|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Livermore Mayor John Marchand wrote a letter to the community on Friday loudly criticizing a county judge’s decision to allow a Livermore man charged in two cold-case rapes to be released from jail for health reasons amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Thomas Reardon granted the request from Gregory Paul Vien’s defense counsel over the objection of the District Attorney’s Office. The 61-year-old was then released from the Santa Rita Jail in Dublin on the evening of April 24.
Vien faces felony charges stemming from sexual assault incidents in Livermore and Union City in 1997 — with a key break in the cases arriving last year when detectives reportedly matched DNA found on a discarded ice cream spoon. The defendant has pleaded not guilty.
Marchand, who strongly disagreed with Vien’s release, issued a letter through the city on Friday sharing his concerns. Here is the letter in its entirety:
Mayor Marchand Addresses the Community About Early Release of Cold Case Suspect
— May 1, 2020
Livermore Community,
After years of hard work and dedication, members of the Livermore Police Department were successful in arresting a man who the evidence shows is a violent sexual predator, Greg Vien, and put him behind bars. As a Mayor, as the son of a policeman, I remember how proud I was when I read about the dogged efforts to bring Vien to justice, even surreptitiously lifting DNA off a Baskin-Robbins spoon. Vien’s crimes were so heinous and he represented such a threat to the community that the judge put his bail at $2.5M. All accounts have shown Vien to be unrepentant and unremorseful for his vicious attacks on women.
This week, Judge Thomas Reardon, citing his concerns for the health and well-being of Vien, reduced his bail to $0 and released him on his own recognizance with only a promise that he would return for trial and stay at his home in Livermore. As the Mayor of Livermore, I have to ask Judge Reardon, “What about the safety and well-being of my community?”
Yes, Judge Reardon required Vien to wear an ankle bracelet, but the bracelet only tracks his movements, it allows us to know where he has been. It does nothing to prevent new crimes from being committed. Let me repeat, a man suspected of being a violent sexual predator has been released into my community with no guarantee that he will return for trial. District Attorney Nancy O’Malley vehemently opposed his release. What does this say to our officers on the front lines defending our community, removing predators from our streets when a judge like Reardon allows him to walk away free. Reardon apparently is more concerned about the safety of a suspected rapist than the safety of our community. His priorities are poorly aligned.
Vien is now living in one of our neighborhoods. Judge Reardon has shown that we can no longer rely upon judges to keep us safe. While I am confident that our local law enforcement will do their job, I will continue to advocate that a higher priority be placed on the community’s safety both in this case and in any similar case in the future.
Sincerely,
Mayor John Marchand
City of Livermore
Guest Opinion: Yes on Prop 38, to give my son and others a fighting chanceSeptember 28, 2026 1:59 pm
Parents-in-law accused of killing Dublin man, New York Times staffer at sports parkSeptember 27, 2026 5:51 pm
Remember judges are attorneys and remember how out of touch attorneys seem to be with the real world. It appears this judge was just reelected and is in office until 2025.
Who is going to start the recall effort?
State Sets Bail to Zero for Misdemeanors and Some Felonies.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye was nominated by Schwarzenegger, in 2010.
I don’t understand how this particular case could fit the intent of the above.
I agree with John the Livermore Mayor. 100% The safety of the people here in Livermore. Why take a risk in letting that man go. We don’t want him to hurt any one again. Please hear our request Thank you Judge. 5/4/2020
I don’t understand how this man was even considered a release candidate. He was a violent sex offender! His bail was adjusted to zero, even the Ghost Ship master tenant who isn’t a violent criminal had his bail still set at $150k. That rapist should never I been released! Kudos to the Livermore Mayor but what was that judge thinking?!
Be careful your honor, remember the case where a young fellow From Stanford U. got a slap on the wrist for his crime against a young woman? I believe that the Judge in that case was removed from the bench. You must surely be a total lefty to make such whacky decision.
To put an entire community at risk to protect one scumbag from the risk of getting infected, Really your honor? Don’t they have Cells in jails to isolate prisoners for their own protection.? Certainly makes me wonder if anybody got greased.
If Judge Thomas Reardon thought it was a good decision to let Vien out, who else is being let out that we don’t know about?
I guess the judge should have simply followed public sentiment, or whatever a majority of commentators on this site think.
I thought the constitution gave people the right to bail? I thought we had a bill of rights that provided that people were presumed innocent?
I thought that the constitution guaranteed that unless someone is accused of a death penalty eligible crime, they were supposed to be able to defend themselves out of custody?
If this accused defendant was our brother , father or relative , we would be screaming about the constitution. Because he is not, we are complaining about a judge who followed the constitution.
Mayor Marchand, I have never seen such a disgraceful, sententious appeal to passion and emotion as this “dear Livermore” letter you have posted.
As a politician, your job is to represent the voters on matters of municipal policy in a city. As a judge, Thomas Reardon is principally responsible for protecting the constitutional rights of people arrested, but not convicted, of a crime.
What may be most concerning is that you claim that “all accounts have shown Vien to be unrepentant and unremorseful for his vicious attacks on women” You proudly thunder on that you are, no less than “the son of a policeman”. Did your daddy ever teach you about the right to be presumed innocent? Did poppa the cop ever have you read the constitution? Did he ever tell you that we don’t say someone engaged in “ vicious attacks on women” unless and until they are convicted in a court? Did pappy ever tell you that even police officers sometimes lie and occasionally frame the innocent? Did poppacop ever tell you that the California constitution guarantees the right to a reasonable bail of every defendant not charged with murder?
Yet you show a terrible lack of leadership and sheer cowardice by playing to the public and attacking a judge who had the strength and character to follow the law and uphold the constitution, irrespective of weak, cowardly politicians like yourself.
If the defendant was a relative of yours, you would be demanding the very same due process and fairness that you want to deny the accused in this case. For that, you should be ashamed.
Marchand is a too ready attack dog. He instinctively attacks opinions and views opposite to his. Is this good leadership? No. Woerner, his probable successor is even worse as he is patently condescending and egotistical.
So the so-called enlightened ones on this string find it pleasing and complementary to keep the victims of Vien in constant fear for their well-being with his release on “ZERO $000000 BAIL”?
Nonsense on the naysayers arguing to sustain Vien’s release and hammering the mayor.
The Green River Killer up in Seattle was almost released by judicial activists because of Covid19. Yes he was already convicted but a last minute appeal by the state AG kept him in prison. How do you think the community felt about that potentially reckless release? Vien was accused with strong DNA evidence or the Prosecutor wouldn’t have put up a forceful battle in front of the judge. Bail amounts sometimes need to be high to ensure the defendant if dangerous is kept out of the community until trial. The Judge that set the original bail evidently felt the need to set it at $2.5M. THAT’S CALLED “PROTECTING THE COMMUNITY”. Everyone pretty well understands this process. It’s bad enough that knuckleheads are breaking into our cars and private property everyday, caught and arrested and let out on “0” bond almost immediately. But now we do it with accused violent rapists? That’s not protecting the community. That’s judicial and criminal anarchy. Isolate the accused if Covid19 is the issue.
My feeling is dont let any bulgary, assault ( especially rapists) and pedophiles out early due to COVID-19 Set up xonvicted criminals in tents on the grounds lije a military encampment If its good enough for our heros, it is 0K for prisoners instead of releasing them back into the community with little penalty lets facevit, at least in jail, they get housing, food and medical Thats more than homeless and working povery level people who are law abiding Tis Country is so screwed up on this.
Joe Biden is out!
The democrats motto is “he may be a rapist but he’s our rapist!”
Chris Miller/Larry Daniels
If you’re an attorney your understanding of constitutional law is lacking.
I thought the constitution gave people the right to bail? Yes
The eighth amendment reads: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” No absolute right to bail exists.
This is why we have bail hearings.
We must balance that right with a victim’s right to have their day in court, to be heard and to be protected. Bail is the balance between not allowing release and allowing release on a person’s own recognizance. Bail ensures that people show up at court.
The bail is this case was not excessive or punitive. The Judge is interpreting the bail reform guidelines in CA incorrectly and has made a mistake in my opinion.
The mayor is well with the law to alert the public and some would say his duty.
I thought we had a bill of rights that provided that people were presumed innocent?
I thought that the constitution guaranteed that unless someone is accused of a death penalty eligible crime, they were supposed to be able to defend themselves out of custody?
If this accused defendant was our brother , father or relative , we would be screaming about the constitution. Because he is not, we are complaining about a judge who followed the constitution.
SC, confusing post. The last paragraph is contradictory to the rest (and is actually what Chris Miller posted). Can you please clarify?