ziggy
Active Member
Hopeful for a decision tomorrow! I really want this guy on trial.
GUILTY CA - Dr. William Ayres for child molestation, San Mateo, 2007 #2
- Thread starter Cubby
- Start date
Ohio Girl: You said: The prosecutor could have avoided this altogether. Boo on her.
Yes, this could have been avoided had the prosecution in the first trial bothered to check to see what Ayres' training was. Two days ago at this competency trial the doctors who examined Ayres kept talking about how Ayres' core argument to them was that he was trained to give genital exams to kids in therapy. The prosecutor knew this going into the first trial and didn't bother to check with anyone from the place where he trained in Boston to see if this was true.
Bear in mind the prosecutor has made up many different stories about her attempts to contact the Boston doctors Ayres trained with - ranging from she never spoke to them to "their stories didn't check out" to "one doctor was not physically able to travel. " These are all falsehoods. We believe she made up the wildly varying stories about her attempts to contact the Boston doctors and her so-called conversations with them - (which they insist never took place) to cover her tracks that she did not bother to look into Ayres' training.
NOW all of a sudden in this competency trial she's talking about how Ayres' new lawyer couldn't find a single doctor to verify that Ayres was trained to give genital exams. She could have saved the DA's office money by making the effort to check that out herself at the first trial.
It is unforgivable that she has made so many false statements about her attempts to contact the doctors who trained with Ayres in Boston. This is not the end of the story on this matter. Stay tuned.
Yes, this could have been avoided had the prosecution in the first trial bothered to check to see what Ayres' training was. Two days ago at this competency trial the doctors who examined Ayres kept talking about how Ayres' core argument to them was that he was trained to give genital exams to kids in therapy. The prosecutor knew this going into the first trial and didn't bother to check with anyone from the place where he trained in Boston to see if this was true.
Bear in mind the prosecutor has made up many different stories about her attempts to contact the Boston doctors Ayres trained with - ranging from she never spoke to them to "their stories didn't check out" to "one doctor was not physically able to travel. " These are all falsehoods. We believe she made up the wildly varying stories about her attempts to contact the Boston doctors and her so-called conversations with them - (which they insist never took place) to cover her tracks that she did not bother to look into Ayres' training.
NOW all of a sudden in this competency trial she's talking about how Ayres' new lawyer couldn't find a single doctor to verify that Ayres was trained to give genital exams. She could have saved the DA's office money by making the effort to check that out herself at the first trial.
It is unforgivable that she has made so many false statements about her attempts to contact the doctors who trained with Ayres in Boston. This is not the end of the story on this matter. Stay tuned.
The consensus among the parents of victims who attended the competency trial this week is that Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall did a much better job than the prosecutor. Reports are that he was better prepared; more polished and organized. He had seven witnesses. The prosecution had only two, and one of them was a bit casual and not hard-hitting.
A mistrial has been declared in the Ayres mental competency trial. Jury couldn't agree on whether he was competent.
The victims of Ayres and their families are furious with the San Mateo District Attorney's office for this mistrial.
Parents who attended this competency trial report that Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall was better prepared; had better witnesses (seven of them) and outsmarted prosecutor Melissa Mckowan. Reports are that she was not prepared, had only two witnesses (one of whom was brought in at the last minute and was very weak) and often fumbled.
Meanwhile around the country, dozens of doctors who were arrested for molesting children AFTER Ayres was arrested in 2007 have long since been tried and sentenced to prison. In one case in Ohio in 2009, identical twin pediatricians Dr. Scott and Dr. Mark Blankenburg were convicted of 79 child counts of child molestation, possession of child
and bribery just NINE months after they were arrested.
The first criminal trial for Ayres was supposed to be a slam dunk, according to experts, but the DA messed that up too by never bothering to check Ayres' bogus assertions that he was trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy in Boston.
Ayres was arrested in April, 2007 and is still free. This is a joke and a terrible travesty.
The victims of Ayres and their families are furious with the San Mateo District Attorney's office for this mistrial.
Parents who attended this competency trial report that Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall was better prepared; had better witnesses (seven of them) and outsmarted prosecutor Melissa Mckowan. Reports are that she was not prepared, had only two witnesses (one of whom was brought in at the last minute and was very weak) and often fumbled.
Meanwhile around the country, dozens of doctors who were arrested for molesting children AFTER Ayres was arrested in 2007 have long since been tried and sentenced to prison. In one case in Ohio in 2009, identical twin pediatricians Dr. Scott and Dr. Mark Blankenburg were convicted of 79 child counts of child molestation, possession of child
and bribery just NINE months after they were arrested.The first criminal trial for Ayres was supposed to be a slam dunk, according to experts, but the DA messed that up too by never bothering to check Ayres' bogus assertions that he was trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy in Boston.
Ayres was arrested in April, 2007 and is still free. This is a joke and a terrible travesty.
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county/ci_18302434
If prosecutors decide against a second competency trial, it could mean the end of the case against Ayres. He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent. And because dementia is a progressive disorder that attacks a person's memory, it is an unlikely he will get better.
If prosecutors decide against a second competency trial, it could mean the end of the case against Ayres. He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent. And because dementia is a progressive disorder that attacks a person's memory, it is an unlikely he will get better.
For those of you who filed complaints to the California Bar re: the San Mateo District Attorney's mishandling and misconduct in the first Ayres criminal trial, the contact person there is Cydney Batchelor:
[email protected]
415-538-2204
What's a travesty is that what came up in this week's mental competency trial was the very thing that San Mateo prosecutor Melissa Mckowan failed to deal with in the first criminal trial- and then lied about her efforts to deal with it was the subject of Ayres' training.
At this competency trial, a psychiatrist for the state testified that Ayres continually hammered home to him that he was "trained" to examine the genitals of young boys in therapy. The prosecution knew this going into the first criminal trial - and even one of Ayres' former partners told her this- but she failed to investigate and then covered up her failure by lying about her failure to do so.
At this competency trial, prosecutor Mckowan brought up the fact that in preparation for the second criminal trial, Ayres' lawyer McDougall was unable to find a doctor willing to testify to that fact that Ayres was trained to do physical exams. This all should have been brought up at the first trial.
The failure of the San Mateo District Attorney's office to investigate Ayres' claims about his training and the subsequent attempts by the prosecutor to cover this up by making inconsistent and false statements on this matter must be investigated further.
[email protected]
415-538-2204
What's a travesty is that what came up in this week's mental competency trial was the very thing that San Mateo prosecutor Melissa Mckowan failed to deal with in the first criminal trial- and then lied about her efforts to deal with it was the subject of Ayres' training.
At this competency trial, a psychiatrist for the state testified that Ayres continually hammered home to him that he was "trained" to examine the genitals of young boys in therapy. The prosecution knew this going into the first criminal trial - and even one of Ayres' former partners told her this- but she failed to investigate and then covered up her failure by lying about her failure to do so.
At this competency trial, prosecutor Mckowan brought up the fact that in preparation for the second criminal trial, Ayres' lawyer McDougall was unable to find a doctor willing to testify to that fact that Ayres was trained to do physical exams. This all should have been brought up at the first trial.
The failure of the San Mateo District Attorney's office to investigate Ayres' claims about his training and the subsequent attempts by the prosecutor to cover this up by making inconsistent and false statements on this matter must be investigated further.
One of the many pissed off citizens of San Mateo County has sent an email to the Ayres blog, which has given me permission to reprint it here. Citizens are outraged at not just the incompetence by the DA's office, but also - as Glenn Rabinowitz, the Executive Editor of the San Mateo County Times described it- their ambivalence about trying the case against Ayres at all. Many believe this is because the DA's office used Ayres to evaluate boys and they're afraid of getting sued.
Here is Tim Wulff's email on the mistrial for the competency hearing:
This news article written by Joshua Melvin smacks of bias, distortion and misrepresentation of fact.
This was NOT a competency hearing. It was an incompetency hearing. Competency is presumed. Incompetency is not presumed. The statement 'He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent' is a false statement. He will or will not be retried solely on the determination and decision of the DA's Office.
The fact of the mistrial on incompetency will raise issues on appeal. That will be the DA's concern.
This
Further, in spite of the utterly unusual events surrounding the declaration of mistrial and the basis for it, not one word of comment is made by the reporter on this subject. Why?
How often does such a high profile case terminate its deliberations so quickly? Yet not a word from this person reviewing the event.
Further, although on-site observers of the trial are unclear as to whether there was a public hearing of the mistrial event, as has always been the case in my experience, there appears to be the possibility that the entire event was conducted in private. This would be extraordinary if true, and certainly newsworthy.
We all know from having seen events like this repeatedly, that it is common practice for a judge to admonish the jurors, consult and advise them according to the law and send them back to try again time and again. Yet, in this case, the judge seems eager to accept the mistrial path and waste the taxpayer's hard-earned money. Why?
None of these issues are addressed by the reporter and editor who seem to my mind intent on creating misinformation in an attempt to mislead the public. If this is the case, it is reprehensible and irresponsible in the extreme.
There has already been a long series of events in this case of questionable actions and behaviors on the part of both Bay Area News Groups characterizations in their reporting of this horrid trial, as well as those of the DA's Office and the Courts in the conduct of this case.
Does Dr. Ayres have knowledge of the conduct of others within the government and judiciary of the County of San Mateo that requires those in power to take steps to collaborate in efforts to protect him from the obvious consequences of his actions? One can only speculate..
more on www.williamayreswatch.blogspot.com
Here is Tim Wulff's email on the mistrial for the competency hearing:
This news article written by Joshua Melvin smacks of bias, distortion and misrepresentation of fact.
This was NOT a competency hearing. It was an incompetency hearing. Competency is presumed. Incompetency is not presumed. The statement 'He cannot be retried on the criminal charges until he's deemed competent' is a false statement. He will or will not be retried solely on the determination and decision of the DA's Office.
The fact of the mistrial on incompetency will raise issues on appeal. That will be the DA's concern.
This
Further, in spite of the utterly unusual events surrounding the declaration of mistrial and the basis for it, not one word of comment is made by the reporter on this subject. Why?
How often does such a high profile case terminate its deliberations so quickly? Yet not a word from this person reviewing the event.
Further, although on-site observers of the trial are unclear as to whether there was a public hearing of the mistrial event, as has always been the case in my experience, there appears to be the possibility that the entire event was conducted in private. This would be extraordinary if true, and certainly newsworthy.
We all know from having seen events like this repeatedly, that it is common practice for a judge to admonish the jurors, consult and advise them according to the law and send them back to try again time and again. Yet, in this case, the judge seems eager to accept the mistrial path and waste the taxpayer's hard-earned money. Why?
None of these issues are addressed by the reporter and editor who seem to my mind intent on creating misinformation in an attempt to mislead the public. If this is the case, it is reprehensible and irresponsible in the extreme.
There has already been a long series of events in this case of questionable actions and behaviors on the part of both Bay Area News Groups characterizations in their reporting of this horrid trial, as well as those of the DA's Office and the Courts in the conduct of this case.
Does Dr. Ayres have knowledge of the conduct of others within the government and judiciary of the County of San Mateo that requires those in power to take steps to collaborate in efforts to protect him from the obvious consequences of his actions? One can only speculate..
more on www.williamayreswatch.blogspot.com
And I'm certainly speculating. I'm so terribly disappointed for the victims and their families. All I can hope is that their needs are being met right now. Just seeing their abuser is a trigger. These men must be kept safe and must have strong support systems to rely on. That's the first priority.
Shame on San Mateo County. It surely seems that they've slid down the slippery slope of a secret agenda rather than attending to the very pressing needs of victims who suffered at the hands of a man the county ordered to "treat" them.
Mercyneal--you've worked so hard and opened so many eyes. Thank you for your dedication.
Shame on San Mateo County. It surely seems that they've slid down the slippery slope of a secret agenda rather than attending to the very pressing needs of victims who suffered at the hands of a man the county ordered to "treat" them.
Mercyneal--you've worked so hard and opened so many eyes. Thank you for your dedication.
Prosecutors have been known to deliberately lose cases. Here's one example:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/05/nyregion/05da.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/05/nyregion/05da.html
San Mateo District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe told a citizen in May, 2009 that his office had "NEVER"hired Ayres to evaluate a boy. That is a completely false statement. Ayres testified under oath during a civil deposition in a molestation suit against him in 2004 that the San Mateo District Attorney's office DID use him to evaluate boys.
Why would Steve Wagstaffe lie about that? Could it be because he didn't want his office to be the subject of lawsuits? What about the San Mateo Private Defender's Association? Ayres was under contract to them for decades. Ditto for Children's Services. No one in those organizations- despite repeated requests from citizens- have bothered to investigate how many boys Ayres molested through these agencies. But up in Calgary, when Dr. Aubrey Levin who treated young men through the courts was arrested for sexually assaulting them, the Calgary courts contacted every single patient of Levin's through the courts to see if they had been molested. You'd never ever catch San Mateo doing anything like that. They don't want to be held accountable.
One of Ayres' victims died this past February. We have learned that Ayres gave him alcohol and other substances in the session and then violently sexually assaulted him (think worst case scenario.) We know that Ayres told this victim, "If you let me do this to you, then I will make sure you don't go to juvenile hall. "
This victim only told his closest childhood friend the details about what Ayres did to him, just before he died. The sexual assault that the victim said Ayres did to him is a thousand degrees worse than anything that has been printed in the papers.
Just think how many other juveniles had the same thing happen to them as this deceased victim. Think how many juvenile cases Ayres affected.
The San Mateo District Attorney's office; the Private Defenders and other responsible organizations have shown a bizarre lack of interest in getting to the bottom of the breadth and depth of the sexual assaults on boys in the juvenile system. No doubt because of the lawsuits.
This information - and much more -will be turned over to the California Attorney General.
Why would Steve Wagstaffe lie about that? Could it be because he didn't want his office to be the subject of lawsuits? What about the San Mateo Private Defender's Association? Ayres was under contract to them for decades. Ditto for Children's Services. No one in those organizations- despite repeated requests from citizens- have bothered to investigate how many boys Ayres molested through these agencies. But up in Calgary, when Dr. Aubrey Levin who treated young men through the courts was arrested for sexually assaulting them, the Calgary courts contacted every single patient of Levin's through the courts to see if they had been molested. You'd never ever catch San Mateo doing anything like that. They don't want to be held accountable.
One of Ayres' victims died this past February. We have learned that Ayres gave him alcohol and other substances in the session and then violently sexually assaulted him (think worst case scenario.) We know that Ayres told this victim, "If you let me do this to you, then I will make sure you don't go to juvenile hall. "
This victim only told his closest childhood friend the details about what Ayres did to him, just before he died. The sexual assault that the victim said Ayres did to him is a thousand degrees worse than anything that has been printed in the papers.
Just think how many other juveniles had the same thing happen to them as this deceased victim. Think how many juvenile cases Ayres affected.
The San Mateo District Attorney's office; the Private Defenders and other responsible organizations have shown a bizarre lack of interest in getting to the bottom of the breadth and depth of the sexual assaults on boys in the juvenile system. No doubt because of the lawsuits.
This information - and much more -will be turned over to the California Attorney General.
Wendy Murphy, legal analyst for the Today Show; MSNBC and Fox News has been following the Ayres case since the beginning. Her opinion: "District Attorney's offices throwing cases is not new. Even the IDEA of Ayres being incompetent is so silly- it seems like a setup."
The "incompetency " issue is bogus. Ayres is lucid and he's only 79 years old. My god, even 91 year old John Demjanjuk, the Nazi prison guard was convicted.
The only time Ayres took notes during the competency trial was when a doctor testified that he was competent to stand trial.
Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall was a prosecutor in the San Mateo District Attorney's office for 14 years, until 2004. Backroom deal with the DA's office on this competency trial? Just sayin.....
The only time Ayres took notes during the competency trial was when a doctor testified that he was competent to stand trial.
Ayres' lawyer Jonathan McDougall was a prosecutor in the San Mateo District Attorney's office for 14 years, until 2004. Backroom deal with the DA's office on this competency trial? Just sayin.....
More on the Ayres competency mistrial from Wendy Murphy, legal analyst on MSNBC, Fox and the Today show: "The interesting thing is - it's supposed to be an issue for the COURT to deal with, not the prosecutor, so even having it structured as a fight between the prosecutor and defense makes no sense.
Competency is about capacity to function in the system and is not supposed to be subjected to an adversarial process in the typical sense."
Competency is about capacity to function in the system and is not supposed to be subjected to an adversarial process in the typical sense."
Even readers of the San Francisco Chronicle are catching on to the fact that the San Mateo DA messed up bigtime by failing to check to see if Ayres was trained to do genital exams to boys in therapy, as he claimed. A commenter named Chris Thorne (and no, it's not me) had this to say about the case:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2011/06/20/BAVH1K07P9.DTL
Ayres testified that as a psychiatrist, he was also a medical doctor and that he used physical exams to help determine what was ailing his patients."
Earlier in his career, when that strange habit of his was remarked upon and questioned by his local professional peers, Ayres claimed that he had been trained to do this during his psychiatric residency back East.
No one had the good sense to actually contact that program to verify his claim.
When later asked about it, the doctor who had run the residency program at the time Ayres had attended it said that conducting "physical exams" on psych patients was absolutely _not_ something they trained residents to do, and in fact it ran completely counter to their doctrine.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2011/06/20/BAVH1K07P9.DTL
Ayres testified that as a psychiatrist, he was also a medical doctor and that he used physical exams to help determine what was ailing his patients."
Earlier in his career, when that strange habit of his was remarked upon and questioned by his local professional peers, Ayres claimed that he had been trained to do this during his psychiatric residency back East.
No one had the good sense to actually contact that program to verify his claim.
When later asked about it, the doctor who had run the residency program at the time Ayres had attended it said that conducting "physical exams" on psych patients was absolutely _not_ something they trained residents to do, and in fact it ran completely counter to their doctrine.
Here's another comment on the Chronicle story from one of Ayres' medical colleagues:
Comment by bruceafrica
7:54 PM on June 20, 2011
What Chris says is true. I was Bill's colleague in the Northern California Psychiatric Society in the 80's and when this story broke there was an attempt made to rally behind Bill " ...because I know he would never do such a thing". He did, and he disgraced us all.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/20/BAVH1K07P9.DTL#ixzz1PsfhFf1N
Comment by bruceafrica
7:54 PM on June 20, 2011
What Chris says is true. I was Bill's colleague in the Northern California Psychiatric Society in the 80's and when this story broke there was an attempt made to rally behind Bill " ...because I know he would never do such a thing". He did, and he disgraced us all.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/20/BAVH1K07P9.DTL#ixzz1PsfhFf1N
Blame must go to the San Mateo District Attorney's office, for failing to investigate Ayres' key claim that he was trained to do physical exams- including the genitalia- on boys in therapy at Judge Baker in Boston. The prosecution knew that, because one of Ayres' own partners told her so after Ayres was arrested.
On the William Ayres blog in January, 2010, prosecutor Melissa Mckowan claimed she contacted several doctors who trained with Ayres in Boston, but ---- she claims they couldn't confirm that they weren't trained to do physicals.
Fast forward to last week's competency trial. Deepsounding at the Ayres blog described the following that occurred during testimony:
The “training” line of discussion allowed McKowan to discuss the fact that while ayres insists that he was trained to do “physicals,” while McDougall was preparing for the re-trial, he was unable to find a doctor willing to testify to that fact.
***
Riddle me this: how is that it was Ayres' OWN lawyer who was the one who ended up being the one to refute Ayres' claim about his being trained to do physicals in Boston training in Boston?
Shouldn't this have been the job of the prosecutor?
If Ayres' own lawyer could not find a single doctor to back up Ayres' statement about his training, why wasn't the prosecutor able to determine this herself? Did she even try to get to the bottom of Ayres' training?
Why did the Judge Baker administration ask a reporter in 2009 why NO ONE from the San Mateo District Attorney's thought to fact check Ayres' claim?
Why was a reporter able to find more than 40 doctors who had trained at Judge Baker when Ayres was there who said he was lying when Ayres claimed he was trained to do physicals? How is it that the prosecutor was not able to find a single doctor from Boston who would confirm to her that Ayres wasn't trained to do this?
Did the prosecutor make false statements on the Ayres blog and to the public about her efforts to contact these doctors? Why is there such a discrepancy in her stories? Why does she attribute information to them that they said did not come from them?
Why did she say that one of the doctors she spoke to was "physically unable to travel" when the doctor claims the San Mateo prosecutor never contacted her at all?
Why WOULDN'T the DA's office want to get to the bottom of Ayres' training? Was there an unconscious wish on the part of the office to sabotage the trial?
On the William Ayres blog in January, 2010, prosecutor Melissa Mckowan claimed she contacted several doctors who trained with Ayres in Boston, but ---- she claims they couldn't confirm that they weren't trained to do physicals.
Fast forward to last week's competency trial. Deepsounding at the Ayres blog described the following that occurred during testimony:
The “training” line of discussion allowed McKowan to discuss the fact that while ayres insists that he was trained to do “physicals,” while McDougall was preparing for the re-trial, he was unable to find a doctor willing to testify to that fact.
***
Riddle me this: how is that it was Ayres' OWN lawyer who was the one who ended up being the one to refute Ayres' claim about his being trained to do physicals in Boston training in Boston?
Shouldn't this have been the job of the prosecutor?
If Ayres' own lawyer could not find a single doctor to back up Ayres' statement about his training, why wasn't the prosecutor able to determine this herself? Did she even try to get to the bottom of Ayres' training?
Why did the Judge Baker administration ask a reporter in 2009 why NO ONE from the San Mateo District Attorney's thought to fact check Ayres' claim?
Why was a reporter able to find more than 40 doctors who had trained at Judge Baker when Ayres was there who said he was lying when Ayres claimed he was trained to do physicals? How is it that the prosecutor was not able to find a single doctor from Boston who would confirm to her that Ayres wasn't trained to do this?
Did the prosecutor make false statements on the Ayres blog and to the public about her efforts to contact these doctors? Why is there such a discrepancy in her stories? Why does she attribute information to them that they said did not come from them?
Why did she say that one of the doctors she spoke to was "physically unable to travel" when the doctor claims the San Mateo prosecutor never contacted her at all?
Why WOULDN'T the DA's office want to get to the bottom of Ayres' training? Was there an unconscious wish on the part of the office to sabotage the trial?
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
I don't think it was unconscious at all. They should all be fired and disbarred. What in the world would make a prosecuting attorney's office think that this is the way to try a case? It makes my heart hurt and I don't have any stake in this at all. I have written my letters and emails, and they fall on deaf ears.
I am truly sorry to all of the victims of the horrible monster. Please know that YOU DID NOTHING TO BRING THIS ONTO YOURSELVES.
This was perpetrated by a sick mind and an evil person.
Be above it, if you can, and know that there are so many more people out here wanting good things for you, than there are misguided fools who won't believe that this man has been wrongfully accused.
Please try to go on with your lives and don't let this monster ruin anything more than can be good in your lives.
I am heartsick about this.
I am truly sorry to all of the victims of the horrible monster. Please know that YOU DID NOTHING TO BRING THIS ONTO YOURSELVES.
This was perpetrated by a sick mind and an evil person.
Be above it, if you can, and know that there are so many more people out here wanting good things for you, than there are misguided fools who won't believe that this man has been wrongfully accused.
Please try to go on with your lives and don't let this monster ruin anything more than can be good in your lives.
I am heartsick about this.
Just in:
Pedophile pediatrician Dr. Earl Bradley, indicted on 470 counts of raping and molesting children in Delaware was convicted yesterday:
Bradley indicted: February, 2010
Bradley Convicted: June, 2011.
Dr. William Ayres: arrested April 2007
June 2011: Still no conviction.
For shame, San Mateo County DA's office, for doing such a piss poor, half-assed job. Stacked up to other cases of pedophile doctors around the country,where doctors were convicted in a speedy manner, the San Mateo's incompetence and foot dragging is not just pathetic, but also highly suspect.
Pedophile pediatrician Dr. Earl Bradley, indicted on 470 counts of raping and molesting children in Delaware was convicted yesterday:
Bradley indicted: February, 2010
Bradley Convicted: June, 2011.
Dr. William Ayres: arrested April 2007
June 2011: Still no conviction.
For shame, San Mateo County DA's office, for doing such a piss poor, half-assed job. Stacked up to other cases of pedophile doctors around the country,where doctors were convicted in a speedy manner, the San Mateo's incompetence and foot dragging is not just pathetic, but also highly suspect.
Similar threads
Online statistics
- Members online
- 132
- Guests online
- 2,749
- Total visitors
- 2,881