Water District Hires Reported Buyer of Anonymous Links Blog

Almost a month has passed since the anonymous political links blog The Daily Fetch went silent. Known for propping up candidates of organized labor, photoshopping electeds into compromising positions and comparing local journalists to communist propagandists, The Fetch became a beacon of snark and vitriol in last year’s San Jose mayoral race. But the site mysteriously stopped batching links on April 8, the day after a special election for San Jose’s northside council seat. Some wags were left to wonder if the site, which was reportedly purchased in late 2012 by labor operative Kerry Hillis, had simply given up the fight. Others suggested that Hillis’ efforts to land a job at the Santa Clara Valley Water District might have interrupted the site’s increasingly inconsistent schedule of posts. The Golden Spigot hired Hillis on April 27 for a $91,000/yr. gig as a “management analyst II,” which is basically an in-house lobbyist position. He previously worked on Dave Cortese’s failed mayoral campaign after communication stints in the office of county supe Cindy Chavez and the San Jose police union. But just when it appeared time to turn the page on The Fetch, the site’s social media channels boldly declared that operations will resume Friday. It also warned readers, “Be afraid. Be very afraid.” Could it be a coincidence that this infamous line was taken from the movie The Fly? Maybe not, as this Fly had been making inquiries about Hillis’ new job over the last week. Or it could be that Hillis simply didn’t have enough time to run the site during his job hunt. What is certain is that the timing of the announced relaunch coincides with the final weeks of the runoff for the north San Jose council seat. A close race is expected between Manh Nguyen and Tim Orozco—the latter a labor-favored candidate—and a month’s worth of opposition research, published in links, wouldn’t be far-fetched.

Send a tip to The Fly

The Fly is the valley’s longest running political column, written by Metro Silicon Valley staff, to provide a behind-the-scenes look at local politics. Fly accepts anonymous tips.


  1. Maybe if the MN and SJI were bastions of journalistic objectivity and integrity, there wouldn’t have been the need for something like The Daoly Fetch. Since both the MN and SJI seems to exist primarily to serve the public relations needs of those in power within the San Jose City Government, it’s comical and more than a little hypocritical to see you trying to look down your nose at The Daily Fetch.

    • The Daily Fetch comes nowhere close to journalism — it’s an attack blog. Personally, I don’t know how they have the gall to call themselves “progressive” when they called the SJPD rape victim a liar last year (that was before court testimony vindicated her story). Standing with rapists, so long as they’re unionized — that’s some progressive journalism for you. If only the Mercury News and San Jose Inside had the courage to stand up for rapists.

      • Intersring…attacking with links to supposedly “legitimate” News stories easilly found on say the Merc or SJI?

        Maybe you just don’t like the how TDF un-spins the spin?

  2. Beau goldie has pissed off the labor unions at the water district so bad that the chickens have come home to San Jose to roost. in desperation goldie is kissing cindy chavez’s round posterior by hiring her associates to save his frying bacon. hopefully the lapdog board or brave ben will see thru this and get rid of an enemy of the working man

  3. I kind of like Kerris, and I like his rag. I’ve watched him in passing a few times, no interaction, but seemed like everyone there knew him and nice enough. I think he was at her birthday party. Kerris, your photoshop skills have been improving.. A lot. Used to be when you shopped things, the line between your paste was so contrasting it was laughable. Now you do some very nice underlayer/overlayer deleting followed up with smudge tool. Very nice.

    Thing is we can’t rag on his rag because his rag is no different than SJI’s rag which is no different than The Mercury news (sans newstand theft) or CNN which is no different than infinity.

    In some way, each of them exist to further the goals of certain people and causes in our local politics. Seems Kerris works for Cindy… I think SJI works for metro, which has it’s own interests. There’s also many many many less known political bloggers. How about http://www.thegreenprogressive.com/ ?

    Thing is SJI (and everyone else) is I think as news, you shouldn’t take pot shots at each other. (Unless you find your newstands in their dumpsters, then I hope you get some justice) I think that The fetch has evolved enough now to where it stands on it’s own.

    So why don’t you guys have a beer and be excellent to one another? SJI you should host a party, invite hella people (me!!!) and see who shows up. You guys know how to throw a party.

    • > SJI you should host a party, invite hella people (me!!!) and see who shows up. You guys know how to throw a party.

      Well, if a progressive democrat church newspaper throws a party, progressive democrats show up. That’s the problem.

      The combined IQ of the neighborhood, the per capita taxes paid, and the employment rate all go down, and alcoholism, use of medicinal marijuana, and unwanted sexual advances all go up.

  4. Any website that writes the following words cannot be taken seriously: “Mayor Chuccardo.” Yes, that’s their way of being derogatory to the current mayor. A clearly biased site, so hopefully no independent voters will bother with The Daily Fetch.

  5. Do you think that publicly shaming rape victims is objectionable? Or do you think that’s just the Daily Fetch “un-spinning the spin”?

    • What “rape victim” did TDF “publicly shame?”
      Isn’t his common knowledge or just you spinning a an allegation based on your biased percepton?

      • I won’t name the victim. The police officer’s name is Geoffrey Graves. The Daily Fetch posted in April 2014 that it was no coincidence that the victim reported the incident of sexual assault after a DUI arrest three weeks later. The implication here is clear — that the timing of the victim’s disclosure suggested her accusation was designed to serve her self-interests and not credible.

        The defense attorney of Geoffrey Graves actually made this blame-the-victim argument in the court room. From the Mercury News:

        >[The defense] tried to press the alleged rape victim on why she didn’t report the alleged sexual assault until three weeks later, when she was arrested for a DUI. But at the end of the day under questioning by prosecutor Carlos Vega, the woman broke down and said she was too scared, embarrassed and afraid to tell anyone.

        >”I still have a lot of fear,” she said in a strained voice. “He’s a police officer and … and they are supposedly out there to protect you.”

        • TDF (and apparently you too) didn’t know the facts related to the reporting of the “rape.” The woman reported the assault 3 weeks later as a result of pre-booking questions put to arrestees at the jail mandated by the “Prison Rape Elimination Act.” Which seeks to document sexual assaults that have occurred prior to booking so that an opportunistic guest at the jail doesn’t try claim that an assault occurred in the jail after the booking.

          People everywhere should applaud the woman for finally reporting the incident so that an investigation could be conducted and appropriate charges filed. On one hand it is embarrassing that Graves happens to (currently) have the title police officer associated to his name. Please keep in mind that he is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Should he be found guilt and stripped of his “title ” law enforcement everywhere will be better for it.

          On the other hand, It is a source of tremendous pride to know that once SJPD was aware of the claim Graves was dealt with appropriately (in accordance with THE LAW and LONG ESTABLISHED procedure). SJPD conducted a thorough investigation which resulted in charges being filed. The investigation also uncovered previously unknown criminal activity for which Graves is now going to have to answer for.

          Grave’s Attorney is exactly that GRAVE’s Attorney. How she chooses to defend her client is 100% on her and has absolutely ZERO to do with SJPD, SJPOA, TDF, The Merc or anyone except her.

          As far as the “implication” you perceive, I can’t tell you how many times a person who is being booked alleges being the victim of sexual assault for precisely “”self-serving” purposes But I know that it has, does and will continue to happen.

          Are you are aware that the Federal Gov’t mandates that police departments review immigration status of “Crime Victims AND witnesses” so that police departments can recommend that enforcement of all immigration law and its consequences be suspended contingent on the “victims” cooperation with investigations and prosecution. SJPD HAS OFFICERS AND SERGEANTS ASSIGNED TO THIS DUTY FULL TIME while other duties are going unfulfilled? Is TDF’s “implication” totally without merit?

          • And you accuse others of “spin”? Not one point you have made rationalizes the Daily Fetch’s use of its blog as a tool to attack a rape victim and cast doubt on her testimony. The closest you’ve come to even addressing that attack in your rambling response is in defense of it, when you mention that sometimes rape testimony *isn’t* honest. If you think that justifies the Daily Fetch’s attack on an actual rape victim, that’s twisted enough for me to wonder if you’re the Daily Fetch. I at least hope you are, because I don’t want to live in a world where one person will write something that appalling and another person will defend it.

  6. First timer here. I’ve been reading The Fly, SJI and MN now for many years and have noticed a very biased hatred towards labor. Why is this??? Could this be that these folks truly do not LABOR, but just sit at their cushy, safe desk jobs, gathering around the cooler each day watching their bums grow wider and wider do to physical inactivity??? Or, could these reporters just be spoiled silver spooners who are still nursing off of their parents hard work??? My guess is, is that these so called reporters receive some type of kickback by supporting a very one sided political agenda. Every article these so called unbiased reporters write, always seem to disc labor and people who support labor. They never comment on the other sides political connections such as corporations, secret big money donors and developers. They write their very biased articles with no true unbiased balance. I understand that there will always be a need for business and labor to hash things out, and that this must be done honestly and fairly for both sides to be successful. Unfortunately the media sources in San Jose are so unfairly slanted, that over time, the readers begin to believe SJI, The Fly and SJMN one sided BS!!! My father used to call these types of people sheep and followers. The DAILY FETCH did not exist until these so called clown shoe reporters got down on their knees and allowed a one sided political party agenda to give them the ole one, two while they looking back and smiling. If there was true unbiased reporting going on here in San Jose, then there would be no need for the Daily Fetch. YOU FOOLS JUST DON”T GET IT!!! Start being true unbiased reporters and the DAILY FETCH will go away… Until then, good job Daily Fetch!!! Keep posting the other side of the issues, and keep doing it with a very entertaining sense of humor… Also, too the very regular haters who consistently comment on every article these so called media sources report, GET A LIFE!!! Stop hanging out in your moms basement, wearing your pajamas all day. Crawl out from your cave, and maybe try some real hard labor. You might get a different perspective.

  7. Carthagus,

    I salute you for your empathy for the rape victim. In a perfect world I too might share it, but not when our justice system so regularly plays host to self-proclaimed sexual assault victims so dishonest, heartless, and despicable that they think nothing of servicing their own needs by sacrificing the rights and reputations of innocent men. Child custody, divorce settlement, plea bargain, jealousy, embarrassment, extortion, revenge, hurt feelings, psychotic delusion: just some of the motivations that have led females to falsely and conveniently portray themselves (and even their children) as sexual assault victims. Anyone — cop, prosecutor, juror, reporter, or even blogger who ignores obvious ulterior motives when measuring the credibility of someone who, often with little more than words and tears, can lay ruin to a man’s life, has allowed compassion to blind him.

    In the Graves case the victim was portrayed by prosecutors as a frightened, powerless woman made even more vulnerable because she was in this country illegally, this despite the existence of behavior-based evidence to the contrary (sneaking into a country illegally to work is one thing, but to do so and feel confident enough to break additional laws, like driving a car, and then endangering the public by driving so while drunk, does not exactly paint a picture of a person frightened and vulnerable). Foreigners of good character, even when here legally, are usually scrupulous about obeying the law.

    No person — interested party or concerned citizen, should be deprived the right to fairly question or objectively investigate the motives, character, and credibility of someone leveling such serious and slanderous accusations. Awarding credibility to someone solely on their race, gender, or sympathy quotient is a recipe for injustice. Women lie, especially about men. People lie, especially when there’s a big cash payoff at stake. Strangers lie, especially when they’re past is unknowable, and illegal immigrants are, by definition, strangers here. The victim in the Graves case had powerful motives to lie, including the chance to take home (probably back to Mexico) a wheelbarrow full of San Jose tax dollars, so my thanks to anyone who questioned her motives and credibility.

    By the way, your insinuation that Fetch questioned the rape victim in defense of the accused’s union is seriously delusional. You might need help.

    • Yes, because when a police union spokesman writes a private blog defending a rapist police officer, that’s entirely coincidental.

      Your post reveals you have little sympathy for the victim. And let’s be clear, she is a victim — the testimony and facts revealed at trial have proven that, and that’s why Graves has lost his union-appointed attorney (and most likely — thank God — his job).

    • WOW: an unusual amount of innuendo and logical fallacies from the normally logical, precise, and erudite FINFAN. He got so worked up that he even made a spelling error, the first I’ve ever seen in his posts: “Strangers lie, especially when they’re past is unknowable…” The plain fact is that no-one without access to the complete investigation file is in a strong position to comment about what Officer Graves may or may not have done, either to the alleged rape victim or to his ex-girlfriend, who has charged him with two violent acts against her. I know that I certainly have insufficient factual information to make a judgment one way or the other. Didn’t officer Graves plead to some reduced charges a short while ago after the D.A. added an enhancement to the rape charge, or am I confusing him with another SJPD officer?
      Some of you may know FINFAN’S identity. I do not. To me, the tone of this and other posts, particularly those relating to public employee pensions and Measure B, suggest to me that he is either a retired cop, or one still on the job but about to retire. That could explain why he is so eager to pre-judge the Officer Graves issues in the officer’s favor, and to condemn his accuser, without all the facts in hand. Don’t get me wrong, FINFAN, I agree with you wholeheartedly on most issues, and truly enjoy reading your normally spot-on and extremely well written posts. But we all have our blind spots, don’t we?

  8. Carthagus,

    You justify your sympathy for the rape victim and your criticism of my skepticism based on what was revealed at trial. This is unfair for two reasons: first, my skepticism was pre-trial (as was the Fetch’s), and second, I find no evidence that the trial has yet to be held.

    Speaking of delusions, if you have information that Mr. Hillis was working for the POA when he blogged about Graves’ accuser, or that the POA has done (or would be motivated to do) anything other than stay on the sidelines in this case, please share.

  9. Amazing how astute the “spelling police” can be when that’s all they have to counter another’s pov…

  10. JMO’C,

    It was never my intention to prejudge the guilt or innocence of the participants but to convey my opinion that it is the sworn duty of the police and prosecutor, and the civic duty of responsible citizens to be skeptical when the circumstances demand it. In the Graves case, the accuser made her allegation while being booked for drunk driving, three weeks after the incident, and at the precise moment her illegal immigration status was running smack dab into the criminal justice system (one that advertises that it doesn’t deport crime victims). This scenario was suspicious enough to prompt the comment in The Daily Fetch referenced by commenter Carthagus. It was also suspicious enough for me. But what I suspect is, it wasn’t at all suspicious to prosecutors because, in this political climate, doubting the credibility of an accuser with her particular credentials just isn’t done.

    I don’t know Geoffrey Graves nor do I know what he did in that motel room, but thus far I’ve seen no evidence to support his accuser’s depiction of him as a force-wielding rapist. What the evidence does support is that Graves should be fired (for his stupidity and reckless disregard of his employer’s interests) and a fair trial on the charges held. But here again is another reason for skepticism, as the DA’s office disgraced itself by burying him deep enough in criminal charges to drive competent counsel beyond his financial reach. The win-at-any-cost bastards even added an arming clause because he carried a duty weapon — while on duty.

    As a born skeptic and experienced observer, I’ve seen nothing about this case that makes me think justice will win out in the end. And that’s an observation that has become far too regular an occurrence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *