Supervisor Pine: Motion to Rescind Lifetime Achievement Award

NOTE: In case you missed the news -- ayres has been found Guilty.

According to several sources, Supervisor Dave Pine has placed a motion to rescind the January 2002 Lifetime Achievement Award in Psychiatry given to william hamilton ayres for his “tireless effort to improve the lives of children[…]”  on the County Board of Supervisor's Meeting agenda.  The rescission item is said to be appearing on the June 4, 2013 Council Meeting Agenda.

A newspaper article covering Pine’s motion appears in the Palo Alto Daily Post.

Supervisor Pine has for several years been compassionate to the families and friends of the victims of ayres; having met with parents over their concerns that prosecution delays seemed unreasonable and that urgency to convict seemed relaxed.

For quite some time, families and friends have seen ayres out in the community behaving competently while free on bail. When the prosecution seemed to believe ayres’ stories of dementia, and seemed to be ready to concede that ayres was not competent to defend himself, the group of families and friends hired private investigators to tail ayres to show that he was indeed acting in a competent fashion.  Supervisor Pine was made aware of these reports, and expressed concern to the District Attorney’s about the pending decision.
Pine and a reporter planned to attend the hearing the morning that the DA conceded ayres’ incompetence, and verified the time with the prosecution and the court calendar. When they showed up, they found that the hearing had already finished before the scheduled start time. The reporter from the San Mateo County Times said that the “Time of Ayres’ retrial hearing is suspicious.”

As the retrial was slated to get started back up, and families and friends wrote the Board asking for focus, Pine and the rest of the County Supervisors brought pressure to bear, clarifying for the District Attorney’s office the desire that the County had for strong and successful prosecution of the case; resulting in additional strength added to the prosecution bench, and re-invigorating the prosecution in finding strong witnesses.

On the Rescission:

After ayres changed his plea to “No Contest” and the Judge found him guilty of the charges against him, several communications were made to the Board of Supervisors from friends, families and victims like the ones below:

Board of Supervisors:

I am a victim of William Ayres, a psychiatrist who worked in and contracted with San Mateo County agencies for many years evaluating juveniles for court cases, and who recently (May 16th, 2013) was found guilty of 8 counts of child molestation with special circumstances. There are at least 45 KNOWN victims of this child molester, most of them out-of-statute for criminal prosecution. There are likely scores of other victims.

It is known that police and other county agencies received complaints about Ayres in 1987 and two in 1994.
On January 15, 2002 this body (The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors) approved:

Resolution (1945) honoring William H. Ayres, M.D. for his lifetime of achievement in the field of Psychiatry, service on the Children and Families First Commission, and for his tireless effort to improve the lives of children and adolescents (Supervisor Rich Gordon)

I now implore you, the current Board of Supervisors, that given William Ayres' May 13, 2013 admission that the facts of the criminal complaints against him are true and correct, to rescind the inappropriate Lifetime Achievement Award given to this child molester by the County of San Mateo.

I hope to see this item on a very near future Board Meeting Agenda.

I also hope you understand that I prefer to remain anonymous in my request.

Thank you for your time in considering this very important, and yet easily resolved matter.
-[initials redacted]

Dear All,

If I could put my 2 cents in, I am all for the rescinding of Ayres LA award. My best friends younger brother, JD, was also a victim of Ayres. The no contest plea and subsequent date of sentencing is a bittersweet victory for my friends family.

The August 6 sentencing date falls on what would have been JD's 50th birthday, and the following day will be the second anniversary of his suicide. There are a few other documented suicides of Ayres former patients, and there are surely others that we don't know about, considering he had hundreds of young boys under his so called care over the years.

This man is a monster of enormous proportions and should have been locked away decades ago. Many people in high places turned a blind eye to the complaints that came in over the years.

Finally, there is no doubt in my mind that Ayres will have a convenient medical or otherwise problem that will extend his sentencing date, or keep him out of jail altogether. He has 2 1/2 months to devise a way to fool the system yet again. If he ever ends up behind bars, it will be a huge surprise to me. He knows how to manipulate the process.

[initials redacted], my heart goes out to you.
My input, Jonathan Henry Huddleston

Dave Pine has been a compassionate County Supervisor, and his efforts are greatly appreciated. Pine has now submitted a motion, and hopefully, on June 4th, 2013 the Board of Supervisors will vote to enact the rescission of ayres’ Lifetime Achievement Award.


Update: There are now Editorial/Opinions from Michelle Durand and Michael G. Stogner in the San Mateo Daily Journal.

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

Today, May 16, 2013, william hamilton ayres, past president of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, has plead "No Contest" to 8 felony counts of child molestation. -- Section 288(a) of the California penal code. ayres also accepted the "Special Circumstances" related to those charges.

The Judge has accepted ayres' plea, and found him to be:
GUILTY on all 8 charges.

I'm seeing some questions about the difference between a "guilty" plea and a "no contest" plea. There is a pretty good explanation here. In essence it is admitting that the facts as charged are true and correct, but without admitting culpability. This is very frequently used when there may be follow-on lawsuits -- this way, there is no "admission of guilt" to be used against the defendant, which would make burden of proof much easier for a suing plaintiff. The plea also allows for later appeals. (See comments below.) Rest assured however, that this plea means that ayres has of his own free will admitted that ALL of he charges against him are true.

ayres was NOT remanded into custody, and is out on bail until his sentencing hearing on August 6, 2013.

Defense has asked for a maximum of 8 years, but with regard to the plea, there are no conditions on sentencing (This was not a plea bargain... it is simply a change from "Not Guilty" to "No Contest".) Maximum allowable sentence is 22 years with genetic marker recording and lifetime sex offender registration. The DA will have opportunity to recommend a sentence after they receive the probation report, but ultimately the judge will set the duration, and it seems like 8 years would be close to the minimum, given 8 charges with special circumstances. All of the articles are saying that ayres WILL serve time.

According to some of the papers, DA Wagstaffe has said that at least in part, what they will be pushing for in terms of sentencing will at least in part have to do with ayres' attitude about the crimes: contrition and admission of guilt may reduce the sentence they are asking for, and the opposite may cause them to ask for more time. The reason for the delay until sentencing is to allow for a probation report that will allow them to better understand ayres attitude about the crimes, among other things...

Judge Freeman will schedule half a day for the sentencing hearing, but has said that she would go as long as necessary to hear all victim statements from those legally allowed and who desire to speak during sentencing.

ayres was in court with his wife Solveig and daughter Barbara.

Courtroom reactions were FLAT and dead silent all around.

ayres' voice wavered only when he had to tell the judge that he was waiving his constitutional rights to speedy trial, and to confront the witnesses against him.

The Defense has maintained their right to appeal, but on at least the matter of the "competency" issue, according to the San Mateo Daily Journal, the appellate court declined to hear the matter late this morning, resulting in the decision to plead no contest.

After the hearing, ayres' sow daughter Barbara went over to pat the child molester lovingly on the back.

Articles so far are here:

San Mateo Daily Journal (pdf)- Probably the best detail of the bunch.

SF Gate (Chronicle) (pdf)

Michael Stogner's Blog on the Pacifica Patch

Victim's advocate William Lynch posted a note from victim's advocate Victoria Balfour on the facebook page for his RISE Foundation website.

Daily Post (Paper Only, but here's a lovely photo of it.)

SF Examiner (pdf)

Merc News (pdf)



Some Thoughts:


DA Wagstaffe has told the press that prosecutors won because they had an airtight case, and that they had better evidence this time around, and that one of the county’s best prosecutors was on the case. (There were three prosecutors this time around.)

I will take this opportunity to applaud and thank the prosecutors for bringing enough pressure to bear that when ayres’ competency gambit had all spooled out, the defense knew that they would not survive a trial given the witnesses that the prosecution was lining up.

That pressure was brought to bear was no easy feat. So I’d also like to also take the opportunity to thank Victoria Balfour who has persisted in keeping feet to the fire through the many years that this case has been running. To wit:

ayres has long been friends and co-board members with judges, prosecutors and politicians though his decades of involvement with the juvenile system. Even if we set aside accusations of conflict of interest, the fact remains that these people were prosecuting a friend and colleague.

It was Balfour who pushed the police to investigate more when she discovered that the man who molested a friend of hers was still practicing “psychiatry.”

It was Balfour who pushed families and friends of victims to hire private investigators to trail ayres when he was claiming to be incompetent – while the DA believed the story that ayres was suffering dementia.

It was Balfour who urged families of victims to contact the County Board of Supervisors to bring pressure to bear on the DA to make him understand that great and relevant witnesses would be needed to secure victory – and that victory was something strongly desired. Victoria pushed many of us on --when we wanted to give up hope.

And it was Balfour who realized that ayres’ statement in the first trial that he had been trained by “Al Songden” -- who does not exist – was a significant piece of information. She interviewed dozens of doctors at the places ayres trained, and not only did all of them state that they don’t train psychiatrists to give “medical exams,” but they also told her that the doctor to whom ayres was referring was Dr. Al Solnit” – information that the prosecutors were able to put to good use when finding witnesses for the second trial – witnesses who would be able to expose ayres’ lies about his training – witnesses who were critical to the prosecution’s “airtight” case and “better evidence.”.

So I’m glad that the DA’s office persisted in spite of the fact that they were prosecuting a long time colleague, and I thank Victoria Balfour for frequently pushing when frequent pushing was needed.


That is all.

Comments are now open.

ayres Found Guilty

ayres has plead no contest to eight counts and accepted special circumstances.

Judge has found him guilty on all eight counts.

Sentencing in August. ayres still out on bail in the interim.   More to follow.

This is not a joke or misprint.

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/bnews/2013-05-16/trial-shocker-ayres-pleads-no-contest-to-child-molestation/1768550.html

http://pacifica.patch.com/groups/michael-g-stogners-blog/p/dr-william-ayres-pleads-no-contest_fcd10733



More to follow shortly.

ayres Molest Trial: Day 2

Criminal Retrial - Day 2:

This is a VERY brief update on the criminal re-trial of william hamilton ayres, accused of molesting many young boys under the guise of providing psychiatric care. 

Discussions were technical, and heavily statute and case loaded today.

I don't have time to look up all of the statutes and cases mentioned right now. Later in the week, I will look through notes provided to me, and post anything interesting.

For now, just a brief gist of the nature of court proceedings today:

Some Incidentals:
Victoria Balfour was not mentioned, even in passing, contrary to what we expected based on yesterday's discussions.

Freeman ruled that references to the first jury trial would be excluded, yet later in the day, McDougall said that he would not object to hearing testimony given in the first trial. (?)

It seems that the prosecutors have been combing through all of the documents that they have from their seizure of ayres billing records (took them six plus years?), as they have recently found at least one letter from ayres to parents who complained about unexpected "examinations" performed on their children. There may also be some debate over whether or not there will be another new witness allowed, or if it is now too late to introduce a new witness.

There were discussions about the permissability of some "hearsay" witnesses, and "spontaneous statements" Code 1220 was mentioned. (This is one of the things that I'll dig into in the next couple of days.)


Defense and Prosecution Bickering:
There was quite a bit of back and forth arguing between Defense Shyster McDougall and the prosecutors about experts and rebuttal witnesses:

If McDougall has "False Memory Foundation" flake Elizabeth Loftus testify, then the prosecution will call Dr. Goodman, but the prosecution can't call Goodman UNLESS McDougall calls.... etc, etc, etc... tit-for-tat, my expert is more frightening than yours... If McDougall brings up ayres' alleged dementia, then McKowan will call Dr. McIlnay, etc,

Court Process:
Judge Freeman seems very focused on preventing the prosecution and defense from wresting control of the courtroom away from her. Section 352 was the discussion point throughout the day. As mentioned yesterday, this has to do with not wasting time, and not confusing the issues for the jury, not causing undue prejudice, etc... Much of the expert witness bickering related directly to this, eliminating witnesses as long as the opponent does not have witnesses to the opposite extent.

The question I have is: at some point doesn't everything become crystal clear because NO witnesses essential to the understanding of the situation are ever called?

It apparently became clear that Judge Freeman was fairly pissed that at every turn McDougall was trying very hard to make the case all about ayres' alleged dementia. At one point, Freeman said that she does NOT intend to retry the competency issue during this trial.

In line with all of this, Freeman told the two sides that for each witness, the respective attorneys will need to provide proof of qualification and relevancy prior to their testimony, and specifically this was underlined when talking about rebuttal witnesses.

Coverage/Next few days:
According to the judge, the next few days will be focused on prepping jury questionnaire and eliminating hardship cases from the very large jury pool. In fact, because her courtroom only seats 80, she said she'd be going to the jury room to address the prospective jurors and have them start filling out hardship paperwork, and then administering the jury questionnaires.

Voir Dire will probably start on Wednesday, the 22nd.

It is probable that this blog will not have observers in the courtroom until that point, or possibly later. If anyone IS in the courtroom and wants to provide some summary info, please feel free to contact deepsounding@gmail.com.

We will watch the local press for information and link it here. Note that as of today, only ONE newspaper even acknowledged that the criminal re-trial started yesterday,  we expect coverage to be fairly poor even compared to last time around.

*Note: I updated this article on 5/15/2013: The letter in the billing files was from ayres to the parents, not the other way around.


william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

ayres Molest Trial: Day 1 - Afternoon

Criminal Retrial - Day 1 - Afternoon Update:

This is a brief update on the criminal re-trial of william hamilton ayres, accused of molesting many young boys under the guise of providing psychiatric care. 



According to an article in the Mercury News (pdf):  Prosecutor Lynch argued that it would take "a major change or substantial new evidence to reopen the long-disputed issue of Ayres' mental health." Judge Freeman agreed and denied further mental health delays. She also denied defense requests to delay the trial while appeal is pursued. 


See the post immediately below this one for this morning's information.
If we have additional information later tonight, we'll post it here as an update.


Evening Update: 5/13/2013 11pm:

Additional details about proceedings today:

Transcripts/records from Napa State will be sealed, judge Freeman says that they are unrelated to the issues surrounding the crime.

1 photo of each victim at the age of molestation will be allowed. Defense Shyster McDougall argued against this. McKowan stated that size, look and age of the victims are relevant. Freeman allowed photos, and indicated that it would be prejudicial to allow the jurors to simply imagine the children at a young age.

Statutes 1108 and 352 came up again. It appears that McKowan may be listing some more witnesses, and concerns about confusing the jury and spending too much time on tangential issues were of interest to McDougall and the judge.

One of the prosecution witnesses on the list is a doctor who trained with Dr. Albert Solnit, who is the doctor ayres said trained him to do "medical exams" This witness has first hand experience with what Solnit would and would not have trained.

The Defense wanted to exclude evidence relating to the civil lawsuit settlements that ayres has had to make. This motion was granted.

The defense wanted to prevent experts from discussing Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome. This motion was denied.

Freeman does not want the words "pedophile" and "victim" to be used in front of the jury, so these terms were disallowed.

Overall, McDougall was very concerned and focused on ayres' alleged dementia. The judge indicated that evidence of ayres' further alleged mental deterioration mostly relates to a time before Judge Grandsaert certified ayres competent, and therefore is not relevant, as it occurred before that judgment, and so was already taken into consideration.  Further, Judge Freeman indicated that the testimony of ayres' wife and daughter did not rise to the level of being actual evidence in the matter.

Tomorrow's discussion will include such topics as: Witness tampering, corruption of witnesses, addressing the possibility that McKowan might have to testify, and last but not least, Balfour's involvement in the matter.



william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

ayres Molest Trial: Day 1 - Morning

Criminal Retrial - Day 1 - Morning Update:

This is a brief update on the criminal re-trial of william hamilton ayres, accused of molesting many young boys under the guise of providing psychiatric care. 

Day One is motions and procedure, as expected.

Court Metrics:
Prosecution bench includes: prosecutors McKowan, Gianinni, Lynch, and from the police department: Decker.

Prosecution expects approximately 6 expert witnesses.

Trial will run Monday through Friday 8:30am until 3:30pm, ending at lunchtime on Fridays, unless trial proceeds rapidly, then Fridays may be days off.

Trial is expected to run through July 3rd.

One of the prosecution's witnesses is flying in from New York, and he'll only be available on June 7th. (Fixing his testimony to that day only.)

Judge has a large jury pool, and selection will run this Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. Each side will be allowed 10 preemptory challenges. Defense Shyster McDougall fussed about wanting more than 10. Judge said she'll think about it.

As in the last trial, the judge will admonish against recording devices. If I recall, last time there were also restrictions against video/photography even in the halls outside the courtroom, but then that was changed after the press made a fuss (I think). I don't know if that was related directly to the ayres case or not, I think the order was issued by a different judge at the time. 

There were two main issues discussed in the morning: competency (eye-roll is appropriate here) and character witnesses:

Competency:
Sounds like both sides submitted their arguments about the ridiculous insistence that ayres is not competent. Shyster McDougall rambled on about California Supreme Court case Medina. Presumably McDougall is hot and bothered about the thought that in a competency case, placing burden of proof on the defense might be a violation of due process.

The judge will weigh the information both parties presented, and have a decision at 2pm today. She states that the "Dusky" US Supreme Court case will take precedence where the two cases clash. From what I can tell,  Dusky holds that there is no constitutional impediment to require a defendant to bear the burden of proof in a competency hearing.

Shyster McDougall whined about needing to delay the trial at least a week to prepare for matters if they need to go down the competency route again. Or maybe he said he needs the delay if they DON'T go down the competency route. I guess I'll have to get clarification. (Does it really matter? I'm sure Shyster McD will argue for delay either way.)


Character/Habit/Custom Witnesses:

There was discussion about Section 1108, which has to do with the permissability of witness who testify about the character, habit, or custom of a defendant.

My summary of the matter (as it relates to defendants accused of sexual crimes): It seems that the court/law is pretty finicky about character witnesses that are intended to show that a defendant has some level of habitual behavior or previously identified character flaw, and using those witnesses in a specific case. This is somewhat different in sexual offense cases, it appears.

Section 1101 says essentially that evidence of character or traits are inadmissible when offered as proof of conduct on a specific occasion.  BUT:

Section 1108 says essentially that 1101 does NOT make the testimony of witnesses with evidence of ANOTHER sex offense inadmissible, as long as the testimony does not take too much of the court's time, cause undue prejudice against the defendant, confuse the issue, or mislead the jury. (Section 352).

I assume the reason that this is an issue is related to either out of statute witness testimony, or the concern that the multiple victims might imply a "pattern" (duh), or could be related to expert witnesses who might testify about other victims and established patterns of behavior on the part of the defense. There was not anything specific enough discussed to know for sure.

There was mention of one particular "1108 witness" whose testimony from the prior trial the judge will be reviewing. 



Later Today (after court returns at 2pm):

If there is a decision on the competency joke this afternoon, we'll report it later tonight.

In spite of today's posts, I'll admonish you again: If it's important for you to know what's going on in the case, you'll need to get yourself into the courtroom. 




william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

ayres molester Retrial Starts May 13, 2013

ayres Child Molestation Trial to Start:
Today. May 13, 2013

There are still outstanding matters, including the latest new claims that ayres is "incompetent" to defend himself at trial, in spite of court and medical professional findings that ayres exaggerated or faked his claims in order to continuously avoid prosecution.

This re-trial was originally slated to begin April 12, 2010.


It's been quite a long, faked delay, and we're not at all sure that we won't see plenty more.

The first few days are likely to be jury selection and other motions. We will post updates as we get them. If you need to know what's going on at the trial, you'd better get your ass there. Reporting may be thin.

Here we go again. Out with the old, in with the old.

william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

Brief Update on Today's Hearing

Brief Update on the May 9, 2013 hearing prior to criminal trial:

The hearing today was primarily to hear motions by the Defense related to further attempts to delay the trial, which at this point, does appear to be getting underway on Monday morning. 

ayres, and his idiot wife and sow daughter were there, along with the weirdo hangers on.

Topics were:

Dementia:
Apparently "Doctor" McDougall thinks that ayres' fabricated dementia has now pretended to progress to even further fake neuropathy, so McDougall wants to have a real competency hearing to address the further pretend decline.

Ooof. 

After that, they can have the real, real, real, real comptency hearing. In fact, if they just wait a few dozen more years, they can just check his pulse to see if he's dead yet, and decide at that point!

Also ayres is depressed, so... yeah... don't want a sad defendant. 

When he's depressed enough to slit his throat open I'll be somewhat convinced that he's actually feeling sad.

Prosecution argued that court had already ruled, and that significant decline would need to be present, and evidence would need to be provided. 

Judge Freeman said that Shyster McD has not provided that.

Denied, but she'll "study" any evidence he has (if any) to provide after the Monday start of trial.


Recusal of McKowan:
Defense Shyster McD: "blah, blah, blah."
Judge Freeman then lit McDougall up. He didn't file any of the motions in a timely manner, could have presented his own evidence rather than relying on subpoena of McKowan -- but didn't, etc, etc...

I think the reality is that McDougall just doesn't have a grip on whatever information he may need, and Freeman called his bluff.

Denied. He can revisit as applicable during the trial and through the appellate process if he gets his act together.

Prosecutor Lynch was also present. 
Lynch called McDougall's motions nothing but designed delay.


Protective Order:
McDougall asked the court to bar press, and/or "veil" -- control the information available to the press.

Judge Freeman said that the Court isn't touching this one, and that the two sides should agree on how to keep everything under wraps, and handle it themselves, that there is public interest and public right to know. McDougall continued to whine for awhile.

Note to McDougall: Fuck off. You're defending a child molester. You're sick, he's sick, his wife and daughter are sick. The fucking kitchen sink is sick. Fuck you.

Denied.


Prosecution Motion to re-introduce evidence (Nude Boy Books):

McKowan tried to get some evidence that was denied in the last criminal trial introduced in this trial. The "art" books by photographer Will McBride titled "The Sex Book" and "Coming of Age" -- which feature mostly photos of nude young boys in just shy of pornographic poses -- were found in the filing cabinet with ayres' patient records, but search warrant errors kept them out of the first criminal trial.

McKowan has recently been claiming in open court (before hearings) that she was going to be able to re-introduce the books into evidence.

McKowan apparently had some case law in mind, but Judge Freeman indicated that there was a window of time that that argument would have been permitted, and that window had been missed by the prosecution.

Motion to re-introduce evidence: Denied.

Accommodations:

Shyster McDougall wanted all kinds of accommodations for ayres, including a laptop in front of him to read material discussed. Judge Freeman asked (stating that she intended no disrespect) if ayres could even read at this point? The Shyster was clearly flummoxed at this point, not wanting to be trapped into admitting that ayres is competent enough to read, but (possibly) realizing that the request was stupid if ayres can't read.

Asshat.

I suppose if the Judge has any doubts, she can just watch the video of ayres reading his magazine while back-seat-driving for Solveig.

Other requests were for shorter court day, more breaks etc.

I would certainly hope that the court would take into consideration that ayres has been faking dementia, and not allow any of these strategies to instill in the jury undue sympathy for the defendant.

Court will run 8:30am to 3pm with 1 hour for lunch. Trial starts Monday May 13, 2013.

UPDATE 5/10/2013: Articles in the Press:

Mercury News Story (pdf)
Nothing new in this story. Reporter Melvyn was in court for the first half of the hearing, but left when they began to discuss accommodations. Interesting that he didn't report on the nude boy books or the press gag or veil.

San Mateo Daily Journal (pdf)
I don't know if the reporter was present. Probably not, though. Also nothing new in this article. 

william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

Reminder: Hearing Tomorrow May 9, 2013

REMINDER: Criminal Hearing TODAY
May 9, 2013 8:30 am
Southern Branch, Hall of Justice and Records, 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA




This is a hearing to hear "Motions"

The criminal re-trial is scheduled to take place starting next Monday, May 13, 2013.

If you're planning to attend the hearing: SHOW UP EARLY. The Hearings have been known to start early in order to avoid making the proceedings public.

If you need court information, look here: ayres' Court Dates



william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

Howard Wallach: Dead ayres supporter; Also: New Hearing

NOTE: New Hearing Scheduled for May 9, 2013 - See Below

Howard Wallach
Heartless Coward: Deleted April 1, 2013
Buh bye, now. Satan will enjoy your services in Hell.

Howard Frederic Wallach, head-shrinker and past president of the California Psychiatric Association, kicked the bucket on April 1, 2013.

Wallach, lauded for his many super-great skills like running a hotel and being a shrink, as well as volunteering for stuff and liking to play golf and bridge, was a true April Fool; he had a major and insurmountable character flaw: He was an adamant supporter of child molester william hamilton ayres.

Wallach was a co-signator of a letter pleading for cash for ayres to fight the charges against him during the criminal trial. The letter went out to the psychiatric community at large, and when some members complained to the Northern California Psychiatric Society, they were reported to have sent out a "rather tepid email to the membership, disassociating the organization from this letter."

You can read his Obit here (pdf) and another in the "Newsletter of the Southern California Psychiatric Society" (pdf)  Note that Captane Thomson and Maria Lymbris, two other idiot shrinks who signed the ayres pleading letter, each wrote brief tributes for Wallach.

Much like the Sandusky / Paterno case: reputation seems to be the key issue in cases like this, once the evil gets under your skin, it's hard to get rid of it without admitting failure and guilt. Rather than risking a reputational hit, weak people refuse to see the evil, and instead make the poor choice to exacerbate the problem by offering their support to the perpetrator.

Shame on you Wallach , and good riddance.



HEARING ALERT / UPDATE: 

There is another hearing scheduled for the ayres criminal matter before the (scheduled) start of trial.

Hearing on May 9, 2013 to hear "Motions."  Topic is unknown.





william hamilton ayres was arrested on April 5, 2007 on charges relating to his molestation of many young boys while he was alleging to provide psychiatric care to private patients as well as referrals for evaluation from the juvenile court system in San Mateo County. ayres has been delaying his way through the system free from custody until this latest gambit to skirt prosecution by playing demented for the courts. ayres is currently under the conservatorship of his daughter Barbara Ayres of Sacramento, CA. 

ayres has had significant interaction over the years with local politicians on boards like the "Children and Families First Commission,"  including the DA who was serving when prosecution began Jim Fox and Assemblyman Rich Gordon. In fact, Gordon nominated ayres for a lifetime achievement award for his "Tireless effort to improve the lives of children." ayres has also been vocally supported during his criminal trial by local head-shrinkers like Bart Blinder, Etta Bryant, Mel Blaustein, Harry Coren, Tom Ciesla, Robert Kimmich, Larry Lurie, Maria Lymberis, Richard Shadoan, Captane Thomson, and Harold Wallach.

Al Giannini: Hired

San Mateo County Board of Supervisors – Board Meeting 4/23/2013


Hire of Al Giannini as second chair in william hamilton ayres prosecution:

San Mateo County Supervisors Pine, Groom, Horsley, Slocum, and Tissier voted unanimously to approve Item #7 on their agenda, adding former deputy district attorney Al Giannini as second chair to prosecutor Melissa McKowan in the william ayres child molestation criminal case.


Other agenda items of note:

National Crime Victim's Rights Week:
Item #3 on the Agenda was a proclamation declaring the week of April 21 to be National Crime Victim’s Rights Week. Don Horsley noted that DA Wagstaffe and his deputy Karen Guidotti had done a good job for victims of crimes in the county. Both Wagstaffe and Guidotti were present. Wagstaffe and Guidotti left after the vote for Item #7.

One of the other agenda items before Item #7 was set to approve the upcoming Mental Health Awareness Week (month? – whatever…)

Awesome.

Motion to Quash: Granted!

April 18, 2013 Hearing: Motion to Quash Subpoena: Granted!

Defense Shyster McDougall was denied access to the State Bar complaint against the prosecutor and her response. While it is a good ruling, from a good of the public point of view, it does not move the case anywhere near a change of venue. Remember that while the defense Shyster argues that he wants a change of venue and prosecution, this is not what he really wants... he's after the delay only.

Hearing on April 18, 2013: State Bar Motion to Quash McDougall Subpoena:

Attorneys were in court today to argue motions in the criminal child molestation trial of alleged psychiatrist william hamilton ayres, accused of molesting scores of young boys.

State Bar Attorney Mark Torres-Gil was in court to quash defense Shyster McDougall’s subpoena for information in the complaint and disciplinary finding against the prosecutor in the ayres case.

Positions had been submitted prior to the hearing, and Torres-Gil’s opening statement was brief and succinct:

He states that the law demonstrates that the defense has no right to pre-trial discovery from the privileged information related to the Bar complaint, specifically but not limited to use for the purpose of attacking the credibility of witnesses, and in light of that, his motion to quash should be granted.


McDougall's folly:

McDougall states that he seeks only narrow and specific information about the complaint against McKowan.

He says he’s “not on a fishing expedition.”

He wants access to the submitted complaint and all related exhibits, and the prosecutor’s response “only.”

He’s not interested in the findings or disciplinary action.

Specifically he says that the prosecutor has indicated that witnesses were corrupted and therefore removed before the start of the first criminal trial (by the complainant) and that witnesses were corrupted at trial and after trial, and he want access to that information.

McDougal states that because the complainant and McKowan have spoken publicly about the complaint, he should be granted subpoena access to the information.


Judge Freeman's Ruling:

Freeman spoke a large about the integrity of the Bar complaint process, and specifically she spoke about protection of the public interest. She stated that McDougall has failed to identify any public interest in the release of this information.

In detail, judge Freeman explained that law is there to protect the interest of the public --  that it would not be in the public interest if a future complainant (in any matter) was afraid to complain to the Bar about an attorney a knowing that their compliant could be made public against their will, and having no say in the matter. That the complainant in THIS case may or may not be willing to expose their complaint is irrelevant.

The judge stated that the Bar is not a prosecuting agency, and that the complaint is not related to the prosecutor’s prosecution of the ayres case itself. The material collected by the State Bar qualify as privileged information under the business and professions code, and this is upheld persuasively by several cases, including cases in Superior court, Supreme Court, etc…)

Freeman stated that at this time the defense has no right to pre-trial discovery in this matter, and the Motion to Quash was granted. (And again the decision was backed by a litany of court cases.)

Freeman told McDougall that it doesn't mean that he can’t make a similar motion once the trial is underway (and she emphasized: “which it very soon will be…”) and that it might be that the matter could be heard In-camera (a private hearing, held outside of pubic view), even by another judge possibly, during the trial.

However, at this time defense does not have right to pre-trial discovery.

Motion to quash subpoena is granted. 

The judge presented a specific example of precisely why this kind of ruling is imperative:

Freeman explained that an initial witness list is broad so that jurors can identify if they know any of the individuals (for example). But actual witness lists are a subset of that list once trial gets underway.

She said that she "doesn't know what will happen in the upcoming trial, but she does know what happened in the first trial":

Freeman noted that during the first criminal trial, when the witness list was presented to court, on the first day of trial, the witness list included Ms. Balfour, with no specifics about Balfour provided to the court, and then she was never called as a witness in the case, but her name was left on the witness list.

Freeman indicated that it is best to wait to determine whether a credibility or impeachment issue actually arises in the trial, and THEN open privileged material.  The court causes harm when it exposes and impeaches an individual, and then the need for it -- the impeachment value -- never arises -- (Which, I might add, is what BOTH sides seemed to be trying to do to Balfour during the first trial -- in fact Freeman indicated that the court knows more now about Balfour than the court really needs to know.)

It sounds like Freeman was subtly arguing that the court and attorneys should be very focused on the criminal matter, not worked up trying to involve Balfour, unless there is impeachment (or other) value -- and as the judge indicated… it didn't turn out that there was impeachment value last time.  I wouldn't be surprised if the subtlety was lost on two thirds of the attorneys present. Perhaps the judge would be better served poking them with a sharp stick:  

IT'S BEEN SIX FUCKING YEARS! GET YOUR FUCKING THUMB OUT OF YOUR FUCKING ASSES.

Having completed the ruling, the judge and attorneys started to discuss “scheduling issues” and at this point, the Mercury News reporter stumbled into the courtroom. The group decided to discuss the scheduling issues in chambers.  So there are likely to be further hearings and changes to court dates coming. We'll post any changes on our "ayres' Court Dates" tab as we find out about them.


Shyster McDougall’s Stumbley-Bumbley:

McDougall persisted in stating that the DA submitted responses to the Bar complaint. The Judge yet again admonished him to be very clear that he means prosecutor McKowan, not District Attorney Wagstaffe or his office.

After the Judge talked about the possibility of In-camera review at a later date, he immediately reacted like a nervous dog with questions about contacting another judge, etc… Freeman admonished him that while he would be free to file motion at a later date, SHE would decide if and when it was necessary to have an In-camera review, and would assign another judge if SHE deemed necessary.

Dude really wants to get in Judge's chambers...

A Final Note:

Prior to the start of the hearing, prosecutor McKowan was discussing additional potential witnesses with McDougall. She mentioned that she had found a doctor who had written about doctor Albert Solnit.

Solnit was the doctor that ayres was calling Al Songden during the criminal trial, and who, ayres claimed,  instructed students (ayres, at the time) to give physical exams and not to use gloves while doing it.

It turns out that Solnit was a bit of a celebrity in the psychiatrist training world, apparently, and even though he is deceased, it appears that there were some books written about him, and his methods. The doctor that McKowan was talking to told her that he'd let her borrow a few of the books which indicate that Solnit trained students NOT to do medical exams.

What a SHOCK.  

OK... Not a shock. Read Here. And Here.

Mind you -- Both sides have made statements of puff-uppery before and after public court hearings that are "hush-hush", but actually meant to be "leaked" to show prowess and cleverness. Most times we don't print these rumors, but they always appear a day or so later in the press attributed directly to the attorney, and often they are of little consequence to the trial.

So don't bank on this information appearing at trial.

An Update:

Note that as of 4/19/2013, there is a new article in the San Mateo Daily Journal (pdf) stating that DA Wagstaffe intends to add former deputy district attorney Al Giannini as second chair to prosecutor Melissa McKowan. (Note that SM Daily Journal continues to run the crazy/frail and incorrectly representative photo of ayres.)

Interesting. Wagstaffe wants Giannini for his "his experience trying “complicated and high-profile” felonies and in jury selection."

According to the "First Annual Report: Preventable Error —Prosecutorial Misconduct in California 2010", in case Ricardo v. Rardin, 189 F.3d 474 (9th Cir. 1999): The California Appellate Court reversed the murder conviction of Leonard Ricardo because Giannini engaged in discriminatory jury selection. (Among other overturned convictions.)

<Sigh.>