Saturday, February 9, 2013

Delay Tactics in Civil Lawsuits against ayres

Shyster Yu
Civil Lawsuit Delay Attempts:

Due to the proximity of the myriad of civil lawsuit trials and the criminal trial of william ayres relating to his molestation of many young boys under the guise of providing psychiatric care, there is some last minute scrambling on the civil matters to further delay those proceedings.

In a flurry of documents filed (court system is poorly designed. Click three times, and you'll see the page) on one of the San Mateo County civil cases against ayres, we find that a deposition from ayres was scheduled to be taken on January 3, 2013, but ayres did not show up.

We then learn that Shyster Constance I Yu, the defense weasel for ayres, filed for a protective order on January 2nd, and therefore ayres wouldn't be showing up.

The Plaintiff attorney indicates that proper, timely notifications were not provided, and is therefore filing for sanctions (cost of prepping for and paying court reporter) for ayres' no-show.

The Shyster for the defense claims that her office did notify the Plaintiff,  but the fax didn't go through.

Shyster Yu provides copies of the transmission error notices as evidence that she gave her best half-assed effort to contact the Plaintiff (Why not at least a head's-up phone call to the Plaintiff rather than just the after-the-fact excuse to the court?) What assholes.

The crux of the matter is that ayres doesn't want to give a statement prior to the criminal trial, as he may make statements that incriminate him and could be used in the criminal trial. As further excuse, Shyster Yu also cites ayres' alleged medical frailty and continues to abet ayres in his malingering fabrications about his deteriorating mental state in spite of the fact that State medical experts and the Court have stated otherwise.

The Plaintiff attorney cites one of the other civil cases against ayres --in that case, motions for protective orders have been denied, and motions to compel deposition have already been granted --on exactly the same grounds as presented in this case.

Not in the Press:

The press has yet to report on any of the current civil cases against ayres, including the most recent case that settled out of court before trial. These civil lawsuits against ayres are "anonymous," listing ayres as "John Doe 1" and so lack of further corroboration may be one of the reasons that the press has not chosen to report on the lawsuits. It is my personal opinion that the press has antipathy to reporting on the ayres case for other reasons as well, but this anonymity may be the biggest problem, so I've done some legwork to help them come to the conclusion that this case, at least, is indeed against william ayres:

In the latest flurry of documents, there is one court document in particular that provides us with good evidence. This document is the "MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES FILED IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER" filed on 2/1/2013 -- Note again, you'll need to click the link three times if you haven't already opened it.

We've provided a copy of the pdf as it was on February 9, 2013 here:
(Document A-0000435808-1.pdf)

Dates from the Documents:

Civil Defendant 
(John Doe 1)
Criminal Defendant
(william ayres)
(Exhibit B) Competency Trial Scheduled Date (As of August, 2010)
October 4, 2010
October 4, 2010 (Original Schedule)
Defendant's Competency Decision
October 31, 2012
October 31, 2012
Defendant's Criminal Trial Scheduled For
March 11, 2013
March 11, 2013
Defendant's Criminal Attorney
Jonathan McDougall
Jonathan McDougall

Other points taken from the document linked above:

* Civil defense attorney description of "John Doe 1" matches criminal defense attorney claims about william ayres: "a frail 80-year old man, is also suffering from a number of physical and mental health issues.

* Exhibit B of the document  specifies that "John Doe 1" criminal attorney is Jonathan McDougall.

* The document links another civil case, CIV467743, to ayres by stating that Orders applied to THIS defendant in the OTHER case should be applied because circumstances are identical.

The press should be able to look at the criminal court dates, and see how many people were in court for competency hearings and decisions, and are scheduled for criminal proceedings on the dates listed above for whom the criminal attorney is Jonathan McDougall.  My guess is that might help narrow the question down a bit.

If that doesn't help, then they could look at Page 29 of the above listed, court provided document, where the court reporter recorded the Plaintiff attorney saying:

"It is 10:10 and the deposition of Dr. Ayers was scheduled for 10:00 today, January 3rd..."

Name spelling error aside (court reporters record in phonetical shorthand), that should help eliminate any remaining doubt, and link at least two lawsuits to ayres.

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.


  1. Why didn't attorney Constance Yu make a phone call to the victim's attorney, stating that Ayres wasn't showing up?

    Ayres should be sanctioned for the $2000.

    Ayres is a COWARDLY sociopathic pedophile. Hope he's having horrific nightmares, is being shunned by the people in his apartment building, and having extreme money troubles.

  2. "Civil defense attorney description of "John Doe 1" matches criminal defense attorney claims about william ayres: "a frail 80-year old man, is also suffering from a number of physical and mental health issues."

    Well, no. Psychopathy is not a mental health issue; it is an immutable personality issue.

    1. Hmmm... While I certainly agree with you that psychopathy is not a simple mental health issue, I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with...

      The statement that I'm making above is that both CIVIL defense Shyster Yu, AND CRIMINAL defense Shyster McDougall make the same claims: That their client is 80, that their client is suffering physical and "mental health" (referring to Alzheimer's)issues.

      My point is one of proof that the anonymous "John Doe 1" and william hamilton ayres are one and the same person, not any judgment about the claims themselves.

      Personally, I think it's patently ridiculous that both Shysters are making ANY kind of claims about "mental health" (dementia) when this claim has been denied by the court and by medical evaluation at Napa State. Seems a bit crooked, in fact.

    2. To judge from what I've read here, I disagree with the defense attorneys' vague "mental health issues" claim. If you are correct to assume that they are referring to Alzheimer's Disease (AD), the attorneys are forgetting that AD is a physical disease and not a mental health issue. The psychopath does not have dementia or AD. If the psychopath had dementia two or three years ago, the psychopath would have AD today. Neither AD nor psychopathy are mental health issues. As such, the attorney's mental health issue claim appears to be baseless. Worse, by perpetuating the psychopath's claim to have AD (or, presumably, a related brain disease), the attorneys undercut their own credibility.

  3. I have come to the conclusion that our system is entirely broken. Few if any get justice and the vast majority of people cannot even get past the first stage of any complaints process. It is an embittering & dehumanizing process that I believe is the actual source of the violence that has lead to mass shootings in our nation.
    Statutes of Limitation are abused daily to cover up that which should have been looked into and corrected, because those in the position to do so chose not to for reasons that would not be considered right if made public. Monetary reasons seem to be the most common followed by protecting a friend or someone that the protector wants to curry favor from. And so on.
    Have we really become so depraved or is it just ignorance and avarice that has turned us away from the rational realization of the enlightened self interest of being honest fair and just?

    1. "Monetary reasons seem to be the most common followed by protecting a friend or someone that the protector wants to curry favor from."

      Agreed. People generally identify with authority and power.

      Most power is the power to coerce somebody. - Charles Koch (as quoted on the cover of the December 24, 2012 issue of Forbes magazine).