The Big Bad San Francisco Attorneys Office
I recently did a search of my name David Gizzarelli on Bing and Google. The search engines list many websites. After my acting resume and this website, all you will see are link after link, page after page of my legal case(s) that started back in 2012. It is now 2023 and I find it strangely odd and significant that there are so many legal websites listing my cases and tagging my name David Gizzarelli. I have no idea why all these websites are listing my legal cases page after page on Google and Bing.
In 2012, I fought the city of San Francisco, the SF Examiner, The SF Chronicle, The Marina Times, NBC Bay Area, KTVU, thousands of online internet sleuths, Facebook trolls and haters, angry dysfunctional Karens and insecure women seeking dominance, and other ridiculous people and accusations.
I fought all these people and powerful governments, powerful entities, billion-dollar media companies, San Francisco employees, animal control volunteers, and people from across the nation and around the world because they all wanted to kill my 16-month-old puppy Charlie. There were so many things going on and so many attacks on me that it would take pages and pages of information to tell you all the different ways I was being attacked.
In attempts to save my sixteen-month-old puppy from euthanasia, I contacted hundreds of attorneys, legal colleges, law firms, legal websites, legal libraries, and media outlets. Many did not want to help me, or worked with me for a short time and then abandoned me. Legal colleges would agree to work with me and then later back out. One of my attorneys, Orestes Cross, accepted $4700.00 from me as a retainer. He told me that he wanted to help me get my dog back. He showed up for a “animal control costs” hearing one time and failed to provide any bill or any expenses. He rarely accepted my calls and seemed to fail me as his legal client. He wanted me to do all the administrative work.
Most likely because there was a group of thousands of people on Facebook, around the city of San Francisco, and elsewhere stalking me, harassing me, hacking my debit cards and bank accounts, calling my attorneys, contacting my associates, getting my crowd funding campaigns shut down, harassing my acting and music career, compromising my general assistance, invading my privacy, illegally obtaining my personal medical health records, and thwarting all my efforts. The media bias and misinformation were so strong that I’d speak with attorneys, and they would already know who I was and would exhibit bias, as well as hostility and insults. Thousands of people, mostly disgruntled and bitter man hating women, were telling everyone that I was a scam artist, that I was dishonest and irresponsible, and that my legal case was over.
What none of them mentioned, though, was the truth. That Charlie and I were running in an off-leash area for dogs known as Crissy Field in the Golden Gate National Recreation area in San Francisco, when a lame police horse named Stoney was ridden into the off-leash area by Eric Evans, a 17-year Park Police veteran officer. The horse that Officer Evans was riding had a healed or healing fracture. This was mentioned by the veterinarian in the vet report with him stating “Though not noted by the officer … ” in line item 5. Also, note that all the horses wounds are labeled “superficial”.
Yet, all the so called extreme leftist journalists were busy creating their narrative. Toilet paper journalists like Andrea Koskey at the San Francisco Examiner who reported on every aspect of my case, however, failed to report on any of my rebuttals, arguments, or victories. When I would speak to her, I would respond to her questions, but my answers would be absent from her articles. C.W. Nevius at the SF Chronicle who almost killed a bicyclist in 2012, was busy writing about me, not the legal case regarding my puppy Charlie. Lisa Fernandez and her crew at NBC Bay Area seemed honorable, but failed to touch on the key facts in Charlie’s case. Amber Lee and the reporters at KTVU who refused to tell everyone I was a working actor in television, film, and corporate video. Mr. Mike Sugerman at CBS … none of these people reported the facts or allowed me to present my argument. It all seemed to be a one-sided conspiracy built on the liberal agenda.
However, there were a few media personalities that I need to recognize. Gil Gross from his show on KGO radio. Gil seemed generally concerned with my efforts and had the most common sense. I felt very welcome and respected by Gil Gross and his show. Another person that needs mention is Brian Sussman and his crew on the KSFO morning show. They put up pictures of Charlie, brought up all the key points, and allowed me to speak my talking points.
Mike Sugerman and I had a great television report on CBS. But the great parts were cut out. There was a part where I was having some trouble speaking and my tongue got tied on some words. That was the only part Mike Sugerman and CBS broadcast on the air. CBS didn’t want to report on the case, they wanted to make me look bad. The interview was chopped up and reduced to 0. The bad parts were at the forefront. CBS didn’t allow my long and detailed thank you to people across the United States and around the world who were sending me support and donations. CBS was also at the Administrative Hearing conducted by the San Francisco Police Department. CBS plugged into the auditorium sound system and shorted out my statement during the Administrative Hearing conducted by the San Francisco Police Department. The recording of my statement at the hearing was virtually in-audible. Mike Sugerman is now sick and fighting a serious health condition.
There are a few interesting things about Andrea Koskey who wrote for the SF Examiner. I may be wrong, but I believe Andrea Koskey is related to Andrew Koskey, a musician that I knew who attended open mics at the Hotel Utah. Over the years, I thought Andrew was a friendly guy who was my friend. However, later after Charlie’s case dissolved, he seemed to have an obvious attitude towards me. Additionally, the last time I checked, Andrea Koskey appears to have been rewarded for her liberal media bias in Charlie’s case and was given a high paying position with the City of San Francisco, and later a position with the State of California.
Most of these media companies or reporters refused to let me present evidence, facts, and barely allowed me to speak at all. They all seemed to be missing the subject … Charlie. In all of the reports, Charlie was never photographed or recorded on video live. In one interview I was scheduled to conduct, I traveled to Los Gatos and then rode my bicycle some 20 miles for the interview. It was never aired. Even the San Francisco Attorney’s Office, as well as the San Francisco Police Department were publishing press releases without allowing my position or allowing me to respond to their bogus rhetoric. All their stories were one sided and filled with fluff, mischaracterization, misinformation, and narratives about what happened. Lending credence to a dog and pony show.
San Francisco Animal Control and the former director Rebecca Katz were even producing and paying for radio spots to further condemn me and large breed dog owners on public radio. It’s disgusting and amazing how fake and contrived the radio spots were. They were mentioning my name, they were including sound bytes from Vicki Goldbeck (sp), an Animal Control Police Officer who wouldn’t allow me to see or visit Charlie. Tim Montemayor from the Monty Show and the other thugs included stories of my sixteen month old puppy Charlie as being vicious and dangerous. They acted like they were all afraid of my puppy. It was all fake and contrived. None of it was true.
Even after the coerced settlement conference where Margaret Baumgartner and the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office threatened that my puppy Charlie could be killed if I didn’t settle with their terms, they all used the court documents to create a further damaging and made-up story regarding my donations and support … that I had spent all the crowd funding donations! C.W. Nevius at the San Francisco Chronicle wanted everyone to believe that I owed San Francisco money and that the taxpayers were going to have to front the bill. But none of it was true. Even the Magistrate Judge Nathaniel Cousins stated to the city attorney that I could not be ordered to pay the money. After all, I was disabled and homeless at the time. I was living on general assistance and was living on $422 a month living in my car … and the money, in my opinion, was all irrelevant. The urgent legal case was about my puppy scheduled to be destroyed.
The truth is that several attorneys were paid over $10,000.00 and I had other costs associated with managing Charlie’s campaign. Of course, not reported either. Additionally, the media wouldn’t report that I paid for the horses’ vet bill. This legal case was not about me David Gizzarelli. It was about my dog. No crimes were committed. I was not on trial. This legal case was all about my puppy Charlie, nothing else. But everyone was so power happy, so inclined to hurt an innocent person, that they all made up this bogus rhetoric. This broad unbalanced display of power to hurt and or kill my young puppy as well as me, David Gizzarelli. They all seemed so blinded and confused. I don’t even think any of my 5 different attorneys knew what this case was about.
I’ve asked all of them to remove the silly articles and the slanderous press releases. I asked the SF Chronicle. The SF Examiner. The San Francisco Attorneys Office. I asked them to remove all the fake rhetoric. They refuse. They had my puppy Charlie on the front page of the SF Examiner. A full page spread. They didn’t pay me anything for that photo and they continue to use it against my will. The photos are my property, yet they refuse to remove the photos. The examiner to this day is using the articles and my photos to promote their ad partners like the Dolan Law Firm who are clearly not for dog owners. Their ads read like an anti-truth serum. That all dogs are vicious and their owners, irresponsible.
When the city of San Francisco tried to go around the Federal Courts and sue me for the inflated animal control costs in small claims court, I had to fight them there, too. But I won that case with the judge stating that any remedy for San Francisco belongs in Federal Court. But did C.W. Nevius at the SF Chronicle report it? Did Andrea Koskey at the SF Examiner cover that story? Did Mike Sugerman come out guns a blazing David Gizzarelli wins!!??
The answer is no. Absolutely, no media company, journalist, or reporter published the small claims court event or any of my small victories. But they were all there! I saw them hiding in the corners of the court room. John Denny, the Animal Control Officer sitting by himself in a corner crying his eyes out for whatever reason. KTVU was there writing down notes and looking at me on my crutches trying to recover from a back injury. It was like it never happened. I even had to appeal at the small claims court. I was disabled, labeled, and homeless fighting the City of San Francisco in small claims court. I guess they were all too sick to their stomach to report on this vicious attack on an innocent human being.
And ten years later, this is all still on the internet, in print, and online forever. This big lie and farce about a vicious dog and his irresponsible owner, David Gizzarelli. I’ve asked many times for all these people to remove the articles and press releases. They refused, continuing to destroy my good name forever. They won’t even let me respond with facts and evidence about my argument, no matter how much proof or evidence I show them.
SFIST.COM were the only ones that granted my request, removing one article. But they left all the rest of their articles which were basically regurgitated information published by the city of San Francisco. The big powerful disgusting liberal city where human life and the life of their pets are disregarded to protect a veteran police officer riding a lame horse into an off-leash area for dogs.
And what about all the supporters for Charlie? There were 122,000 petitioners on my CAUSES.COM campaign by the time they deleted it. Literally millions of people were tuning into Charlie’s case from around the world. An impressive effort, but the media didn’t report on it. They wanted the public to think I had no supporters and eventually the attacks and misinformation got all my campaigns shut down. CAUSES.COM deleted my page with no clear explanation. I believe San Francisco just wanted to keep me from having funds to fight for Charlie. FUNDRAZR.COM didn’t want to shut me down, but they told me they had to. Many other campaigns that I started were shut down. The attacks and misinformation got so bad that they couldn’t moderate the information anymore. However, they said that they would keep the page and information for later reference if I needed it. https://fundrazr.com/4Sl6a
I will forever be bitter and angry at San Francisco and the people that did this to me and my puppy Charlie. I never saw Charlie again and I have no idea what happened to him. I tend to believe that Charlie was killed or stolen, simply out of spite. In the back of my mind, if Charlie was destroyed, he died a horrible death.