Peter Frick-Wright
I mostly try to limit the action in these updates to the proceedings themselves. I’m going to be turning this trial into a short graphic novel with artist Pyar Anderson, and writing a more complete and carefully told version of this story for BIKE Magazine. Not that I’ve been holding back important things learned outside the courtroom, (I totally have, and they’re juicy. I’m sorry.) but I needed to have some limits so I could offer something new in those stories.
But, on my way to the courthouse this morning, I witnessed something that gave me a better understanding of the charges—and now the verdicts that the jury reached this afternoon.
About halfway to the courthouse, I stopped to watch a fight developing at a bus stop across the street. I didn’t see what started it, but it was between a smallish guy in sweatpants and a guy in a long black trench coat. It was just a bunch of yelling at first; it seemed they were going to go their separate ways. But as they separated, some comment sparked more. They turned back at each other and kept shouting, and Trench Coat pulled a weapon.
Or, he tried to. Trench Coat had to check three pockets before he found the one with the knife, but once it was out I could see it glinting in the sun across four lanes of traffic.
He held it down by his side, arm straight, maybe eight inches from his body—exactly the same position that witnesses described Vandeman holding the screwdriver.
It was not an imminent threat to the other guy’s life, but it sent a message. Sweatpants could keep yelling, but he had to do it from 10 to 12 feet away. Trench Coat didn’t have to say anything.
I got to the courtroom around 11:00 a.m., and the bailiff told me that the jury had just finished a read-back of the handsaw incident testimony and was going to work straight through lunch. It is likely thanks to this lunch-hour effort that we know the verdicts today, since several delays once the jury was ready nearly took proceedings to the end of open-court.
After lunch however, it became clear that the jury was deadlocked on one of the counts. The handsaw.
A juror later told me that they’d come to unanimous decisions in all five of the other counts in about two hours and that the rest of the deliberations were devoted to discussing the question of intent in the most serious charge.
One of the elements of assault with a deadly weapon is whether or not the accused meant to cause bodily harm with their action. Accidents aren’t criminal. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and several members of the jury felt that the DA had not shown intent beyond a reasonable doubt.
Others on the jury felt the intent was clear, however, and several hours of deliberations only swung one vote. They were stuck.
They had reached decisions, however on five of the counts and when the jury filed back into the room, none looked at Vandeman.
The jury passed the big manila envelope to the bailiff, the bailiff handed it to the judge.
The judge opened it and reviewed the verdict for a long, silent moment, then handed it to the clerk to read.
Assault with a deadly weapon was the first charge, and they had no verdict, so Madame clerk started on count two.
For vandalizing Ian Richards’ bike tire: not guilty.
Since the punctured tire could not be found, this count was Richards’ word against Vandeman’s, leaving plenty of room for reasonable doubt. At this news, Vandeman moved forward and back in his seat very rapidly.
For exhibiting a deadly weapon: guilty.
In my opinion, the evidence and testimony was weakest on this charge. At one point Cook had argued for the charge to be thrown out since there was quite nearly no evidence that Richards had felt threatened. But in closing arguments, Cabanero made the point that showing a weapon during a conflict is a threat, intended to send a message, like Trench Coat, above. Apparently, the argument stuck.
For exhibiting a deadly weapon at Emanuel Alcala: guilty.
For battering Emanuel Alcala: not guilty.
The jury said that there was no evidence that Vandeman had touched Alcala, just his bike.
For battering Justin Bruss: guilty.
On count one, the handsaw, after asking the jury a series of questions, the judge declared a mistrial. The District Attorney’s office will have to choose whether they want to pursue that charge with another jury trial in May.
Then came the question of whether or not Vandeman would be taken into custody right away.
Cabanero requested a “remand” which means he go behind bars immediately, Cook argued that Vandeman had no criminal record, no history of failing to appear and that over the past year he had completely complied with the order to stay away from the trail.
“I must concede that cases are few and far between when a defendant is found guilty and remains out of custody,” the judge said. “Though I do think this is a unique case and Mr. Vandeman is a very unique defendant.”
He said his major concern was that Vandeman would use the interim to access the East-West fire trail. But he allowed Vandeman to stay free, since the jury had not been able to reach a verdict in the most serious charge and to the court’s knowledge he had not violated the “Stay Away” order, which there was some concern at the arraignment he would.
So, Vandeman is guilty of some of the things he’s accused of, innocent of others. The handsaw is still up in the air, but it will be for another jury to decide. If there was criminal intent, the jury confirmed, it was just a flash of malice, not a premeditated attack.
The deadly weapon charges come with a 30-day minimum sentence, so Vandeman will serve somewhere between a month and a year in jail, to be determined at his sentencing hearing.
My last glimpse of Vandeman was over my shoulder on my way out of the courtroom. He had come to court on short notice and wore brown Dickies and a t-shirt, like he’d been working out in the sun until he’d gotten the call to come in. He was still at the defendant’s table, stoic, staring straight ahead as the room emptied. I can only guess why he wasn’t more upset.
Justice is done. Whether MVD understands it remains to be seen.
I can only see one word in this post: Guilty.
Thank you Peter
Thank you for covering this trial. Based on what I have read, this seems to have been a fair process for Mr. Vandeman. He was lucky he didn’t run into someone like “Trench Coat” or this could have been much worse. I look forward to reading your article in Bike Magazine!
I wonder why the judge considers him so unique? What is it about him that gets him special treatment? Anybody? Anybody?
I take no great joy in seeing Vandeman headed to prison, but his actions last year were so egregious – as confirmed by the Jury – that no other outcome is appropriate. Thank you, Peter, for your very thorough reporting and equally entertaining writing.
I don’t mean to rain on your little parade, MTBers, but there’s something you should know before celebrating Mike V’s verdict.
A Quote for Scofflaw MTBers and their supporters -
(from a very timely blog, written somewhere in the USA, this past St. Paddy’s Day)
About two years ago, the federal Bureau of Land Management adopted a new regional travel plan and CLOSED the area to motor vehicles and even to **mountain bikes**. There are multiple signs which explain that access is limited to foot and horseback…
…Soon we saw their tracks, chewing up both the valley floor and nearby hillsides. Finally we saw them, ripping around on the ridges before descending near us, where the two teenaged boys halted and stared down at us. I was steaming mad….there are many places nearby for them to cavort legally.
There was a thought of “Maybe I should carry a rifle up here and teach them a little respect for the law.” Or “Could I train (the dog) to chase their —cycles, then lunge for their throats?”
I mean, if they can’t read the closure signs, do we really need them around?
They looked like punks we could take if it came to that, so I just shouted at them: “Don’t you guys know it’s illegal to (ride) up here?” They didn’t respond, just started their cycles and headed down. Soon they were out of sight…
-Ed Quillan (–NOT the Great Gazoo, either)
Great Gazoo could not have said it better. We are much too polite where I live. And very law-abiding to a fault.
It looks like Mike V. was the least of your worries, MTBers. There’s always a meaner junkyard dog waiting for you around the nextcorner…kinda like jumping out of the fry pan into the fire, isn’t it? Ride with care, kiddies. You just never know who you overly smug mountain bikers may just piss off, royally, next time! Thank you, very much.
That’s impressive, Gazoo. Do you always talk about yourself in the third person? You are a very special defendant.
Great Gazoo left out the article source:
http://www.hcn.org/blogs/range/confronting-scofflaws-1
Great Gazoo left out the article source – as it’s about MOTOR BIKES – not mountain bikes.
*FAIL*
The Great Gazoo defined: He/She/It may be more than one person/entity. He/She/It is a very special breed of “Alien”, indeed.
“Resistance is futile, You will be assimilated.” (Oops! Sorry! Wrong alien entity.That’s the Borg…heh heh)
Let’s try, again — “Toodle-loo, MTBer dumb-dumbs!”
Ah, that sounds about right!
Bye-bye!
Thanks for writing about the trial. Excellent coverage.
Sorry Gazoo you’re busted. Article was about motor bikes and misrepresenting things by taking them out of context doesn’t help your case – unless you work for Fox news.
Maybe they should not try again on the felony count. Enough already. Provided the sentence he receives is not the minimum, he’s spent a fortune on lawyers, and he’ll do sufficient jail time that he’s highly unlikely to ever do something like this again.
In the spirit of “let the punishment fit the crime,” perhaps rather than more jail time he should be required to do community service helping ROMP build and maintain mountain bike trails.
“Great Gonzo” suggests an interesting possibility, threat or not. This type of behavior is nothing new. I will offer, however, that the reaction to the publication of the defendants behavior is remarkably similar with numerous cyclists ridng armed.
The actual expression of such behavior is really rare. When it does happen the law takes it pretty seriously as has been demonstrated here.
As for GG’s creepiness; the menacing, the invective, the sense of stalking? Just another angry little man behind a keyboard.
“There’s always a meaner junkyard dog waiting for you around the nextcorner…kinda like jumping out of the fry pan into the fire, isn’t it? Ride with care, kiddies. You just never know who you overly smug mountain bikers may just piss off, royally, next time! Thank you, very much.” – Gazoo
I would say this is pretty true for anyone on the trail, or anywhere. It seemed these guys were, at the least, restrained in the confrontation with MV. You really never know who you will come across on the freeway, sidewalk, or trail and what their personality or current state of mind will hold in or let out. I hope you have a different demeanor while out on the trail and not behind the keyboard writing misdirections, exaggerations, and outright lies.
“He/She/It may be more than one person/entity” – Gazoo
Hopefully one the entities can leash/cage the others that may get themselves or someone else hurt. Please don’t take this as a personal threat or attack, which it isn’t. It’s just a reminder that your friendly warning can happen to anyone, whether they are right or wrong. The other side of the coin, so to speak, which you either don’t recognize or choose to ignore.
IIRC Mike already spent weeks (or months?) behind bars when first arrested, before the bail was reduced and then he could come up with the fee for the bondsman. Even with mandatory sentences, defendants usually get credit for time already served in custody before the trial. So it’s possible he won’t spend any *more* time behind bars, and this might have been part of the judge’s reasoning to let him stay out on bail pending sentencing.
lol, GG side loses, now he retorts with threats. I gotta ask, do us mountain bikers troll their message boards as hard as they troll ours?
re: Great Gazoo’s implied threat – it works both ways, tough guy. You never know what extra gear a MTB rider might be packing in that jersey pocket, so if your dog doesn’t come back after you sic him on a rider, don’t be surprised.
Thanks for the trial coverage. IMO, the trial provided an opportunity for all of those who have dealt with MV to see what a worm he was under cross-examination when confronted with his own words. His gutlessness at being fully honest about his writing and feelings about MTB’ers revealed him to be the fraud he really is. His primary concern on the stand was for saving his ass, not the environment. That alone was worth more than any convictions the jury could deliver.
Hopefully, Mike will appeal. These jerks came forward YEARS after the so-called incidents. What a bunch of sissies!
Peter, I’m sure the judge would be interested in getting a copy of the Great Gonzo’s veiled threat and his IP address for consideration during sentencing.
LOL at Terri and Gonzo’s resort to name-calling.
*Thumbs Up*
Terri is that a threat? You know that won’t help your real estate career if you go around threatening possible clients.
Terri Alvillar says:
March 22, 2011 at 3:13 pm
Hopefully, Mike will appeal. These jerks came forward YEARS after the so-called incidents. What a bunch of sissies!
Terri, this same behavior happens a lot in rape cases and other abuse cases. For whatever reason, the woman or person involved decide not to come forward until multiple people report the same thing. Are they sissies too?
All too common in the world. . .
The main point is that MVD was found guilty. Terri, you can’t go around calling him an innocent man anymore. Chew on that.
I think GoPro needs a GG/MV special for the next encounter(s).
Peter – Thanks again for all of the excellent reporting. I will buy the issue of Bike Magazine with your write up for sure.
Is there a list I can sign onto to be notified when the book is published?
Will there be a chapter “The Psychology of Trolls”?
Thug/Sissy, it’s all good!
When is the sentencing? The Alameda County web site only shows when the protective order expires on 05/28/2013.
I forget, how much time was he in jail before he was able to post bail?
It’s highly unlikely that he’ll appeal the misdemeanor convictions since the evidence was so compelling. He got a good jury, one that would not convict on the misdemeanor charges that lacked sufficient evidence, even though they probably believed he was guilty of those offenses as well, and a jury where there was at least one member who thought the felony charge was unwarranted.
The best he can hope for now is a) the district attorney decides to drop the felony charge, and b) the judge imposes the minimum sentence for each misdemeanor conviction. He could conceivably serve no more jail time. The judge should also require counseling and community service if he doesn’t impose more than the minimum sentence.
I think the reason he did not appear to be more upset is that he was actually relieved that there was no felony conviction. I’m sure that his lawyer warned him that he would likely be found guilty for some of the misdemeanor charges. He’ll probably do better with the penalties for the misdemeanor convictions than he would have done with the plea bargain that was offered, plus he’ll have no felony on his record. Now he’s probably desperately hoping for the dropping of the felony charges rather than a re-trial.
He’s probably out shopping for a mountain bike now.
@ Terri…
“These jerks”… you’re referring to the victims in this case, correct?
What an interesting mindset you have…
Looking forward to the graphic novel, Peter. Thanks for keeping us informed.
Jeez, I thought Gazoo and MV were friends, or at least allies. But here’s Gazoo completely trashing Mike’s long-posited contention that mountain bikers are the threatening and violent ones in the trail access discussion. Rifles? He thinks it might be justice to shoot a bullet through another person for a misdemeanor offense? To “teach them a lesson”? Really?
And by raging– erroneously, but nonetheless– about trail erosion and daredevil, extremely high risk sports, he’s totally slagging off equestrians. (Respect to you, Terri; I never really knew how dangerous horse riding was, but I started looking into it because of all this. Dang. I’ve crashed a bike a time or two, but horses are a seriously hazardous pastime.)
I guess you can’t pick your online friends, though.
I’m glad to learn Mike V has kind and friendly relations with his co-worker and neighbor, and can be reasonable in arguments with his wife. Lots of people seem to lose their social skills once they get behind a keyboard, so it’s nice to hear such a testimonial from a Real Life source occasionally.
Thanks to Peter for all his writing!
20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.
21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe,
but deny justice to the innocent.
Isaiah 5
All I have to say to MV is this:
When you get in prison, kick somebody’s ass the first day, or you’ll become somebody’s bitch.
@terri
Yeah, your little buddy there is not Rosa Parks or Nelson Mandela.
Appeal? Sure… burn up more of his cash on lawyers over a misdemeanor. Go for it! Heck, I might even chip in a buck or two for the entertainment value.
PFW,
Thank you for a great writeup. Please keep us informed when the Bike issue with your story will be published.
Terry-You need to find peace and harmony. Admire the world for the diversity that abounds in nature an in people. Living a life to make a difference is a good thing. Trying to make those changes by bashing and generalizing will earn you no honor amongst anyone.
Gonzo-The BLM document sited in the article you quoted from states in every case that mtb is a desired function, not one to get rid of. Still you make or imply a good point that the bad element is not within mtbers, but rather the sociopaths like MV.
To both of you I say, get a bike, any bike and ride. Find a group to ride with, develop relationships and enjoy life. Stay away from roadies though. They’re a different sort.
“Although they claimed to be wise, they (mountain bikers) became fools” Romans 1:22
Terri Sweet (aka Terri Allivar) has her own reasons for not wanting mountain bikes on trails. She bills herself as a “Horse Property Specialist,” and apparently she’s an equestrian as well. If there’s one thing that even hikers and mountain bikers agree on, it’s that horses cause _far_ more damage to trails than either hikers or cyclists.
I’d like to eventually see some sort of alternate use of trails where mountain bikers and hikers use certain trails on alternate days to avoid conflict, and where equestrians are not allowed at all because of the damage they do to trails.
Maybe Vandeman can turn over a new leaf and devote his time to getting horses off trails. They cause enormous amounts of erosion, pollute streams, scare wildlife, and make a huge mess.
Wikileaking, are you re-writing the Bible for us???
Those original guys could really use your help!!!!
Awesome.
“Although they claimed to be wise, they (Mike V, Terry A, Wikileaking) became fools” Romans 1:22
WOW, that sure showed YOU.
Mountain bikers and Peter:
“How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple?
How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing (of MV) and fools (mountain bikers) hate knowledge?”
Prov 1:22
Mike and Terri
“Leave the presence of a fool (mountain bikers), for there you do not meet words of knowledge.”
Prov 14:7
Figures. A religious nutbag is a trail nazi.
@Wikileaking and GG: At least Terri has the balls to post as herself.
BTW, we didn’t convict MV, a jury of his peers did. Your comments are misdirected.
…actually, I guess re-writing the Bible to make it support your opinions is a time honored method. One of the most popular uses of religious texts through history, in fact.
“Although they claimed to be wise, they (the people who disagree with me) became fools” Romans 1:22
This quote is great, since it essentially calls the other guy a dummy, and claims that God said so.
As a bonus, it frees you from the mental effort of thinking of a sensible argument that actually applies to the discussion at hand.
Sadly, also one of the more popular uses of religious texts through history. =/
Richard, actually Terri is not posting as herself. Her name is now Terri Sweet. Not sure if that’s her married name, maiden name, or pseudonym.
I would post a link to her at her web site, but I don’t want to do anything to help promote her business. The world would be such a better place if people like Terri and Mike could be encouraged to use their energies for the betterment of the environment and their fellow man.
@Tom: I’ve only interacted with her as Terri Avillar. Those postings are certainly her writing style. Thanks for the heads up.
@Richard, well said about Mike V being convicted by a jury of his peers, not by us.
I didn’t see all of the jury selection, but Mike’s lawyer was (wisely, IMO) excusing every cyclist, former cyclist, and relative of a cyclist from the panel. She wasn’t even leaving people who said they just commuted to work.
She looked to be doing a pretty smart job with her questions, and she got him cleared of a couple of charges and created enough doubt to require a retrial on one.
That the jury found him guilty on some counts and not guilty on others indicates to me that they were not biased in any particular direction. They just found some witnesses more credible than others.
Thanks for writing this up. I was one of the first 12 seated and was actually disappointed to be dismissed because it sounded like an interesting trial. I couldn’t figure out why the prosecution dismissed me – the bike helmet and the fact that I’m a hiker would have made me think the defense would have been the ones.
Sentencing will be 11 April 2011 at 9:00 AM, Dept. 109, Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse.
I was on the jury. I arrived at Peter’s site out of curiosity of the things that transpired in the court after we were dismissed (thank you to the previous note about the sentencing schedule). I can tell you that at the end of deliberations, there was little sympathy for Vandeman; most of us were openly discussing what an odd person he was. As for the charges, most were quite easy to decide. The court gives you a list of requirements that need to be met before someone can be found guilt of a charge (these were all misdemeanors, by the way). The hang up with the assault charge was one of those requirements: willful intent to lower the saw into James Lanham’s path. We deadlocked in favor of convicting after being unable to sway a minority of jurors that his action was no accident. It sure didn’t help that the detective investigating the incident lost Vandeman’s statement. I suspect it would have been easier to convict on that charge had Tyler, Lanham’s roommate who was present for the incident, had been available to testify. As for those who support Vandeman’s actions, I have to say that I am disappointed. You must live an insulated existence to believe that resorting to vigilantism is ever appropriate behavior.
Thanks for writing, Juror No. 5. Very interesting to hear how things went from the inside.
“…an odd person…” probably in need of psychiatric care. This should be considered at sentencing. He needs help, not jail. If it is a personality disorder, no amount of help will change him, however, so appropriate permanent restraining orders may be called for. He will never understand this; he will think that the whole world is against him. Sad.
i hope the judge sentences Vandeman to 3 months riding mt. bikes on trails.
Thanks to juror #5. I hope that your perspective has some positive influence on Vandeman’s supporters as to how the general public actually views his actions, and how utterly out-of-touch with reality that their world view is. Vandeman, unfortunately, isn’t capable of making this kind of observation and changing his perspective. Sad.
Mike West, pro mountain biker, was cited for using an illegal Boulder trail in a designated habitat conservation area closed to mountain bikes!
West is due to be arraigned in Boulder Municipal Court at 8:30 a.m. April 12. He faces possible fines of up to $2,000 for the two tickets.
Perhaps Mr. Frick-Wright might want to follow up with this arraignment of his peer, instead? Maybe Peter may begin to understand why people like Mike V. get retty damn fed up with scofflaw mountain bikers on closed, illegal trails, etc.!
“According to the municipal ticket, West said he rides on the (illegal) trail ‘two or three times a week’ because it provides him a ‘good practice run.’”
It’s amazing how utterly out-of-touch with reality the MTBers’ world view is. They think that the rules; the law doesn’t apply to them. Unfortunately, MTBers aren’t capable of making this kind of observation and changing their perspective. Sad.
Note that West admitted his guilt to the officer, and likely won’t contest his illegal actions, and will pay his fine. Compare that to the actions of Vandeman, who wouldn’t admit to his intent or violent actions – something the jury clearly saw through. Like I said, Vandeman’s supporters are completely out-of-touch with reality. Sad.
It was getting boring in here until GG showed. It’s too bad he can’t man up like Terri and post as himself.
GG, you’ve never broken the law, driven faster than the posted speed limit, never passed a cyclist over the double-yellow line, etc. All motorists do this (including myself).
“Get off the roads!” say the motorists to the cyclist.
“Get off the trails!” say the hikers to the cyclist.
“F**k You!” say the cyclists. What else do you expect?
At least West was on a bike, not tempted, like all hikers (including myself) to step off the trail with hiking boots, the ultimate ATVs. Only bicycles should be allowed on trails in conservation areas. The cyclist sticks to trails as opposed to bush-crashing hikers (like myself).
Gazoo, you just wrote: “It’s amazing how utterly out-of-touch with reality the MTBers’ world view is. They think that the rules; the law doesn’t apply to them.”
… but at the top of this comment page, you quoted a blogger:
‘There was a thought of “Maybe I should carry a rifle up here and teach them a little respect for the law.” Or “Could I train (the dog) to chase their —cycles, then lunge for their throats?” ‘
and concluded your post with:
“Great Gazoo could not have said it better. We are much too polite where I live. And very law-abiding to a fault.
“It looks like Mike V. was the least of your worries, MTBers. There’s always a meaner junkyard dog waiting for you around the nextcorner…kinda like jumping out of the fry pan into the fire, isn’t it? Ride with care, kiddies. You just never know who you overly smug mountain bikers may just piss off, royally, next time!.”
After Mike’s trail, after all of his contentions over the years that bikers are the violent ones, after reading the non-mountain-biking Juror No.5′s account of the discussion about him in the jury room, how is it that you still think it’s an intelligent move to point out that bikers are the scofflaws?
What you wrote is still posted right on this page for everybody to look at. Did you think nobody noticed that you are directly advocating and even actually threatening violence? Did you mean it, or did you forget that you wrote it?
re: Gazoo – trying to reason with him on this topic is a lost cause. People like Gazoo, Terri, and MV are like any other type of zealot, it’s not about facts, it’s about faith. One would hope that Juror #5, a person who was interviewed and approved by MV’s own defense lawyer, might make the Gazoo’s of the world give pause to their blind support for Vandeman, but blind adherence to a twisted ideal is a hard nut to crack. I’m always on the lookout for nuts like Gazoo and Mike when I go MTB’ing on legal trails, and I’m not afraid of them or their threats. Nobody here should be, either.
I’d worry more about encountering Ed Quillan than I would about the Great Gazoo, buddy. Great Gazoo is just out to just annoy MTBers, and evidently you’ve taken the bait. Meanwhile, check out Great Gazoo’s new tweet called “A Tale of Bikes & Balls”. Your own mountain bikes can be your worst enemy. Oh, the humanity!
…and again, back with the gleeful recounting of bodily injury. Not so much annoying, really, but it does show a certain pathological, almost sensually obsessive enjoyment. We can see from your long list of tweets that you really do like to “dish it out”, you Hairy Scoutmaster you.
But hey, who doesn’t love the idea of people getting hurt? Maybe hurt bad? mmm…
re: Gazoo – when schooled, resorts to “huh, me? I’m just a gadfly.” Just as gutless as MV on the stand. Pathetic.
Oh, boo hoo hoo! I’m crying crocodile tears, here. I thought this kind of thing would excite mountain bikers, as they always like to discuss their injuries on forums with great bravado! (pictures included!) The nastier the better. I thought it was a some kind of one-up-man-ship game going on between injured bikers, called “Suck It Up!” Oh well, might as well go back into my dark little man-cave and watch “Wipe Out USA” instead. (sigh…) Good grief, and good night!
Wow (Great Gazoo) trolling on a comments section of a blog about Mike V’s trial. Great Gazoo’s writing is so familiar to me, but i can’t quite place it…
The truth of the matter that is that Mike V in the last few years was good for mt. biking as land managers and conservationists alike were really starting to recognize him as a zealot.
The irrational Mike Vandeman the bizarre phenomenon, his story summarized in irrelevance, in the end left with a legacy of being known only to those he despises, his cell mates, and probation officer.
Yet another “hiker” driving a car, one like GG and MV drives: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e40_1302074912 … I figure if people like MV and GG like to gleefully report mountain bike injuries, maybe it would be fun to post the antics of idiots in cars. Now do you see why mountain bikers stay off the roads? It’s unsafe! At least a mountain biker doesn’t burst into flames when he crashes. LOL!
A side note: Great Gazoo sometimes refer’s to him/her self in the first person, sometimes in the second. Do “we” have a little bit of a personality disorder like the convicted criminal in this case? Are “we” feeling superior in every way? Maybe GG could go to group therapy with MV.
“Anonymous”: is that really the best retort you can come up with? No wonder you wish to remain anonymous, “Anonymous”
Yes, Anonymous Gazoo. It’s pretty obvious why you want to remain anonymous, as well. LOL!
Perhaps If mountan bikers give up mountain biking, there would be no more clear cutting in the forest, no more slash and burn, no more land taken up for freeway car “structures” and so on. I read your tweets every time I want a laugh!
Have fun in therapy with your cellmate.
“I’m glad that you helped stop a freeway project. That makes it all the stranger that you support mountain biking.” – Mike Vandeman
This is the same kind of thinking used by Great Gazoo. Desire to mountain bike = disdain for nature. In other words, ALL mountain bikers are in favor of the destruction of nature, so if one is “cured” of the desire to ride a mountain bike, one immediately desires to preserve natural habitat.
Mike Vandeman is a mathematician first, a “psychologist” second. His Ph.D. is in the reductionistic field of psychometrics. Human behaviors and traits can be reduced to predictable and measurable quantities. We are just machines. Mountain biking = nature destroying. Perfectly logical.
The only problem is that M. V.’s biggest peeve, on his website, is motor vehicles. He says we should boycott them. Boycott cars, car ompanies (even electric cars) and petroleum products. It’s at the top of his list, but at the trial it is revealed that he owns a car and drives it sometimes. Liar! Hypocrite!
I imagine that Great Gazoo has views of humanity similar to the defendant in this case, along with similar world views and psychological issues. May GG and MV seek the help they need.
Liars! Hypocrites! LOL!
Someone should tell juror #5 that being “odd” is not a crime.
Someone should tell Terri Alvillar that we didn’t convict him of being odd — just battery and use of a deadly weapon (those are crimes). But his personality and character came in to play when he elected to take the stand in his own defense, thus becoming evidence in the case (and open to the jury’s consideration.)
Juror No. 5 (?) Who ever you are, and if you indeed were a “juror” on this trial, your judgment on the whole matter has come into question simply because you have chosen to unwisely contribute your thoughts on this very biased mountain biker blog before the trial is over. If you are just a poseur then your arguments don’t hold any water.
@GG: The trial is over. Only sentencing awaits.
BTW, Terri will always have more balls than you.
I did not receive this information directly, but this is my understanding of the sentence given to MV today, which I picked up from O&S on MTBR:
30 days, to be served on the sheriff’s work detail (picking up trash). No actual prison to be served, if the Sheriff takes him. The program costs some money, too. He also gets credit for having been in custody for 7 days. Judge said picking up trash was a good plan for a passionate environmentalist like MV.
Has to stay off the UC trails for 3 years.
DA asked for 270 days.
Judge said that since MV didn’t have a record and no one was really hurt, lighter sentence was appropriate.
Apparently, MV sent a letter to the judge, which the judge returned, unopened to his defense counsel this morning. Defendants aren’t supposed to send letters about sentencing to the judge without their counsel’s approval, but MV did anyway.
I’d give up a slightly significant body part to read the contents of that letter, “4 teh lulz.”
Three years, no local trails. That means (gasp) he’s going to have to drive his polluting, nature destroying car (over a “structure” like a bridge or a freeway) to a different area so he can hike and preach to cyclists about how they are ruining nature.
Great Gazoo, the judge asked me point blank if I would discuss this case in any way (with friends, on Internet, etc.) during the trial. I said no. He then asked if I would have any problem talking about the case “on Facebook or anywhere else” after the trial was over. I said “Absolutely not.” He said “Good.” I kept to that instruction.
The trial ended on March 21 when the jury rendered its verdicts (try to pay attention if it’s your intention to sound intelligent and informed). I even spoke with both attorneys about the trial after they sought my opinion in the hallway outside the courtroom after the jury delivered its verdicts and was dismissed.
Regardless of how you think the legal system should work, I didn’t sacrifice my First Amendment right to freedom of expression when I was picked for a jury. And I am sorry if the facts of the trial are inconvenient or conflict with your view of the world.
I was in in attendance today when Mike got probation after a wrong decision by a jury convicting him of two minor offenses. I have never heard a judge praising a defendant before, bragging about Mike’s masters degree in math from Harvard! After all this, the worst thing the judge could say about Mike is that he was obnoxious on the trail! The judge himself said that nobody was hurt. It seemed to us that the judge could see how ridiculous it was that Mike was charged in the first place. Please don’t quit your work, Mike. You have benefited too many people and places! I wonder how much IMBA paid the assistant DA to prosecute?
A deadly weapon? The judge demonstrated that the so-called deadly weapon was about two inches long and that when the mountain biker asked him “is that a weapon?”, Mike put it back in his pocket. Juror #5 clearly has an ax to grind! Bad juror.
GG, maybe “Juror #5″ is a poseuse?
And Older and Slower and his buddy left the courtroom with their heads hung low.
Key quote: ” …and no one was really hurt…” Wow!
“Hissy fit” MTBers wasted a lot of people’s time and money over a grudge held against a nemesis of theirs. Wow! Stupid is as stupid does. An apt motto for mountain bikers.
BTW, the asst. DA asked for a dismissal on the most serious charge – the one where the mountain bikers, speeding on an illegal trail, ran into Mike and his two friends then claimed Mike attacked him! Judge granted the dismissal.
“…or conflict with your view of the world.”
Juror No. 5 sounds suspiciously like a MTBer or a MTB supporter. Wow!
“Juror No. 5 sounds suspiciously like a MTBer or a MTB supporter.”
nope. just never been a fan of trolls.
Juror 5, you ARE a troll!
Who’s having a “hissy fit” in this thread? Sounds like Terri and Gazoo.
Mike will pay enough. Thousands in legal fees, no local trails for three years and, the least of it, having to clean up garbage for a month under the supervision of the Sheriff’s department. Sounds fair to me.
He’ll be 70 before he can walk another local trail. That’s pretty significant.
Wow, Terri… Five separate posts in less than 10 minutes? It’s worth reading these posts just to see how wound up you are now. Maybe you should breathe into a paper bag for a bit.
Tell us, though, how many Harvard graduate students end up being sentenced to a mandatory work detail? Did the judge mention that too?
And also:
“I wonder how much IMBA paid the assistant DA to prosecute?”
Are you accusing IMBA of bribing a state employee? You going to back that up, or just babble incoherently again about something unrelated?
What’s up with the attacks on juror #5? I was a part of the jury as well (juror #6 if that isn’t obvious), and in my opinion, MV made a huge mistake in testifying on his own behalf. To me, he came off as unreliable and contradicted a lot of the testimony given by the other defense witnesses.
It was clear that MV was the aggressor in these encounters and he escalated the situations time and time again. Yes, the bikers were on illegal trails and that’s wrong, but that doesn’t excuse the conduct of MV and I feel that we sent that message pretty clearly.
And as to the screwdriver being a deadly weapon, it absolutely could be and thankfully it wasn’t used as such by MV. Brandishing the weapon (which MV did) is a crime and we convicted accordingly. Hopefully MV will learn that he can’t threaten others or physically stop others just because he has beef with them riding on the trail. Actually, I think the time away from the trails will do him good.
I hope that the MV trolls will give it up and do something positive with their lives as well, but I won’t hold my breath.
Jurors 5 and 6 are mountain bikers!
There’s a difference between being an aggressor and standing your ground. Some people refuse to jump off the trail every time a speeding mountain biker comes along. In every case, the mountain bikers were violating the space of Mike Vandeman, not the opposite.
Terri, why don’t you fund his appeal? You could sell some equestrian properties and make sure justice is done. Might be difficult, though, when everyone is out to get the real victim in this case, Mike Vandeman. His phone is probably tapped, too. Watch for black helicopters!
You’re not going to acquit him in this silly mountain biker blog. Why do you bother? Go preach to the choir.
(PS: Nobody believes you)
Something tells me Terri is posting for teh lulz. I can’t see how you can believe that MV purposely putting himself in front of the bikers constitutes a violation of “the space of Mike Vandeman.” MV is not entitled to the entire space of the trail, but thanks for the laugh!
Clearly a tainted jury.
Mountain bikers were entitled to NO space on those trails!
Terri, the mountain bikers are a takin’ over. Time to saddle up and ride into the sunset.
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” ~Max Planck, A Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers, 1949
Typical mountain biker, Anonymous, spewing threats and wishing death to their opponents.
Somebody sure has their granny panties in a twist.
Terri, I got news for you. You’re going to die someday, so am I and so is Mike Vandeman. Please explain how quoting a famous scientist is a “threat.” Life is fatal. Guaranteed.
You are revealing paranoia and delusion. It is quite telling. More, please. I haven’t had this much entertainment in a long time.
“Anonymous”, You know very well what your threat was – how about stating your real name? Are you another “juror?”
Terri Avillar or Terri Sweet, whichever you are going by today, I have to agree with Anonymous, this isn’t a threat. Unfortunately, we are all going to pass one day. The quote from Max Planck is not focused on death or threats of death, but merely that new generations will grow up with a different perspective on issues that faced their previous generation(s). You are so pent up with anger that it is clouding your ability to think clearly about what you are reading.
On a side note, do you ask your prospective real estate clients that you meet or send you an email from your website, http://www.sweetsonoma.com, if they are mountain bikers? If they are, do you decline to work with them based on your views towards mountain bikers?
If the new generation will be a society of lawbreaking thugs who frame innocent people who are merely minding their own business in a lawful way, it will be a sad day for a good quality of life.
Frame? He admitted all of this in court. He was convicted based largely on his own testimony. Thankfully, most of the people on this forum are aware of you inability to separate fact from fantasy.
Tainted jury.
It appears juror 5 hid his true motives from the court, if he/she was really a juror. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Wow, Terry.
Tainted jury, eh? Why not bring that evidence to the judge for a retrial.
Muuuaa haa haa haaaaa.
(me wrings hands as MV burns up massive amounts of cash)
You realize the jury was selected by both lawyers, right?
Terri, you ought to be an anonymous writer, as you have more reason than I do. Sticking up for Mike is no good reason to stick your neck out. Also, he lists “horses and burros” as one of his “peeves” in the same sentence as “mountain bikes.” I find it strange that you support him. He and I agree on one thing: horses should not be allowed in designated Wilderness Areas. Be thankful for the mountain bike, Terri. It pushed the horse off the top of the Wilderness “enemies list.” If you’ve ever come to the end of a long day’s hike and the only flat areas to camp are covered in horse manure, you’d understand. This has happened to me many times. I have been backpacking for 40+ years.
PS: I was not one of the jurors. I do not even live in the area, although I used to a long time ago.
I love how she sold lumber before she decided to sale urban sprawl properties. Too funny. This woman is a total joke.
Arne Ryason?
Terri is quite the sore loser. Again, MV was convicted by a jury of his peers. The sentence is fair and appropriate. Of course, since Terri a complete moron (and mean too) she’s doing her usual song and dance: inventing threats, libeling IMBA, and equating riding noncompliantly with the actual crime committed by Mike V (i.e. threatening and brandishing a weapon).
Again, Mike V. lost. He spent tons of dough on his lawyer and will be 70 by the time he can return on Side O. The best part is that now we all know what he looks like and will be able to let the campus police kow if we see him again on the trail. Can’t wait to ride in Berkeley.
Very good, Terri, but not me. I do read Ryason’s stuff, though, have been following him for years. I copy my writing style from him. He’s quite a character.
“the new generation will be a society of lawbreaking thugs who frame innocent people”
Sounds like Terry spends a lot of her time watching Matlock and telling kids to get off her lawn…
Carla Stroh?
Sounds like charlie brown arguing with some senile old man with all the “good griefs” and “scofflaws” and “hissy fit mt bikers” in this forum. Mike V lost. He got punished. Finally. Legally.
Punished for what? According to the judge for being “obnoxious” on the trail. Obnoxious is innocuous when you compare what citizens have suffered by mountain bikers over the years.
Supposedly, Juror 5, acknowledging his awareness about trail conflict between mountain bikers and other trails users, was so impassioned about his impartiality about trail conflict that the lawyers brought him into judges chambers prior to the trial and Juror 5 evidently convinced the judge that he didn’t have a bias against mountain bikers. Yet now after the verdicts, Juror 5 has been outspoken in favor of mountain bikers on a mountain biker blog. This guy is tainted and any convictions ought to be thrown out!
Terri, your buddy lost. Get over it. Actually, why don’t you get off the computer, get on a mountain bike and get some exercise?
Terri won’t get over it. She is obsessed over who really “won,” obsessed with who one of the anonymous writers is, etc. She is trying to appeal the case right here. What is she trying to prove? It won’t change the court’s opinion. It’s kind of like the defendant writing a letter to the judge after the jury had reached its verdict. There has to be some angle, some mistake somewhere. She won’t rest. May I suggest she urges Mike to file an appeal. Perhaps she can help fund it. Arguing here is pointless. The defendant was convicted and, barring an appeal, will carry out his sentence. He is fortunate there is no felony conviction and that he will spend no more time in custody. He will be helping to clean up the environment, which is probably something he would do anyway.
When I think of how much the defendant spent on attorney’s fees, there was (and still is) a much more constructive way to spend that money. It would have been simple to commission a sign, to be placed at the top of the trail: “Warning – Bicycles Prohibited. $1,000 fine. Warning – This trail has several hidden cameras. If you ride a bicycle on this trail you will be photographed, identified, tried and fined.” The defendant and his friends could have gotten together and offered to do this at no cost to UC Berkeley or any other land owner. A couple of signs, printed to UC’s specs, would cost maybe a couple hundred dollars. Automatic “trap” cameras (with steel enclosures), typically used to photograph animals on trails, would cost around a couple hundred each, more or less. http://www.cabelas.com/trail-cameras-1.shtml . The defendant and his friends could have taken turns speding some leisurely hours sitting on a strategic point above the trail, enjoying nature, with a hand on the cable release of a camera with a telephoto lens, mounted on a tripod, ready to capture scofflaw mountain bikers. Now, with the judgement against him, he will be unable to do this.
The defendant is tech savy. He is aware of equipment available to do the above. If he’s so smart, why didn’t he do this? Why did he give in to illogic? Illegally brandishing a screwdriver in response to an illegal act by a bicyclist does not solve the problem. It actually makes it worse. Now the mountain bike community will use the defendant in this case as the “poster child” of those opposed to mountain biking: “See? Anyone opposed to mountain biking is just a violent, irrational nut.” Just as he stereotypes mountain bikers with his writings, he will now be the butt of a new stereotype. The defendant’s actions might end up having the opposite effect of what he may have intended. He has sabotaged many years of his own work. What a shame.
Mike Vandeman was punished for his viewpoint, nothing more. Even the judge said at sentencing that there was no “brandishing” and the screwdriver was too insignificant to be considered a “weapon.” Mountain bikers should not take any pride in the convictions – anyway, they will be expunged when probation is complete.
I agree with Terry, jurors #5 and #6 are cleary tainted ducks!
Thank you to all the jurors for their service.
I also agree that MJVPHD was punished for his viewpoint, the viewpoint that he is free to do anything he likes without repercussion, such as putting himself and others in danger but darting into their path, intentional placing his saw so that it will hit others, etc. Clearly this is all thoughtcrime punishment.
No mountain biker was ever in danger and no mountain biker was hurt. Mountain bikers think they can ride wherever, whenever they want without repercussions. They believe they are entitled to speed through groups of walkers and then blame the walkers for their own illegal activity. It is typical of mountain bikers!
Reality check:
“No mountain biker was ever in danger…”
* except for the two individuals who were threatened with a deadly weapon or the other who was the victim of battery. These are incidents Vandeman admitted to in court, which you would know had you attended the trial.
“… and no mountain biker was hurt.”
* except for James Lanham, who was struck by Vandeman’s saw, which Vandeman admitted to in court when he said he apologized to Lanham on the trail for hitting him with the saw. Vandeman’s own witness, his auto mechanic’s wife, testified to the same.
By the way, here are the court’s instructions to the jury for the charges Vandeman was convicted of:
Brandishing:
http://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/800/983.html
Simple battery:
http://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/800/960.html
“No mountain biker was ever in danger and no mountain biker was hurt.”
That may be the case, but they were battered, as decided in a court of law, none the less.
Terri, apparently your limited brain has forgotten that a person was injured by a saw, which is what the authorities pursued. Mike decided to take the law into his own hands instead of going to the authorities, which is why he was convicted. Regardless, he will be a trash man in an orange jumpsuit for 22 days and unable to go back on the UC trails for 36 months. No matter what you say here or anywhere, nothing will change that sentence. Unless MV appeals the sentence, which will drain more of his retirement fund.
Playing with Terry and Gonzo is like pulling the wings off of flies. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Their responses and contributions are totally beside the facts. It is a curiosity that such a thought process hold such sway these days. It is how the Tea party folk survive; spreading misinformation, being obtuse, character assassination.
Further they refused to understand that reasonable people can come to a conclusion that Mike created a dangerous situation. You don’t have to be a mountain biker to see that. The curiosity is that Mike may never understand that he created the situation.
Yes, Mike is an odd bird; that doesn’t mean that people can’t have affection for him. That doesn’t mean he can’t become educated and hold down a job and be married. And that also doesn’t mean that it can’t fit with bizarre behavior and some curious thought processes.
Over the years we have all had the opportunity to read Mike’s published thoughts, to see the weakness in his method, and learn to simply avoid him like a fart in the room. At some point the best method is to simply dismiss them out of hand. It is the same with Terri and the Gonzo. There is just no way to engage vituperative railing in any meaningful fashion. Further the constant interface with other people puts them in a position to say some pretty ridiculous things. I think they lose track and spout nonsense. You have all seen that very clearly.
Yet that is not the thought process at issue here. What does concern us is Mike’s thought process. Sure we have seen it in a written and predigested form but it wasn’t until this series of appearances in court that you got to see how this process evolves. He seems very hard-pressed to integrate some fairly simple ideas having to do with how people behave with regard to each other and how to manage himself in a legal structure.
The judge made a point of the appreciation of Mike’s education. Somehow His Honor took that value as signal but I see it very differently, with all due respect to His Honor’s disposition. This is the kite that Mike flies to validate all of his pronouncements. It has been stated many times that his PhD is in Psychometrics. That is the one aspect of human psychology that works with mathematics. This is not the guy that you want to sit and have him guide you through therapy. That is a very different character; a character who appreciates, understands, and embraces human foible, it’s limitation, and does it with grace and fellow-feeling.
No, his thought process doesn’t work that way. And as I said before it was revealed as the case matriculated. Several times, early in the process, Mike tried to handle judges and steer things. That overreaching sense of the ability to control and direct forces and processes only brought a sterner hand from a variety of judges. It didn’t matter what his education was. And in the end even the jury realized that he was in that kind, gentle, old fellow who was just misunderstood trying to make a better world. They saw him as an odd bird.
In fairness to all we might all look a little bizarre under the examination of a public audience. Yet few of us would extend ourselves so far as to think we could manipulate a court with a greater internal truth. Few of us here would go so far as to attempt to subvert the legal process by direct contact with the judge hearing the case. Are you kidding?
The process saw the participation of at least three judges and two juries. The conclusions are now a matter of record and consequences have been metted out. There are people who are unhappy with this; that the punishment is not enough or is too great or that the process was flawed. Yet what has been demonstrated, in real time through a device designed to extract the best information possible to establish some sense of truth, is a character which clearly holds himself outside the norms most of us manage. And a character like this cannot exist in isolation; it must be supported and enriched by others in kind.
KentM, you are mistaken. Mike was not convicted of the incident where the mountain bikers came speeding into Mike and his friends and ran into the pruning tools they were using. That charge was dismissed!
Shosan, thanks for your comment (below). That proves the only reason Mike was charged was because of what he WRITES, not because of anything he actually did. The judge said nobody was hurt. The jury evidently thought Mike hates mountain bikers when all he does is write about factual things mountain bikers do. And it is quite clear there was at least one closet mountain biking advocate on the jury.
shosan says:
April 14, 2011 at 11:46 pm Sounds like charlie brown arguing with some senile old man with all the “good griefs” and “scofflaws” and “hissy fit mt bikers” in this forum. Mike V lost. He got punished. Finally. Legally.
Berkeley Mike Mejia, you are also mistaken. Mike did not create a dangerous situation at all – in each case, mountain bikers created the situation because they were riding in places that were off-limits to them. And that is the flaw with your thinking – you are blaming the law-abiding person for what the mountain bikers themselves created. Like a burglar who breaks into a home where he doesn’t belong, bumps into the homeowner and blames the homeowner for touching him!
And by the way, the “battery” according to the judge, was nothing more than “a touch.”