Once again, I will let others fill in the blanks. And considering how many firings, civil service hearings and federal lawsuits are in the works against the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, there are a LOT of blanks to fill in. Johnny Mac is going to be swearing under oath a lot in the near future.
This entry was posted in Government Corruption and tagged John McMahon by Administrator
Yep it sure looks like it when you read transcripts and final briefs by lawyers.
I just read a GREAT one from Michael Schwartz. A FREAKIN masterpiece, one of the best BEAT downs of the Sheriff’s Administration I have EVER read.
The only thing missing was the actaul hammer impacting the head of John McMahon.
Oh I think a lot more are coming down the pipe.
From Bob Fonzi all the way down the ladder.
Disparate treatment, dishonesty, double standards,incompetance, fabricated evidence etc BY SBSD witnesses and investigators.
And John McMahon allows that. John McMahon DOES not even check their work product. FAILURE to supervise McMahon.
The same shit as in the POST scandal.
EDDIE STARK you are a POS beyond comprehension. Line by line pal, line by line.
Hey Johnny Mac you heard of the domino effect?
When your minions talk about qualifications to be Sheriff, reading these briefs suggest you FAIL in most catagories that a cop should have.
You have 27 years on the job, educated Union University? Someone said that’s the multiple choice college degree test?
I’d say official transcripts are a hell of a LOT more accurate than Eddie Starks summary’s YOU fail REAL bad in the attention to detail.
Fail to supervise John, YOU and some others have no concept of supervising in the MOST critical of times.
THE prosecution and termination of your EMPLOYEES.
YOU relie on others to do your dirty work, HELL that aren’t even paying attention and neither are you.
McMahon its going to be ruff for you before election time.
Being in court ESPLANIN stupid is going to get OLD real quick.
Get rid of Paul Cook and it might ease your pain.
And he won’t be able to fall back on the old adage…..”BUT I DIDN’T KNOW”…..He’s been informed, numerous times, and by several different individuals. AND it’s on tape!
You got that right OAN, not only on tape, but in transcripts and by a couple of other sources who WILL get a subpoena if their MEMORY suddenly fails.
In reading the transcripts and briefs that I did, the evidence is CLEAR not only in the Orduno case but the Bauer case John McMahon is NOT COOL!!! Not EVEN close.
If John McMahon was COOL, then after Orduno was acquitted in his criminal trial, ALL John McMahon had to do is get the transcript of the trial and read for himself what actually transpired.
I’d love for John McMahon to say, “oh there is nothing here, we will continue on”.
He can’t say that because he NEVER bother to READ anything of value. It’s because he wanted to play STUPID, claim ignorance in EVERYTHING that was going on for the most part.
Hmm, “failure to supervise” A CLASSIC example.
The only conclusion that one could reach is, this case is toast, time to do the right thing and bring this guy back to work.
John McMahon and Bob Fonzi both IGNORED some very serious issues. When McMahon was questioned about those SPECIFIC issues, he DID not see that specific issue or that issue.
Funny how McMahon NEVER saw ANY of the glarring issues Michael Schwartz asked him about. McMahon RUBBER stamped Orduno’s termination and DID NOT even read MOST of the report.
Instead of doing the right thing both these HIGHLY qualified individuals ALLOWED even more aggregious conduct to take place and continue on with a TAINTED prosecution of an innocent deputy.
Charging him with lying in the manner they did, then what transpired AFTER the prosecution started to the conclusion of the Civil Service hearing is BEYOND understanding.
When SBSD mistakes became obvious, instead of backing off, SBSD just CHANGED testimony to suit there needs and continue on like NOTHING happened.
The word MALICE comes to mind in reading all this.
If I was a supervisor in SBSD and had to listen to McMahon or his minions talk about “failure to supervise” or “failure to act” I’d be laughing my butt off right then and there. RIGHT in their face.
I’d simply throw these documents on his desk and tell him to have a NICE day.
Orduno has an EXCELLENT civil case for wrongful termination. And I don’t think John McMahon is covered by governmental immunity either.
How stupid can you be to BELIEVE for one second that lies and changing testimony will make you a WINNER at the end of the day???
There is no question SBSD promotes the stupid ones first.
But there are others who SHARE responsibility in how ALL this has been allowed to go on for so long.
OAN if you know any employees within SBSD who are being represented by lawyers OUTSIDE of LDME, it would be a good thing if those lawyers hooked up with folks at LDME and compare notes on their cases.
I think it would be VERY beneficial to the employees and a potential gold mine in information.
WOW, WOW, WOW — someone sent it to me and I just read it. I was present when much of it was testified to under oath yet I am blown away by it. And this is our new sheriff. WOW, WOW, WOW.
@ACU……Thanks for the AWESOME advice! It has been forwarded accordingly and those meetings are pending….
So if Scum McMahon is charged with and convicted of a felony, he could loose his retirement too. Couldn’t happen to a better turd.
John McMahon
having been called as a witness by the respondant, having first been sworn by the hearing officer, testifies as follows:
Direct examination by the County:
Q: And did the board find that Orduno violated Department and County policies?
A: Yes, ma’am
Q: And can you tell us why?
A: Based on the evidence and ALL the documentaion contained in the investigation, the administrative investigation, that the Board of Chiefs believed that all three of those allegations were sustained, violations–potentially violations of criminal law, as well as department policy in regards to lying, untruthfulness, and failure to report.
Q: And are those SERIOUS department violations?
A: Yes ma’am.
Q: And is this conduct that would be expected of a deputy sheriff?
A: No ma’am
Q: Why?
A: The lying allegation is significant. Obviously with–certainly MORE importantantly with BRADY now and those types of things, officers credibility and honesty is CRITICALLY important when it comes to testifying.
And then the failure to report allegations we’re all MANDATED reporters, and based on the evidence contained in this investigation, the failure to report was a significant violation.
Q: And you weren’t the Skelly officer–the assistant sheriff that held the mitigation or Skelly meetings with Orduno, were you?
A: No ma’am.
Q. Do you know who that was?
A: Assistant Sheriff Fonzi, now Undersheriff Fonzi.
Johnny McMahon YOU set the tone pal. And we know that part of your testimony was BS by the double standards you have applied in MANY cases.
And as the evidence continues in this case YOU and FONZI the KEY decision makers DID NOT read the INITIAL IA report, nor did you FOLLOW-UP on the progress of the case.
YOUR testimony concludes ALL that.
You obviously DID NOT even BOTHER to follow up by reading the transcripts of THIS hearing and see that your investigators were giving contradictory testimony and would see how Eddie Stark was a LIAR as testified to BY his IA partner at the time Sergeant Browne.
You also would have seen that your FUTURE neighbor Leland Boldt had some SERIOUS competance issues.
HEY JC, is this 3rd or 4th hand info IDIOT? Feel free to tell us how YOU would make iepolitics AWESOME.
More to follow.
And who is ALSO responsible for this type of TESTIMONY/ PRACTICES to go UNCHECKED, SEBA!!!
Why didn’t we know about things like this for the last several years, SEBA.
Actually you did know, you just ignored it.
Because SEBA was part of the problem.
SEBA ie, William Abernathie, Mike Eagleson, Bill Hadden and crew KEPT it a SECRET and hid behind the confidentiality laws.
They used David Hart as their GO TO hearing officer to further hurt a members case, KNOWING full well that David Hart would in MOST cases rule in FAVOR of the County, then SEBA could hide behind the BS MOU and say, binding arbitration we must accept the hearing officers decision.
But EVEN if they challenged Hart SHS would GO RIGHT back to using him.
But remember Bill Hadden MIGHT use his “A” game.
NICE little SCAM right there.
It had NOTHING to do with the members privacy, it was about COVERING for the brass and NOTHING more.
SEBA had a nice UNWRITTEN “don’t ask, don’t tell” practice in place for years.
And SEBA seldom if EVER asked a member if they could use the BS in their individual case to HELP others.
With Mike Eagleson’s AWESOME resume from LaVerne University he failed to KEEP or USE the cases he was involved in to help others.
He further failed to ASK questions of those he KNEW were having difficulties with their lawyers.
And those who did COMPLAIN to him about issues, were given DOUBLE talk in hopes of KEEPING the member QUIET.
But now that the cat is OUT of the BAG, Michael Eagleson has SUDDENLY seen the light of his 14 plus years with SEBA that he MIGHT have been INEPT or CORRUPT by APPEARANCE alone.
Still waiting for a SUPPORTER of Eagleson to take the gloves off and step up.
His defense to all this, the messenger is crazy. His explanation when asked, WE tried to help. WOW that explains all this FACTUAL information away. LaVerne University taught you well Eagleson, cause your ACTUAL experience suggest you have been asleep too.
But we know you were ordered to be a CROOK and keeping your job while others suffer is part of an accepted practice among the COWARDS you surrounding yourself with. That would include the ones with self-serving motives.
If in doubt to any of that, have Eagleson show you his VICTORIES as a warrior for the members. It should ALL be written down, JUST ask him to show you.
He likes to HANG his degrees on the wall, have him show you his files too.
Unfortunately the current SEBA President and a couple of INEXPERIENCED Board Members STILL have not wrapped the arms around the obvious. EXCUSES still being handed down as a defense for STUPID.
Much like the Sheriff’s Administration even though you might have been a CROOK during your employement as long as you PLAY the game your covered.
Amazing how one can be NECK deep in corruption, lie cheat and steal, then suddenly become a SAINT when they get on board and ONLY because they can no longer EXPLAIN away the obvious, get a pass on their PRIOR misdeeds.
Those NAIVE and INEXPERIENCED board members can and will drink a glass of KOOL-AID if you serve it up the right way.
Let SEBA explain away what LDME has done in the last few months in COMPARISON to SHS 8 plus years with SEBA.
DO NOT forget SHS best criminal lawyer BAILED on SHS.
I think their going to come up REAL short on the paperwork at the end of their explanations.
A word to the wise for the CURRENT “E” board, START asking questions, start using the term, “show me” when Eagleson and crew OPEN their mouths.
Better yet, how about YOU Board members start asking the LAWYERS handling the cases if they FOUND any misdeeds on the part of Sheriff’s management.
DON’T wait for the member to come in and complain, take the INIATIVE to monitor things going on, don’t rely on Eagleson to tell you, then ARGUE with a member cause you think you have the answers. YOU will be the idiot at the end of the discussion. Many of you already have been.
If your going to SIGN off on Johnny McMahon should you not know for a FACT he is who you wish to support?
Supporting a corrupt candidate for Sheriff who is qualifed to run the department MEANS what to you folks?
Are you going to say we accept the corruption because their is a bigger picture to look at. DUCK if you tell me that.
If you have a BRAIN you will. Start being the detectives you boys say you are and IMPRESS those who are watching with your experience NOT your good word.
John McMahon did bother to READ much in the above case, he JUST assumed the summary’s from KNOWN liar Eddie Stark was ALL he needed to fire Orduno. BIG MISTAKE.
Simple solutions to MAJOR problems at this point.
I got CRAYONS to write this down if you still are having a problem CONNECTING the dots.
Now Laren, you and Mikey feel free at anytime to grow a set and tell some of us face to face IT AIN’T so.
Mikey can have his pals with guns stand next to him for protection and he still won’t win the argument.
NO 909 McMahon’s pension is in stone. He WOULD NOT lose it, nor would anyone else. Once he is 50 he gets to use it.
But Johnny Mac can pay any punative damages OUT OF POCKET in the right scenario and if the right motions are made.
That might hurt!!!
There was a new law that took effect 1/1/13 that could take the retirement of safety members if convicted of a felony.
FYI
Aaah BV2 got it, sorry 909.
Cross examination of John McMahon by Michael Schwartz.
Q: And if Lieutenant Leland Boldt had testified that he’d expect a perceipant witness’s statement to be in a report, you’d agree with that statement wouldn’t you?
A: It would sound reasonable.
Q: And are you aware that Sergeant Bobby Hughes received a letter of reprimand for his role in this case?
A: I don’t specifically remember that, but your bringing it up, that’s vaguely familiar.
Q: And are you aware that Sergeant Eddie Stark testified that he, in fact, NEVER interviewed Sergeant Bobby Hughes in this case?
A: I am not aware of that. (BUT YOU ARE NOW)
Q: Now, you noted a few moments ago that the allegations in this case would have what’s called Brady implications
A: Yes sir.
Q: And ONE Brady implication would be an allegation of dishonesty, right?
A: Yes sir.
Testimony from page 305 starting at line 20.
Q; And is it safe to say that if information came to a Sergeants attention that a dep– that a deputy may be trying to date or ask out an explorer, even if the explorer is an adult, that could be sexual harassment, couldn’t it?
A: Yes sir.
Q: Depending on the circumstances?
A: Yes sir.
Q: You would expect that sergeant to investigate that in some capacity?
A: Correct.
Q: And perhaps even report it to his supervisor; correct?
A: Yes sir.
Q: Are you aware that Sergeant Bessinger did not do that in this case?
A: I am not aware of that, no sir. (BUT YOU ARE NOW)
Testimony from page 306 line 27.
Q: And if it came to the administration’s attention that a sergeant who received that information did absolutely nothing to investigate that potential sexual harassment and possible charges, you’d expect there to be an investigation into that sergeant, wouldn’t you?
A: Yes sir.
Q: A failure to report; right?
A: Or failure to take action.
Q: Failure to supervise; correct?
A: Could be depending on the circumstances.
It’s obvious thus far that Mr.Schwartz who is a respected attorney as far as the brass is concerned is telling McMahon that potential misconduct has taken place in this very case by his investigators and witnesses.
If your a respected attorney as Schwartz is, then you are also credible because Schwartz has proven his veractiy MORE than once.
What is funny, Mr.Schwartz pointed out that the VERY witnesses and investigators in this case have done EXACTLY what his client is charged with. THAT SIMPLE..
There are PLENTY of other cases to show this PATTERN.
Further Captain Don Yoder sat through the entire hearing, Lt. Boldt is GOOD friends with McMahon and is also aware of potential misconduct committed in his presence.
Hmm ya THINK either of them talked with McMahon AFTER his testimony?
You can see how important the brass felt it to INVESTIGATE possible misconduct on an ANONYMOUS phone call, but how EVERYONE else is dragging their feet on misconduct being committed in their presence. PRICELESS!!!!
Now if Johnny McMahon wanted to be COOL and a stand up guy like some tell us HERE was the perfect opportunity to do JUST that.
The first order of business was pulling that STUPID reprimand from Sergeant Hughes file. Bessingers conduct out scored Hughes conduct 30 to 1.
Starting investigations on Stark, Sergeant Bessinger, Roxanne Bessinger would or should have been the next order of business.
Nope we will ignore ALL those FACTS brought out by a respected attorney and continue on even though OUR misconduct out scores Deputy Orduno’s.
A qualified guy running SBSD? Cool? REALLY????
And if you think there is just one case like this out there with Johnny Mac’s fingerprints on it? OKAY!!!
But you must understand that Billings,Bessinger,Boldt are good buds in the real world, just like Boldt and McMahon are real buds.
We all know that to be common knowledge, but it was also established in this case.
SO if your an employee who has been charged with incompetance or failure to ACT, dishonesty, just LOOK right here and you can SEE the REAL teachers of the PROBLEM.
The testimony clearly shows Leland Boldt and his crew drug their feet after being informed of a potential problem on this matter for about a week.
There is NO question ONCE Boldt found the explorer in question several avenues of investigation could have been taken IMMEDIATLY, at minimum calling the explorer in an interviewing her.
Funny once SBSD determined Orduno MIGHT know something, CAC detectives knocked on Orduno residence at 11:30 pm and woke him up out of a sound sleep to interview him.
NOW explain the importance of that move?
Their primary basis for charging him with LYING was when Orduno said at first “he didn’t want to get involved” in this matter. AH Orduno don’t want to get involved so he is lying, YEA that will work.
I have read nothing close to a lie on Orduno’s part, nothing close to what Stark and Roxanne Bessinger did UNER oath, not EVEN close.
And a jury didn’t think Orduno was lying either.
This case is without question just another KNEE JERK over reaction as a result of the other explorer issues that came forth before this one.
Just like in the POST scandal, hmmm, will hammer this guy and that guy to COVER ourself and make the public believe we are handling business.
With the assistance of the Sun newspaper we can write our OWN CYA story.
If a civil attorney is paying attention to all this, it is also clear that SBSD had NO check and balances in place prior to this explorer scandal taking place. Policy and procedure regarding explorers riding along.
Gee how many times has the lack of policy and procedures been the core issue in scandals? The Floyd Tidwell scandal comes to mind.
Also interesting is the number of Chiefs on the Executive Staff that worked Internal Affairs.
Cusimano,Mesa,Cochran, Williams recently.
The EXPERTS shall we say and with all those years under their belts, they STILL CANNOT get it right.
We all KNOW they don’t read the damn IA reports or listen to the tapes.
The wait for defense council to come in and bring out their incompetance, THEN the BOC changes the charges to suit their agenda, sometime they just ignore defense council.
Or they decide their not going to fire the employee after the mistakes are brought forth, hmmm will just give them 30 days off if they don’t fight the charges, if not, we will fire them.
What they never figured on EVER happening is their non-sense EVER coming out in a public forum.
Thanks to SEBA and SHS that goal was acheived until recently, and LOTS of folks butt hurt as a result of NO MORE business as usual and keeping it a SECRET.
ACU, sounds like that scum McMahon is a Brady cop. This is the shit we get from Josie and the BOS. Another Hoops, more crap and the good old boy system at its best.
SEBA Loren, get off your ass boy and do something. No hall pass for this one guys. We have the promotional system that is being ignored by SEBA. How about this guys?
McMahon needs to be recalled. Can you recall an appointed POS. Well id SEBA has some balls we can take this on and make this crap STOP!
And if you believe the answers to the below questions from Schwartz to McMahon, I have some swamp land in my back yard I’ll sell ya for real cheap.
Q: You’ve known Lt.Boldt for over 25 years; correct?
A: Yes sir.
Q: Any you consider him both a colleague and friend; is that right?
A: Yes sir.
Q: And on this case Lieutenant Boldt, acting captain, consulted with you about this case investigation from it’s inception, while it was going on; correct?
A: I BELIEVE SO.
Q: Up until it was given to Crimes Against Children?
A: Probably even after that. But yeah. I don’t remember exactly what our interaction was, but–but I am sure we had a conversations in regards to this investigation.
(Hmm I wonder if Orduno would have said “I don’t remember, what me and the explorer talked about regarding Benjamin”, if Johnny Mac and crew would have accepted that answer or charged Orduno with not being forthcoming/lying).
Q: And did you order Lieutanant Boldt not to have anybody else involved in the investigation besides and Sergeant Billings and/or Sergeant Bessinger?
A. I don’t recall ordering him to do anything in regards to this investigation.
Guess Lt.Boldt gets to accept full responsibility for any errors in this investigtion, because McMahon cannot RECALL what they even talked about.
That’s ok Johnny Mac, you have some more chances to use the term “I don’t recall”.
You must have talked to Rod Hoops about how to testifie before your testimony here.
Funny Hoops can’t remember his conversation with two people he has lunch with JUST once. ONLY remembers what Pete Ortiz told him.
You can’t remember having a conversation or giving direction to a LONG time friend such as Leland.
That would be the guy who bought a parcel of land from you in Idaho.
Of course Leland said under OATH that you all don’t share land, guess Schwartz should have asked Leland if he BOUGHT any land from you. SEMANTICS I guess.
Let’s not forget that Leland Boldt was the Homicide Sergeant who’s team was investigating the Ivory Webb shooting of the airman back in Jan 2006.
We all heard how Hoops and Stewart had decided Ivory was guilty of those crimes within the first few hours of the incident.
Their expertise in deciding ALL that was telling. I am sure Rod Hoops experience with the Kevin Cooper case where he could still smell the blood after 30 years gave him an excellent advantage on making such a decision.
Stewart with her 3 seconds of patrol and criminal investigations backed up Hoops theory too.
We all know Michael Schwartz handled that case on got a 12-0, NOT GUILTY right out of the gate. SBSD didn’t even come close to winning that one.
Poor Lewis Cope the DA’s MAIN MAN, didn’t have a chance. But he will bring down ALL those defendants in the Colonies case I am sure.
And we know that Internal Affairs played their games with Ivory too. Much like they did deputy Orduno,Boros and Bauer and a few others.
Guess Leland didn’t learn much from the Webb case knowing he would face off again with Schwartz. DUH!!!
What is interesting is SBSD did not bother to break the video of that shooting down FRAME by FRAME.
If they did, well they ignored some SERIOUS photographic evidence showing the airman reaching into his jacket with his right hand after Ivory told him to get up.
I really wonder now after hearing these issues with Leland and now reading them, if Leland FAILED to see those photos, or he found that evidence and was TOLD to ignore it since SBSD decided to go ahead and prosecute Ivory?
The hiding of EXCULPATORY evidence seems to be a REAL bad habit in SBSD.
Since Leland thinks Bob Hughes “failure to report” the anonymous phone call the next day was worthy of a written reprimand, and Sergeant Bessingers COMPLETE failure to report a more significant issue in this matter, Leland himself playing games for over a week AFTER being told by Hughes, WELL Leland is NO HERO in all this or the Webb case.
One really wonders HOW MANY other skeletons lurk out their with Leland Boldt’s name attached to it? The question begs to be asked at this point.
His sense of duty if CLEARLY selective at best.
Of course Leland did tell a few people out of the gate that he didn’t think Ivory would be found guilty LONG before the trial started in fact.
Makes you wonder NOW if Leland knew about those photos and just kept his mouth shut or AGAIN followed orders that I am sure NO ONE would remember NOW.
And you deputies who get butt hurt someone arrests another deputy driving drunk with his 3 kids in the car for DUI and PLEADS guilty to the charges, but your not upset by things like this is LAUGABLE!!!
OH WAIT I know why, cause your too scared to tell Leland he’s a punk cause you don’t want to get into trouble.
But you will play games with a fellow deputy and talk your smack, then whine when they come calling to confront you about your lies.
YEA SBSD is one of the SHARPEST marbles in the drawer in the modern age of Law Enforcement.
With the crappy union reps giving permission to Sheriff’s management to do certain things against a member which is WRONG in the first place, yep everyone is on top of their game the last few years.
Seems LDME if proving OTHERWISE!!!!
And those other smaller unions who wish to keep SHS on board, REALLY, are you REALLY paying attention or just impressed with your 2% pay raise?
And Boot says OLD NEWS has no bearing on the present day issues, REALLY???
Those of us who are NOT boots would beg to differ.
Not much change in the last 30 years, except in the last few months, and NO THANKS to the crooks who finally are being OUTED.
And we will keep reporting this 3rd and 4th party stuff because WE CAN!!!
Kenny,
Since you want everybody to not forget things, we should also not forget that you were an inept deputy who got fired for several reasons. You really need to get a life dude. Your posts just solidify that you are a few cans short of a six-pack.
You have some great info Ken. Wonder if they will fire John Mac now. Maybe send hime to jail over this stuff.
ACU, Just because I have not posted in several months, doesn’t mean I stopped paying attention.
I have NEVER EVER said “OLD NEWS has no bearing on the present day issues”. The complete opposite is true. I have record of nearly every post I have authored. You attempted to call me out about a year ago in similar fashion. Perhaps you confuse my typical optimism with someone who is trolling, but I am certain my words are skewed in your interpretation. I could cite many examples to prove my point but I will only choose a couple… I only care to clarify because there are people who may not have had the opportunity to read my opinions in the past.
-
On May 15th of 2012 at 1820 hours, I posted: “One person will not make us great… our members make us great. WE can direct the evolution (or revolution if needed) of our organization. Past practice and experiences can and should be used as a guide for future decisions. This is why I welcome any facts you want to raise.”
On May 16th of 2012 at 1956 hours, I replied to your misrepresentation of my words by saying: “I can tell you with 100% certainty there will be problems in the future… I have never claimed there are no problems.” … “I just say, let’s do something productive about it.”
-
I am not upset at you and am in no way attempting to start a war over semantics. I just want to be clear, I do not subscribe to the philosophies of those you typically target. I would hope by now you realize my screen name could be viewed as ironic, and not foretelling of inexperience. That being said, I do not have the attitude of ‘Been there, done that’… I am still learning every day. Thanks… I’ll go back into internet seclusion now… lol!
Good to see that your computer is still working Boot.