‘He’s back’: Alleged stalker returns to S.F. after judge…

692 shares, 851 points

‘He’s back’: Alleged stalker returns to S.F. after judge dismisses case, scaring women on city streets

Like it? Share with your friends!

692 shares, 851 points


Your email address will not be published.

  1. He’s either come across a woman who’s carrying a gun or he’ll piss the wrong couple’s husband or boyfriend off. Guy like this only learns the hard way…if at all.

  2. There was a fair amount left out of this “story” about this case last year.

    He was charged with misdemeanors. Even sexual battery is ONLY a misdemeanor in California (take that to the legislature; a DA can’t file something they can’t prove with evidence). Maximum sentence was 6 months and that’s served at half time (90 days).

    Dude served over the maximum time waiting for placement to be restored to competency. There is a HUGE problem in CA (and SF!) about this; ppl don’t get placed quickly enough to get any treatment on a misdemeanor. Not like treatment as an alternative to jail, but as in their criminal case is suspended while their competency is addressed through treatment because you can’t hold someone accountable criminally if they are determined to be incompetent (again, see the legislature).

    A judge can’t hold someone in jail if they have served beyond a maximum term – even while waiting while their criminal case is suspended. They can’t be sentenced any further. “In the interests of justice” – which is Penal Code 1385 – is not an expression of Judge Roeca’s opinion that justice is served, but is rather a statement of the law because there is no further sentence (or enforcement) that can be served and therefore it’s moot; the law compels dismissal.

    I looked this up because Judge Roeca manages the calendar and courtroom of defendants that have been found incompetent to stand trial. Ms. Knight makes it sound like he exercised discretion in cavalierly dismissing his case: that is not the case, not even a little bit.

  3. > He said I was the one stalking him — and that he didn’t give me permission to write about him.

    Oh how the turntables.

  4. Given the number of victims this screams class action lawsuit against SFPD, the City, the DA, and various judges under 1983. The disparate impact is obvious and it’s abundantly clear that absent some consent decrees we’re not fixing our system.

  5. As a tiny woman who walks my dog alone a lot, what would y’all recommend for self protection here? I don’t want to let the fear take over since constantly reading articles like this makes me wanna be a recluse 🙁

  6. From the article:

    > What remains clear is that despite his many brushes with the law, he’s not received the intervention — and help — he so clearly needs, including from San Francisco’s broken criminal justice system.

    In what world does *this* guy deserve any kind of help? He feels completely justified in molesting and terrorizing the women in SF, including minors. SF Chronicle has consistently shown its lost touch with how the world works. This city needs better local journalism.

  7. SF residents – I’m having a hard time remembering how the criminal justice system was pre Bodin. I’ve lived here since ‘92 and always felt reasonably safe. Once I saw hippies getting beat to shit outside a Jerry show at the warfield while tripping balls. That kinda stayed with me for a while but other than that it was kinda no harm no foul for most of the trivial shit. If you get out of pocket then you and the popo have words. Like this guy woulda been committed from the start. Or am I remembering it wrong

  8. One day he’ll be found laying in the gutter with his body showing signs of extreme trauma and nobody in the neighborhood saw nor heard a thing 🤷‍♂️

    Pauper’s grave.

  9. I love this sub. Full of vim, animus, from people who spend all their money on Door Dash and GrubHub because they are too afraid to live in the City.

  10. this sub is all about accusing random people of committing a crime without any evidence! how the F do you know who’s telling the truth here?