UPDATE 2016: Those confused by the Brock Turner verduct should not be. Mike Armstrong is also a Stanford Graduate. Stanford has a history of protecting their own. See case below involving Mike Armstrong committing in our mind, malpractice, for stipulating a woman who reported child sexual abuse by a Stanford Professor, stipulate to a 10 year restraining order. Also, never trust Mercury News reporter, Tracey Kaplan. Kaplan forwards negative information about Armstrong, directly to him.
UPDATE: The public should be aware Palo Alto PD continues their efforts to protect men accused of molesting children...and perhaps cooridinating efforts against those reporting these types of crimes.
For that effort, the police can rely Prosecutor Deborah Medved, (who has a past history in withholding evidence) whose job includes ginning up efforts to support her self-describe job title of "verticial prosecution" of cases involving children....while later claiming she did not see evidence that would prove there was no case against one woman in particular, Anneliese Barron, who originally followed the suggestions of Palo Alto PD. We see the case as a valuable lesson in government based, misogyny - and the women who willingly participate.
May 2, 2014.
Bizarre ending. The Restitution order was final today; with DA saying she will modify restraining order to allow Barron to return to work. Judge Toff said he didn't think a ten year restraining order that names Barron's children (which Barron's attorney stipulated to in chambers unbeknownst to Barron - which strikes us as malpractice) would preclude Barron from regaining custody of her children. (We are waiting for a transcript.) Oh, and the father of Barron's youngest, who was fired from his employment, today served an Ex-parte order so he can return to Georgia...with their child. He has no job, and no means for support except for Barron, so he's hanging on for dear life.
April 6, 2014: Is Prosecutor Misconduct a national problem? Perhaps. Bronx judge (and former DA) the Honorable Judge John Wilson banished ADA Megan Teesdale from ever appearing in his courtroom, after it was revealed Teesdale withheld evidence in a case...that never should have been brought to trial.
Consider the case of ADA Deborah Reece Medved, whose LinkedIn profile reveals her job is listed as "Vertical prosecution of child abduction and family violence."
Certainly one form of job security is withholding evidence (such as in the Barron case), a return plane ticket and text messages that might shield a subsequent bogus prosecution. No wonder Medved and her supervisor were in the Judge's chambers pleading he rule Medved didn't commit misconduct. Likewise no surprise Medved didn't want to turn over text messages of one of Barron's accusers.
However, how many times can Medved realistically claim she never "looked" at evidence...sitting on her desk for months?
More importantly, given Medved's prior job was to protect children, how is it Medved didn't insist Palo Alto Police Department get the computer laptop the male suspect refused to turn over in a custody case? How is it the DA's office didn't insist on investigating fully, the laptop?
On March 21, 2014, Personnel from the DA's office showed up in court today, a bit nervous and intent to make sure the record reflected the Prosecutorial Misconduct allegation is from the Defendant, not her attorney.
For this supervisor Hendricks showed up, with the DA investigator. That would be the same DA investigator who didn't reveal to the judge in his request for an arrest warrant, that Barron had a return ticket from Hawaii. Today though, Hendricks opted not to meet in chambers. But Hendricks, Medved and the DA investigator should be nervous. Santa Clara has a long history of prosecutorial misconduct, for which the State Bar might want to delve into, as obvious questions, remain.
Question: How is is DA Deborah Reece Medved had access to so much exculpatory information that she claims not to have viewed? Perhaps the defense attorney could ask this during the May 2nd, hearing. As the video on the right reveals, what may be presenting itself, is yet another case of a police indifference to crimes against children, followed shortly thereafter by a systematic plan to shoot the messenger with a little help from the DA.
On that note, will PA PD ever demand the father's laptop be turned over to them so they can at long last, conduct a thorough investigation?
One key question remains: Was David Angel, head of the PR vibed, "Conviction Integrity Unit" aware two DAs met with Judge Ronald Toff in chambers for the express purpose of asking Judge Toff to make a finding (absent a hearing) of no prosecutorial misconduct in the Barron case?
When that failed, both begged Judge Toff to not identify the upcoming hearing to address the alleged misconduct, as a misconduct hearing.
(The matter came up after it was discovered evidence had not been turned over to the defense.)
What happened after Barron made a written complaint to David Angel regarding the DAs double-team, in-chambers meeting effort? Word isDeborah Reece Medved's supervisor, Cindy Hendrickson, called Barron's criminal defense attorney, Mike Armstrong with the news the DA's office was going to ignore Barron's complaint because it came directly from Barron. This was followed by a letter from outside counsel stating the DA's office was doing a great job. Will Armstrong take the appropriate action to protect his client?
Perhaps. So far though, Armstrong's zealous advocacy could best be described as "lackluster." So time will tell. How? If this hearing on Misconduct disappears, then we'll know. Also, it remains to be seen if the missing evidence will find its way into the hands of the defense.
March 10, 2014
We received the below from Annelise Barron and are posting without comment.
"Dear Mr. Angel,
The reason for this letter is to inform you that on February 21, 2014, ADA Deborah Reece Medved's supervisor, Ms. Cindy Hendrickson, appeared with Ms. Medved in Judge Ronald Toff's chambers, and attempted to convince the judge to make an immediate finding that no prosecutorial misconduct had occurred--with no facts in support before him, no hearing, and without me, the complaintant, having an opportunity to respond substantively. The matter was not even on calendar!
Moreover, in chambers, Ms. Hendrickson and Ms. Medved asked Judge Toff not to refer to my complaint in open court as relating to possible "prosecutorial misconduct", when he stated for the record the scheduled March 21 hearing on that matter.
These in-chambers machinations represent continued prosecutorial misconduct, separate from the prosecutor's ongoing withholding exculpatory evidence. Judge Toff went along with Ms. Hendrickson's second request, but not her first. This is just FYI; you can confirm the facts of what occurred with Mr. Armstrong.
Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Please contact my defense attorney, Mr. Michael W. Armstrong, to let us know when we can expect to receive your response.
March 3, 2014
Citing confidentiality, Palo Alto PD Sex Crime Investigative officials declined to confirm whether they knew prior to completing their report, the named suspect refused to turn over his laptop computer to Jeffrey Kline, the forensics expert hired to assess the claims made.
Somehow the claims repeatedly made by Barron's kids have been lost in the shuffle of yet another claim alleging prosecutor misconduct.
Lets begin with the kicker:
How twisted is family to criminal court?
On February 21, 2014, Santa Clara Deputy District Attorney Deborah Medved wanted Judge Toff to rule Medved had not withheld evidence in the Annelise Barron case....after withholding evidence.
But good news, Judge Toff, declined. New hearing on that issue is scheduled for March 21, 2014.
Readers should be aware when it comes to issues with withholding evidence - this isn't Deborah Medved's first rodeo.
That's how twisted, family to criminal court, cases become. Including experts hired to write custody evaluations who refused to read police reports. Names will be named as soon as they are verified.
Minor's counsel doesn't believe child's repeated claims of abuse by father. Seemingly, Palo Alto Police don't investigate, (but recommend the hiring of multiple experts to opine.)
However, Mom doesn't mind signing stipulation to not report crimes, because both kids have been reporting crimes to teachers and others "mandated to report" for years.
Not that reporting has helped. March 21st is the date of the next hearing to determine if Deputy DA Deborah Medved's had a role in withholding evidence benefiting Barron.
So the bottom line is another family court case goes South, after married mom Annelise Barron reported intra-family crime:
She immediately divorces the person she feels is responsible, but then...the plot thickens! Two unhappy men work together and voila,
(Defense counsel....was...was present? Does this mean the DA would have to recuse herself so she wouldn't be near Barron? Or, could she get over her terrible fearfulness just for court?)
So we telephoned Deborah Reece Medved to ask why she uses two names. Her response was "How did you get my phone number, who are you."
We repeated our name and again asked Deborah Reece Medved the reason for her two names. She refused to respond.
On Feb. 21, Annelise Barron will be back in court. As will DA Deborah Reece or Medved. Perhaps with yet another name!
Breaking: 2015 - No less than the former top jurist for the 9th Circuit spoke candidly of corrupt DAs.
Santa Clara County:
2014: As of Feb of this year we have been in contact with PAPD on the Barron case, and hope to report back, soon. The case reminds us of UCSD researcher Joyce Murphy, and her prosecution.
We're conflicted about this. When the DA feels the need to appoint an Integrity Unit, isn't it time to, sell?
However, in that Santa Clara, unlike other counties, at least admits it has a continuing problem with some prosecutors such as Medved (or Reece) whose name keeps popping up, isn't it good David Angel, head of Santa Clara's Conviction Integrity Unit, may solve Santa Clara's long-time problem?
"No Means No" Orange County DA's office again demonstrates serial, misconduct
issues with Deputy DA's in their attempts to win convictions. Or, as
Deputy Public Defender Scott Sanders said, "The court-ordered discovery
reveals investigatory and discovery
practices by [prosecutors] that are rooted in deception and concealment;
an unchecked and lawless custodial informant program overseen by the
Orange County district attorney's office (OCDA); and a string of
prosecutions which confirm a culture that confuses winning with
justice—prosecutions marked by repeated and stunning Brady violations, suborned perjury and a myriad of other misconduct."