SAN FRANCISCO – 01-28-2019 (PRDistribution.com) — The City of San Francisco’s case against black proprietor Anne Kihagi has been frustrating to hear unravel, as we want to believe that what goes on in a courtroom is fair – but that’s not always the case. Many articles have exposed the bias of Judge Angela Bradstreet, who only found witnesses credible when it benefited the City, otherwise ignoring their accounts if they supported the black landlord’s position.
Tenant Allison Leshesfky, their key witness, and other witness were frequently disproved by the defense’s evidence, but Judge Bradstreet didn’t care; she continued heavily penalizing the landlord.In one instance, Ms. Leshesfky testified that the owners had security cameras in the hallways of the property, complaining that one camera was pointed at her door and could see inside her unit, violating her privacy. A picture was presented showing that the building had security cameras in the hallways, but her hallway’s camera was on the same wall as her door – thereby discrediting her privacy argument. How can a camera almost three feet above the door on the same wall look into the unit? The photo was clear and convincing to everyone, and while most would hope that a judge would be honest and consider key evidence, especially after denying the owner the right to testify and defend herself, Judge Bradstreet found a way to penalize the landlord $3,000. Another picture, of the stairs at another of Ms. Kihagi’s properties. One of the tenants testified that the landlord asked him not to sit on the stairs as he and his cousin were doing. He said the mere request to not sit on the stairs equated to harassment. The day the owner made this request, construction work was underway, so there were many contractors with equipment coming in and out constantly; the request was clearly made for safety.This is the same picture that Judge Bradstreet saw. There are only 2 stairs, on an entrance with a front door that’s 36” wide and stairs only 48” wide. There would never be enough room for anyone to walk with two tenants sitting in the middle of the stairs, especially not construction crews with equipment. And if anyone was to trip, who would be sued?The judge was also presented evidence of leases with language preventing tenants from loitering or lounging on the front stairs of their buildings. This is, of course, for the benefit and safety of all residents and guests. Even still, Judge Bradstreet issued another $2,000 in penalties.A final example, Ms. Kihagi asked tenants in a different building not to sit on the stairs during an open house. These tenants were not offended by the request – but the judge still added another $2,000 in penalties.Another tenant testified that they were asked not to store fire hazards next to the water heater, as this is a fire risk and was also reiterated by building inspectors on several occasions. Judge Bradstreet didn’t care and penalized Ms. Kihagi another $4,000, despite language in the house rules stating “that no personal items should be left in the common areas or stairwells at any time.”Again and again, Judge Bradstreet ignored concrete evidence and created over 100 penalties. Yet when the same tenants’ text messages were presented, showing that they were planning to cause actual physical harm to Ms. Kihagi, the judge dismissed it, deciding that they never had bad intentions. The judge penalized for such issues and more a whopping $2.5 million, plus exorbitant attorney’s fees, without any repercussions from the Court of Appeal, who operates under the assumption that judges are being fair.Yet here is proof that mistreatment is occurring in our own justice system. Here are pictures that show the truth.
For more information on Anna Kihagi & West 18th Properties, @annekihagi1http://annekihagisf.com/
For the original news story, please visit https://prdistribution.com/news/pictures-dont-lie-sf-judge-ignored-evidence-penalizing-black-owner-anne-kihagi-millions.html.
Powered by WPeMatico