Citing a misguided legal maneuver by city lawyers, a federal judge late Monday rejected a request by the city of San Francisco to stay a preliminary injunction blocking the city from sweeping up tent encampments in the city amid a shortage of emergency shelters. In denying the request for a stay while the injunction was appealed, U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu pointed to a legal move by the city's lawyers, who, in their haste to file an appeal, ignored their previous advice about the proper procedure for had ignored the filing of their challenge to the interim injunction.

Storm damage prompts SF officials to re-inspect newer high-rise buildings

Ryu used the city's legal strategy to support her conclusion that the city had little chance of success in its appeal of the injunction. She also found that the city had not demonstrated that it would suffer “irreparable harm” if the injunction remained in effect.

The decision, and particularly its focus on the city's legal maneuvers, are likely to complicate the city's chances of overturning the cleaning ban in the near future. The controversy comes in a high-profile case brought against the city by the advocacy group Coalition on Homelessness and a number of individual plaintiffs, including some unsheltered people living on the city's streets.

The plaintiffs argued that the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment means the city cannot punish a person for sleeping on city streets while there is a lack of available shelter beds.

Ryu agreed and on December 23, 2022, preliminarily ordered the city to enforce or threaten to enforce a series of laws and ordinances that would “prohibit involuntarily homeless persons from sitting, lying or sleeping on public property.”

The order effectively prohibited the city from breaking up or sweeping tent camps. The judge based her decision on the fact that the city's homeless system, with more than 4,000 beds, was inadequate to house the entire unsheltered portion of the city's homeless population.

Without beds in shelters, she argued, the homeless would have no place to sleep except on city streets. This meant that clearing out encampments was essentially punishing people for their involuntary status of homelessness.

When the injunction was issued, the city responded quickly and sharply.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed said: “Mayors cannot govern cities this way. We already have too few tools to deal with the mental illnesses we see on our streets. Now we are being told not to use any other tool that will help get people indoors and keep our neighborhoods safe and clean for our residents.”

On January 3, San Francisco District Attorney David Chiu issued an unusual press release saying, “The court’s order puts San Francisco in an impossible situation, both practically and legally.”

The city's overreaction stemmed from their concern about the possible scope of Ryu's command. Tent encampments are illegal in San Francisco under city law and can be broken up, but only if the city gives advance notice and provides people with shelter.

The city feared that the order would be interpreted to prevent encampments until sufficient housing was available for every unsheltered person in the city. The city believed that it should only provide a shelter bed for people displaced during the evacuation of a camp. The difference between these interpretations was enormous.

According to the city's reading, on any given day only a few dozen empty shelter beds had to be found to accommodate the people in whatever camp was being swept. Under the other reading, thousands of beds would need to be built or purchased—enough for all the homeless—a process that would likely take years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Apparently seeking a quick resolution to this issue, the city's attorneys filed a so-called “administrative motion” on Jan. 3 to “clarify” the meaning of Ryu's order.

Ryu wasn't happy.

Despite the urgency of the city's request, Ryu found at a Jan. 12 hearing that the city's attorneys had improperly raised the issue and attempted to use a process to raise minor administrative matters – such as permission to increase page limits to ask for a short version – to address a clearly substantive question. At the hearing, Ryu admonished the city's lawyers (as well as the plaintiffs' lawyers who had used the same procedure in one of their motions).

She told lawyers for both sides: “You know better” and warned them “not to get off on the wrong foot.”

She further clarified that if the city wanted to raise the issue, it should follow the proper process for substantive motions. The city did not accept their offer. Instead, she appealed her injunction on January 23.

A week later, on February 2, it asked Ryu to stay her injunction while the appeal was pending. In the briefing in support of the stay, the city's attorneys made the same legal argument about the scope of the injunction that they had unsuccessfully attempted to make in their Jan. 3 motion for clarification.

This approach obviously bothered Ryu. In her decision Monday denying the suspension, she emphasized that the city had refused to do so, even though she had asked the city to adequately address the matter. In their view, this approach deprived the court of the opportunity to examine the city's argument in the context of a proper assessment of the facts.

She also found that the city had failed to meet its burden of proving that it would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction remained in effect. For example, she pointed out that the ordinance allows the city to require the relocation of an encampment for the time it takes the city to clean the area. She also said the city can continue to provide social services and housing options to encampment residents.

The finding that the city's attorneys did not follow proper procedures puts the city in a difficult position. While the city can ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to stay the injunction, the appeals court would not only have to take the relatively unusual step of intervening before the merits of the appeal, but also do so where necessary It is justifiable that the City did not take the appropriate steps to bring the matter before the court that issued the contested injunction.

KRON On is now streaming live news

Unless the appeals court intervenes, the injunction will likely remain in effect pending a full trial in the case before Ryu. This trial is currently scheduled for April 3, 2024. Jen Kwart, a spokeswoman for City Attorney David Chiu, said: “We continue to believe that Judge Ryu's order places the city in an untenable situation, goes beyond legal precedent and exacerbates our homelessness crisis.”

We look forward to presenting our case to the Ninth Circuit on appeal.”

Hadley Rood, one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, said, “The injunction is narrow and only prevents the city from brutally punishing homeless people simply because they are homeless.”

Problems surrounding the city's handling of homelessness have escalated in recent months. The city's Board of Supervisors held a hearing March 21 to consider a plan drawn up by the city's Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing to outline how to house all homeless people in the city.

The ministry rejected this, concluding that even with $1.45 billion and three years for implementation, it could not achieve the desired result due to difficulties in acquiring land in the city and building adequate capacity . The department's stated inability to provide enough housing, combined with the city attorney's difficulty obtaining a stay, appear to be the problems the mayor and board face in leading the city's recovery from the pandemic is likely to become even more severe.

Copyright © 2023 Bay City News, Inc.

The post Federal decide refuses to droop injunction appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

The initial gambit by Nima Momeni's defense attorneys to move his trial from San Francisco did not pay off as the judge in the case ruled on the request for a change of venue on Friday.

Momeni's trial could finally begin sometime this year with the April 2023 murder of tech entrepreneur and CashApp founder Bob Lee. As Mission Local reports, his tentative trial date was set for May 20 on Friday – although the defense may seek further delays.

But for the change of venue motion, the judge didn't believe an impartial, home-grown jury could be assembled in San Francisco.

“Yes, he is the CashApp founder, but the court believes that killing him is the reason individuals are becoming more aware of him,” Judge Eric Fleming said, according to Mission Local.

The defense team surveyed 100 SF residents and found that while 86 percent had heard of the murder case, only 41 people agreed that Lee was a “Silicon Valley icon.” And less than a third said they had already formed an opinion about Nema Momeni based on news articles about the case.

Fleming said he thought about whether gruesome or gory details of the murder had been shared widely with the public and concluded that this case didn't really fit that description, Mission Local reports. And he added that potential jurors were equally likely to have “negative opinions and potential biases” toward the defendant, in this case being against the victim.

Bradford Cohen, who is part of the defense team recruited from Florida to defend Momeni after he apparently fired local defense attorney Paula Caney, admitted to Mission Local outside the courtroom that “we always file these motions,” referring to refers to the application for a change of jurisdiction.

While this was a defeat for the defense, they had a victory last week when Judge Fleming ruled in their favor in a request for seven years of phone records from Bob Lee's cell phones.

“The prosecution will seize both of Bob Lee’s phones for seven years because that’s when Bob Lee met Khazar Momeni – and the government maintains that relationship was legitimate,” attorney Saam Zangeneh told Mission Local.

Khazar Momeni, Nima Momeni's sister, is at the center of this case and Nema's possible motive for stabbing Lee. Lee had been in a romantic relationship of sorts with married Khazar Momeni for seven years and – having moved to Miami – was in town on business when the murder occurred.

According to evidence publicly released in previous court documents, on April 3, 2023, Lee and Khazar Momeni had spent the day together and attended a party at an individual's apartment at 1550 Mission Street. This person has been identified multiple times as Lee's friend or drug dealer, and it has been alleged that something inappropriate happened to Khazar Momeni while she was there, for which Nima Momeni may have blamed Lee.

Lee and Nima Momeni were seen on surveillance footage leaving Khazar's Millenium Tower apartment in the early hours of April 4, about 20 minutes before the stabbing occurred a few blocks away. The kitchen knife believed to be the murder weapon may have come from a set in Khazar Momeni's kitchen.

Previously: Lawyers for Bob Lee murder suspect Nima Momeni want to move the trial from San Francisco

Pictured above: Nima Momeni arrives in court at the Hall of Justice on May 18, 2023 in San Francisco, California. 38-year-old technology entrepreneur Nima Momeni was charged in a San Francisco courtroom today in connection with the stabbing murder of Cash App founder Bob Lee. Momeni pleaded not guilty to a murder charge. (Photo by Paul Kuroda-Pool/Getty Images)

The post Accused Bob Lee Killer Can Get Truthful Trial In San Francisco, Choose Guidelines appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday denied a motion to move the trial of a man charged in last year’s attack against former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband out of San Francisco, saying she wasn’t convinced the court wouldn’t be able to find impartial and fair jurors in the San Francisco Bay Area.

David DePape’s defense attorneys argued that the intense publicity the case has received means he won’t get a fair trial in the city. They had asked Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to move the trial to Eureka, a city near the border with Oregon. The federal trial is set to start Nov. 13.

Federal public defender Angela Chuang said local media attention has tainted the pool of jurors. In its motion asking for the change of venue, the defense said a survey it commissioned shows many potential jurors already believe DePape is guilty of the crimes and would be unable to change their minds.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley pointed out that the case received national attention and that the defense survey also showed many people in Eureka are also familiar with the details of the case.

She also said it could be hard to find such a jury in Eureka because the population the court could pull from is 326,000, compared to 5.5 million in the Bay Area.

“I agree with you that to ensure Mr. DePape has an impartial jury, we are going to have to pull a lot of jurors and make sure we question them,” Scott Corley said.

“I actually think we will have a way harder time if this case is transferred … because the number of people we’re pulling from is a magnitude smaller,” she added.

Prosecutors say DePape broke into the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Oct. 28 seeking to kidnap the former speaker — who was out of town — and instead beat her 83-year-old husband, Paul, with a hammer. The violence sent shockwaves through the political world.

DePape, 43, pleaded not guilty to federal charges of attempting to kidnap a federal official and assaulting a federal official’s family member. He also pleaded not guilty to state charges, including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse. He remains jailed without bail. The state trial hasn’t been scheduled.

Chuang and federal public defender Jodi Linker also said in their motion they fear potential jurors in San Francisco could be biased against DePape because Nancy Pelosi, who has represented the city in Congress since 1987, remains a popular figure in the Bay Area.

Eureka is in rural Humboldt County and is politically more conservative.

They said Bay Area media outlets have extensively covered the case and played video footage of the assault on Paul Pelosi, the 911 call, and a police interview of DePape shortly after his arrest.

Footage of the attack was released to the public in January after a California judge denied prosecutors’ request to keep it secret.

The post Choose rejects transferring trial of man charged in Nancy Pelosi’s husband assault out of San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge on Wednesday denied a motion to move the trial of a man charged in last year’s attack against former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband at their San Francisco home, saying she wasn’t convinced the court wouldn’t be able to find impartial and fair jurors in the San Francisco Bay Area.

David DePape’s defense attorneys argued that the intense publicity the case has received means he won’t get a fair trial in the city. They had asked Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to move the trial to Eureka, a city near the border with Oregon. The federal trial is set to start Nov. 13.

Federal public defender Angela Chuang said local media attention has tainted the pool of jurors. In its motion asking for the change of venue, the defense said a survey it commissioned shows many potential jurors already believe DePape is guilty of the crimes and would be unable to change their minds.

ALSO READ: 

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley pointed out that the case received national attention and that the defense survey also showed many people in Eureka are also familiar with the details of the case.

She also said it could be hard to find such a jury in Eureka because the population the court could pull from is 326,000, compared to 5.5 million in the Bay Area.

“I agree with you that to ensure Mr. DePape has an impartial jury, we are going to have to pull a lot of jurors and make sure we question them,” Scott Corley said.

“I actually think we will have a way harder time if this case is transferred … because the number of people we’re pulling from is a magnitude smaller,” she added.

Prosecutors say DePape broke into the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Oct. 28 seeking to kidnap the former speaker — who was out of town — and instead beat her 83-year-old husband with a hammer. The violence sent shockwaves through the political world.  

DePape, 43, pleaded not guilty to federal charges of attempting to kidnap a federal official and assaulting a federal official’s family member. He also pleaded not guilty to state charges, including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse. He remains jailed without bail. The state trial hasn’t been scheduled.

Chuang and federal public defender Jodi Linker also said in their motion they fear potential jurors in San Francisco could be biased against DePape because Nancy Pelosi, who has represented the city in Congress since 1987, remains a popular figure in the Bay Area.

Eureka is in rural Humboldt County and is politically more conservative.

They said Bay Area media outlets have extensively covered the case and played video footage of the assault on Paul Pelosi, the 911 call, and a police interview of DePape shortly after his arrest.

Footage of the attack was released to the public in January after a California judge denied prosecutors’ request to keep it secret.

More from CBS News

The post Paul Pelosi assault: Choose rejects shifting DePape trial out of San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

A federal judge said she needs more evidence that San Francisco is complying with her injunction preventing moving unhoused people.

OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — San Francisco homeless residents lost their bid to ensure that city officials comply with a federal judge’s block on encampment sweeps, but the judge on Thursday also demanded more transparency from the city.

U.S. Chief Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu denied without prejudice a request by plaintiffs living unsheltered in San Francisco that she appoint a special master to help enforce the injunction Ryu ordered. But she ordered the city to file a declaration on staff training within two weeks, and to meet with Magistrate Judge Lisa Cisneros to discuss improving how police officers communicate with unhoused people. The plaintiffs must file a supplemental brief within one month.

Ryu ruled this past December that San Francisco officials cannot threaten enforcement of “sit/lie” or public sleeping laws against involuntarily homeless individuals, meaning people who do not have access to shelter or permanent housing.

The plaintiffs say the city regularly fines and removes them from public property, often seizing or destroying their property, violating their Fourth and Eighth Amendment rights. They also accused the city of sweeping encampments after the injunction was ordered, during the atmospheric river storms that drenched the state during this year’s winter.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed speaks at a rally outside the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Screenshot via Courthouse News)

City officials appealed Ryu’s injunction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and argued in court Wednesday that the ruling was too vague to know which parts of city ordinances could be enforced.

Mayor London Breed, backed by county supervisors and coalitions of wealthy donors, told a crowd assembled outside the appellate court that the city is prepared to take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. 

The crux of the case rests on precedent set in Martin v. Boise, barring cities without enough shelter beds from moving unhoused people — and the fact that San Francisco does not have enough shelter for all unhoused people, as Ryu determined in January. The plaintiffs point to a waitlist of at least 400 people, while the city has said it offers unhoused people shelter before conducting encampment sweeps. 

In federal court Thursday, Ryu expressed concern that some police officers who interact with unhoused residents may not be trained on the injunction and rules for when they can and cannot move people. 

The judge also chastised the plaintiffs for not clearly explaining how, by law, the city had violated her order.

“You’ve left me here to guess, or try to figure out what you’re arguing,” she said. “There’s a lot of assumptions that are being made in the plaintiffs’ side of the papers. These are all legal questions that need to be teased out.”

Attorney Kevin Wu, representing the plaintiffs, said they have reason to think the city is not following rules about keeping records, such as activating body cameras or recording property confiscations, which will complicate their discovery process. 

“They do give us concerns that we don’t have enough at our disposal to monitor the city’s actions in real time, and prevent any irreparable harm that may be befalling plaintiffs,” he said.

“You have to first show me that there’s a problem,” Ryu told Wu. “You didn’t do the work I need from you to be able to render a decision.”

Ryu told the city that the record shows there is ambiguity around people’s rights, and misunderstandings that cops could prevent. 

“Is San Francisco open to coming up with clearer communication about people’s rights,” she asked, “so that homeless individuals who encounter police have a better understanding of what’s going on?”

After saying the city does not believe the plaintiffs gave evidence of non-compliance, Wang agreed that officials are open to improving communication with the public.  

Ryu said she is also concerned about declarations submitted as proof that city officials destroyed people’s property without cause.

“Some of them felt like pretty clear violations,” Ryu said, noting one description from an unsheltered woman who said a worker took her jewelry, put it in their pocket and told her that it belonged to the city. She noted the city hadn’t submitted evidence of having trained all workers who interact with unhoused people on what they may and may not do. 

Miguel Gradilla, an attorney for San Francisco, said most workers engaging with unhoused people discuss their property rights every day, but was not sure how many public works staffers may be trained on the rules for handling people’s property. 

Before ending Thursday’s hearing the judge also recommended better communication on both sides.

“My sense from the filings is that communication is not great,” Ryu said. “But that’s your choice on how you want to litigate the case.”

The case is slated for a bench trial starting in April 2024.

Read the Top 8

Sign up for the Top 8, a roundup of the day’s top stories delivered directly to your inbox Monday through Friday.

The post San Francisco homeless residents ask choose to make sure metropolis follows order limiting displacing folks appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

A federal judge on Wednesday denied a motion to move the trial of a man charged in last year’s attack against former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband out of San Francisco, saying she wasn’t convinced the court wouldn’t be able to find impartial and fair jurors in the San Francisco Bay Area.

David DePape’s defense attorneys argued that the intense publicity the case has received means he won’t get a fair trial in the city. They had asked Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to move the trial to Eureka, a city near the border with Oregon. The federal trial is set to start Nov. 13.

Federal public defender Angela Chuang said local media attention has tainted the pool of jurors. In its motion asking for the change of venue, the defense said a survey it commissioned shows many potential jurors already believe DePape is guilty of the crimes and would be unable to change their minds.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley pointed out that the case received national attention and that the defense survey also showed many people in Eureka are also familiar with the details of the case.

She also said it could be hard to find such a jury in Eureka because the population the court could pull from is 326,000, compared to 5.5 million in the Bay Area.

“I agree with you that to ensure Mr. DePape has an impartial jury, we are going to have to pull a lot of jurors and make sure we question them,” Scott Corley said.

“I actually think we will have a way harder time if this case is transferred … because the number of people we’re pulling from is a magnitude smaller,” she added.

Prosecutors say DePape broke into the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Oct. 28 seeking to kidnap the former speaker — who was out of town — and instead beat her 83-year-old husband, Paul, with a hammer. The violence sent shockwaves through the political world.

DePape, 43, pleaded not guilty to federal charges of attempting to kidnap a federal official and assaulting a federal official’s family member. He also pleaded not guilty to state charges, including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse. He remains jailed without bail. The state trial hasn’t been scheduled.

Chuang and federal public defender Jodi Linker also said in their motion they fear potential jurors in San Francisco could be biased against DePape because Nancy Pelosi, who has represented the city in Congress since 1987, remains a popular figure in the Bay Area.

Eureka is in rural Humboldt County and is politically more conservative.

They said Bay Area media outlets have extensively covered the case and played video footage of the assault on Paul Pelosi, the 911 call, and a police interview of DePape shortly after his arrest.

Footage of the attack was released to the public in January after a California judge denied prosecutors’ request to keep it secret.

The post Decide rejects shifting trial of man charged in Nancy Pelosi’s husband assault out of San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

SAN FRANCISCO – A federal judge on Wednesday denied a motion to move the trial of a man charged in last year’s attack against former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband out of San Francisco, saying she wasn’t convinced the court wouldn’t be able to find impartial and fair jurors in the San Francisco Bay Area.

David DePape’s defense attorneys argued that the intense publicity the case has received means he won’t get a fair trial in the city. They had asked Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to move the trial to Eureka, a city near the border with Oregon. The federal trial is set to start Nov. 13.

Federal public defender Angela Chuang said local media attention has tainted the pool of jurors. In its motion asking for the change of venue, the defense said a survey it commissioned shows many potential jurors already believe DePape is guilty of the crimes and would be unable to change their minds.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley pointed out that the case received national attention and that the defense survey also showed many people in Eureka are also familiar with the details of the case.

She also said it could be hard to find such a jury in Eureka because the population the court could pull from is 326,000, compared to 5.5 million in the Bay Area.

“I agree with you that to ensure Mr. DePape has an impartial jury, we are going to have to pull a lot of jurors and make sure we question them,” Scott Corley said.

“I actually think we will have a way harder time if this case is transferred … because the number of people we’re pulling from is a magnitude smaller,” she added.

Prosecutors say DePape broke into the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Oct. 28 seeking to kidnap the former speaker — who was out of town — and instead beat her 83-year-old husband, Paul, with a hammer. The violence sent shockwaves through the political world.

DePape, 43, pleaded not guilty to federal charges of attempting to kidnap a federal official and assaulting a federal official’s family member. He also pleaded not guilty to state charges, including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse. He remains jailed without bail. The state trial hasn’t been scheduled.

Chuang and federal public defender Jodi Linker also said in their motion they fear potential jurors in San Francisco could be biased against DePape because Nancy Pelosi, who has represented the city in Congress since 1987, remains a popular figure in the Bay Area.

Eureka is in rural Humboldt County and is politically more conservative.

They said Bay Area media outlets have extensively covered the case and played video footage of the assault on Paul Pelosi, the 911 call, and a police interview of DePape shortly after his arrest.

Footage of the attack was released to the public in January after a California judge denied prosecutors’ request to keep it secret.

Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

The post Choose rejects shifting trial of man charged in Nancy Pelosi’s husband assault out of San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Amy Larson and Haaziq Madyun

4 days ago

SAN FRANCISCO (CRON) — An attempted murder trial of David DePape will go ahead in San Francisco after a federal judge on Wednesday denied defense attorneys’ motions.

DePape was arrested Oct. 28 for allegedly assaulting the husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with a hammer at Pelosi’s Pacific Heights home. DePape confessed to San Francisco police investigators that he broke into the home in the middle of the night in an attempt to break Nancy Pelosi’s kneecaps.

But the Democratic politician wasn’t home that night, so DePape attacked Paul Pelosi instead, he told police. Two body cameras from the SFPD officers recorded the attacker striking Paul Pelosi in the head with the hammer.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of California and her husband Paul Pelosi attend the 45th Kennedy Center Honors on December 4, 2022 in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

The hammer attack made headlines across the country. On Wednesday, DePape’s defense attorney argued that the only way to ensure a fair trial and find an unconvicted jury was to move the trial out of the Bay Area. Defense attorneys requested that the upcoming trial be held in Eureka, where future jurors would likely know less about the case.

DePape’s Public Defender, Jodi Linker, alleged that media promotions in the San Francisco Bay Area, including KRON4, were inflammatory and pervasive.

David DePape (right) records Gypsy Taub’s nude wedding in front of City Hall on December 19, 2013 in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg)

Linker wrote in a request to change the venue, “Video footage of the incident was released to local media, as was an audio recording of a police interrogation that took place shortly after Mr. DePape’s arrest, during which he made incriminating statements.” Local media has also focused on Mr. DePape’s alleged bigoted political beliefs, further poisoning the Bay Area well. And polls show that a very high proportion of potential Bay Area jurors believe Mr. DePape is already guilty.”

“The extensive, biased and inflammatory media coverage in the Bay Area of ​​Mr. DePape’s alleged criminal conduct; the unique local prominence of Nancy Pelosi; the release and broadcast of a recording of Mr. DePape’s confession during police interrogation; and the relatively short time elapsed between this incident and the hearing warrant the change of jurisdiction from the San Francisco division of that court,” Linker wrote.

FBI agents and police investigate Nancy Pelosi’s large home in San Francisco on October 28, 2022 following the home invasion. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg)

According to Linker, Bay Area media outlets have portrayed the defendant as a “right-wing hate advocate” who holds racist, anti-Semitic, misogynist, Islamophobic and homophobic beliefs.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley disagreed and denied the motion to change jurisdiction. “I don’t think it’s even necessary,” Corley said.

SFPD Officer Kyle Cagney responded to Paul Pelosi’s 911 call. In this December 2002 court sketch, Cagney holds up a gavel used in the attack. (sketch by Vicki Behringer)

The judge noted that the hammer attack on Paul Pelosi drew national media attention and the case involved Nancy Pelosi, a national political figure. The judge also noted that the Bay Area jury pool had a population of 5.5 million, while Eureka had only 300,000 available residents.

DePape pleaded not guilty to federal and state charges including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse.

DePape told investigators he was on a “suicidal mission” to fight tyranny and corruption in Congress. SFPD Lieutenant Carla Hurley said when she questioned DePape, he revealed he had other political agendas.

During a taped confession with Hurley, DePape said he planned to kidnap Hunter Biden, who lives in Malibu, California, and target California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The post Pelosi hammer assault trial will keep in San Francisco, choose guidelines appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

A federal judge has denied a motion to move the trial of a man accused of assaulting the husband of former US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last year from San Francisco

From

OLGA R. RODRIGUEZ Associated Press

Jul 19, 2023 6:47 am ET

• 3 minutes read

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge on Wednesday denied a request to move the trial of a man accused last year of assaulting the husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi out of San Francisco, saying she was not satisfied the San Francisco Bay Area court could not find an impartial and fair jury.

Defense attorneys for David DePape argued that the intense publicity the case received meant it would not receive a fair trial in the city. They had asked Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to move the trial to Eureka, a town near the Oregon border. The federal trial is scheduled to begin on November 13.

Federal Defense Attorney Angela Chuang said the attention of the local media affected the jury circuit. In its motion to change jurisdiction, the defense said a poll it commissioned shows that many potential jurors are already convinced that DePape is guilty of the crimes and are unable to change their minds.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley noted that the case had drawn national attention and that the defense survey also showed that many people in Eureka were familiar with the details of the case.

She also said finding such a jury in Eureka might be difficult because the population the court could recruit from is 326,000, compared to the Bay Area’s 5.5 million.

“I agree that in order to ensure Mr. DePape has an impartial jury, we need to gather a lot of jurors and make sure we question them,” Scott Corley said.

“I actually think that if this case transfers, we’re going to have a much harder time…because the number of people we pull off is a lot smaller,” she added.

Prosecutors say DePape broke into the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Oct. 28 to kidnap the former speaker, who was out of town, and instead hit her 83-year-old husband Paul with a hammer. The violence shook the political world.

DePape, 43, pleaded not guilty to attempted kidnapping of a federal agent and assaulting a federal agent’s family member. He also pleaded not guilty to state charges including attempted murder, burglary and elder abuse. He remains in prison without bail. The state trial is not scheduled.

Chuang and federal defense attorney Jodi Linker also said in their filing that they worry potential San Francisco jurors may be biased toward DePape because Nancy Pelosi, who has represented the city in Congress since 1987, remains a popular Bay Area figure.

Located in rural Humboldt County, Eureka is more politically conservative.

They said Bay Area media reported extensively on the case, playing video footage of the attack on Paul Pelosi, calling 911 and a police interview with DePape shortly after his arrest.

Footage of the attack was released to the public in January after a California judge denied prosecutors’ request for secrecy.

The post Choose rejects transferring trial of man charged in Nancy Pelosi’s husband assault out of San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Giants were excited to begin a marquee series against Judge originally aired on NBC Sports Bayarea

NEW YORK — Executives at Major League Baseball’s Manhattan headquarters aren’t generally known for having a sense of humor, but the person who put the finishing touches on the 2023 schedule certainly decided to have some fun with the Giants and New York Yankees.

The organizations have long been known for being the two frontrunners for Aaron Judge’s services after he achieved the free hand. When the schedule was released last August, everyone knew Judge would be at Yankee Stadium on March 30th. The only question was what shelter it would be in there.

The Giants put on the best effort they’ve ever had for a free agent, only for Judge to decide not to come home and stay in a town that has become his home. The Giants expected that to be the case all along, and Judge himself made it clear afterwards that he never wanted to leave the Yankees.

Months after that decision, there will be no uncomfortable feelings, baseball operations president Farhan Zaidi said last week.

“I think it will be fun,” said Zaidi. “He’s the opponent now. We tried to sign him but he’s the opponent now. I think if anything it’s a little extra motivation for us and the guys in this team. I think we really have one good mood.” “We’re in our clubhouse right now and I think the guys are feeling really good with the group of players we have. I think athletes are always looking for an extra source of motivation and to make people feel like he is a player that we need and we can’t win without him I think that just gives extra motivation.

“Yankee Stadium is a great place to play, period. Being there on the opening day I think will be something special. And then dealing with a bunch of guys (we’ve been following) – a guy who was on our team last year in Carlos (Rodón), and unfortunately it doesn’t sound like he’s going to be able to pitch – but I think the fact that we were chasing some of the same guys (like the Yankees) will only provide additional motivation.”

The Giants won’t be short of that this season, but there’s an urgent need to latch onto the sources of motivation and get off to a fast start. The day before the Giants flew to New York for their opener, an email was sent out by the organization advising that tickets were still available for next Friday’s home opener.

There won’t be much excitement at Oracle Park early in the season, especially if the Giants don’t have a strong opening road trip. That would not have been the case had Judge agreed to return to Northern California.

The pursuit of the reigning American League MVP was first and foremost a baseball game. Judge told the Giants he wanted to play in midfield, and his arrival would have given the heart of the lineup its most imposing presence since Barry Bonds, while also leveling outfield defense.

But Judge would have sold tickets too. Many, many, many tickets. He would have been a game-changer at the team store, where the Giants were disappointed last season to find their former players overtaking current players in jersey sales.

The Giants made an offer of exactly the same magnitude as the nine-year, $360 million it ultimately took the Yankees to bring Judge back, and maybe one day they’ll look back — having seen where the markets of Shohei Ohtani and Juan Soto ends up – and I regret not having been more aggressive. For now, they’re happy with how they turned out.

Like Judge, Michael Conforto is a West Coast guy who’s become a New York staple. The Giants brought him in to fill out their outfield, and Conforto seemed like their best positional player for most of the spring.

Zaidi said he believes rotation will be the team’s forte, with Ross Stripling set to make his debut on Sunday after Logan Webb and Alex Cobb start the season. Sean Manaea will eventually fit behind him and Taylor Rogers seems poised to be a big help after a dominant spring. Mitch Haniger will start the season in the IL but could join Conforto at the heart of the lineup as early as next Thursday.

It’s not a group built on star power, but the front office added a lot of depth, a word that was mentioned a lot at camp. Manager Gabe Kapler said it was the best starting lineup he had in his four seasons at San Francisco, and Webb marveled at how many layers of defense there are on the pitching staff. He also offered a different take on how the Giants can be successful, even if people on the outside don’t generally see it.

“I think we’re going to be very scrappy,” Webb said at the end of camp. “I think that’s a good word for the group.”

RELATED: Webb keeps expectations high after big 2022

That’s not how anyone would have described the Giants if they had signed Judge, but what’s done is done and they’ll spend the next three games figuring out how to keep MVP low and a strong lineup.

Work started early for Kapler and his staff, who lined up three right-handed starters for a lineup led by Judge and Giancarlo Stanton, with rookie shortstop Anthony Volpe looking to join them when he makes his much-anticipated debut on Thursday. It’s a series that would always be in the spotlight, and Kapler hopes his players will embrace that.

During his own playing career, he took Mike Mussina deep at the old Yankee Stadium and scored against Andy Pettitte at the new one. He knows how special this weekend will be for an organization opening the season in New York for the first time since moving to San Francisco in 1958.

“I’m really looking forward to opening in New York and having this opportunity,” said Kapler. “And more importantly, to give the players in our roster the opportunity to experience that level of intensity on the first day of the season.”

Download and follow the Giants Talk Podcast

The post San Francisco Giants Further Motivated to Face Aaron Choose, Yankees on Opening Day – NBC Bay Space appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.