San Mateo County’s DA'S Pattern of Betraying Victims of Violence

San Mateo County’s justice system has once again shown its true colors, prioritizing convenience and institutional reputation over the rights of victims of violence. Carrie Banks, a survivor of sexual assault, is the latest casualty of San Mateo County DA betraying victims – a system that routinely marginalizes, silences, and invalidates those it is sworn to protect. Her federal lawsuit against the county, its District Attorney’s Office, and its Probation Department reveals a damning pattern of behavior—one that underscores a culture of neglect, victim-blaming, and utter disregard for justice.

The facts of Banks’ case are as horrifying as they are emblematic of a broken system. In July 2021, Banks was raped in her own home while unconscious after being followed there by Fernando Altuna Mendoza. Despite the overwhelming gravity of the crime and evidence—including an apology note from Altuna Mendoza himself—District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s office reduced the case to a single false imprisonment charge. The plea deal, which Banks learned about only after it was offered, ensured no jail time, no sex offender registration, and no justice for the violent crime she endured.

This is not an isolated incident but a glaring example of a systemic rot within San Mateo County—a county where victims of violence are too often treated as obstacles to be managed rather than as human beings deserving of dignity and justice.

Deliberate Disregard for Victims’ Rights

Carrie Banks’ lawsuit claims that the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office violated her rights under California’s Victim’s Bill of Rights, including her right to be informed, consulted, and heard. Instead, Banks says the plea deal blindsided her, informed only hours before it was finalized, and denied any meaningful opportunity to oppose it.

This is not just negligence but a calculated betrayal of a victim’s trust. Banks’ experience highlights a profoundly entrenched culture within the DA’s Office—one that routinely minimizes the voices of survivors while shielding perpetrators from accountability.

Even more disturbing are the statements made by Deputy District Attorney Sharron Lee, who allegedly suggested that video footage of Banks kissing her rapist at a bar could be interpreted as an invitation to sex. Such comments are not just outdated—they are reprehensible, reinforcing dangerous myths about consent and retraumatizing survivors. Banks described Lee’s behavior as “harsh” and said it made her feel like “only a witness in this case until he’s convicted, and at that point I’m an actual victim.”

According to an article in The Daily Journal by Holly Rusch, Wagstaffe defended his office’s actions by stating, “If I were to go into detail with the problems in the case, I would be personally attacking her.” This statement is a profound act of institutional betrayal and a textbook example of DARVO—Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. Instead of addressing the immense harm inflicted on Carrie Banks, Wagstaffe chose to deflect. Why would addressing the so-called “problems” constitute a personal attack? Is it because Banks dares to demand accountability in a system that habitually fails victims? Is it because her pursuit of justice threatens to expose the rot and entrenched malpractice patterns within the DA’s Office? How dare she challenge a system that thrives on silencing survivors and absolving itself of responsibility? How dare she stand up to the corruption that allows violent offenders to walk free?

Wagstaffe’s statement is not just dismissive—it reeks of the arrogance and entitlement that define San Mateo County’s justice system. In the eyes of those fighting for justice, Wagstaffe’s actions make him complicit—not just a bystander but an offender in his own right. By using DARVO tactics, he seeks to deny accountability, attack the credibility of a victim, and reverse the roles to portray himself and his office as victims of her courage. This is not just an institutional failure; it is an act of betrayal so profound that it undermines the very foundation of justice. By framing transparency as an “attack,” Wagstaffe exposes his office’s priorities: preserving power, avoiding scrutiny, and silencing anyone who dares to demand better.

His words and actions send a chilling message to survivors everywhere: not only will this system fail you, but it will also turn against you if you dare to speak out. In this betrayal, Wagstaffe does not just represent the system—he is the system, and in the eyes of those seeking accountability, he is an offender in every sense of the word.

The San Mateo County DA’s Office: Betraying and Re-Traumatizing Victims to Protect Itself

Wagstaffe claims, “No prosecutor’s office in this state does a better job of prosecuting these cases.” Yet the facts tell a starkly different story. Time and again, the San Mateo County DA’s Office has demonstrated a troubling pattern of prioritizing its own convenience over justice for victims. We are aware of numerous cases where both the Sheriff’s Department and the DA’s Office have blatantly disregarded credible claims brought forward by victims, perpetuating a culture of neglect and systemic failure.

The plea deal offered to Fernando Altuna Mendoza, which stripped the crime of its violent nature, is nothing short of a slap in the face to all survivors of any and all forms of assault. Banks’ attorney, Aaron Zisser, aptly highlights that the issue isn’t just the plea deal itself but the DA’s systemic failure to include Banks in the decision-making process. This wasn’t a procedural error—it was a deliberate choice to exclude the very person whose life was forever changed by this crime.

Even Altuna Mendoza’s own apology note, which explicitly acknowledges his wrongdoing, was insufficient to compel the DA’s Office to take the case to trial. Instead, Wagstaffe and his team chose the path of least resistance, sending a clear and chilling message to victims: Your pain, your voice, and your pursuit of justice simply don’t matter here.

How the Press Enables Institutional Abuse

The San Mateo Daily Journal’s coverage of this lawsuit serves as a chilling reminder of the media's role in perpetuating injustice. Instead of critically examining the DA’s Office and its repeated failings, the Daily Journal gives Wagstaffe and his deputies ample space to justify their actions while downplaying Banks’ trauma. The framing of the article leans heavily toward defending institutional decisions, with quotes like Wagstaffe’s claim that “the evidence in the case, including a couple [of] new witnesses that were found, convinced us that there was a very serious chance that [the case] would not result in a conviction.”

This style of reporting reeks of controlled opposition—a façade of accountability that ultimately protects those in power. By failing to scrutinize the DA’s Office and presenting victim-blaming comments without challenge, the Daily Journal has aligned itself with the institutions that failed Carrie Banks and many of the victims who remain silenced in San Mateo County. 

NBC BAY AREA also covered the Bank's story, which you can review HERE.

The Fight for Justice in a County That Abandons Survivors

Carrie Banks’ story is not unique; it is a symptom of a justice system that consistently fails the most vulnerable. From the DA’s Office to the Probation Department, San Mateo County has demonstrated a pattern of behavior that cannot be ignored. Banks’ courage in bringing this lawsuit shines a light on the systemic failings that too often remain hidden behind closed doors.

Despite the immense toll on her mental health, career, and family life, Banks refuses to be silenced. “As bad as it was, I got far in the process,” she said, acknowledging that many women never even see their attackers charged. Sadly, we can attest to that reality. However, it should not take relentless resilience and self-advocacy for victims to be heard, valued, and protected.

The people of San Mateo County deserve better than a justice system that routinely prioritizes convenience over accountability. They deserve leaders who stand with victims, not hide behind empty rhetoric. And they deserve a media that will hold those leaders to account, not act as their mouthpiece.

The question is whether the county will finally confront its failures or continue sacrificing survivors like Carrie Banks on the altar of institutional preservation. The time for reckoning is now.

Disclaimer: The content on this blog is for informational and advocacy purposes only. It reflects the opinions and interpretations of the author and is based on publicly available information, personal observations, and independent research. While every effort ensures accuracy, the blog does not provide legal, medical, or professional advice. The views expressed here are not intended to defame or harm any individual, institution, or entity, and all information is shared in the spirit of transparency and public interest. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research.