 14.84%
In other words during this 5 year window the funds in these Counties out performed there previous 50 years !

FUND BALANCE (market value)
Los Angeles
$30.3 billion
$4.8 billion
San Diego
$3.7 billion
San Bernardino
$3.6 billion
$3.3 billion
$3.8 billion
Contra Costa
$2.5 billion
$1.4 billion
$2.1 billion
$1.3 billion
San Joaquin
$1.3 billion
Santa Barbara
$1.2 billion
San Mateo
$1.2 billion
$900 million
$928 million
$955 million

After I complete a detailed review of the 2000 pension fund value of Los Angeles I will focus on Santa Clara for my friends that fight for educational concerns in that county. Ventura county will follow that for my friends that work there.