Pre-Trial for Teacher Accused of Sex With Student Postponed

A preliminary trial for a Granada High teacher accused of having sex with a former student has been pushed back to January 17, 2013.

A pre-trial for a Granada High teacher accused of having sex with a former student has been postponed to January 17, 2013, according to court records.

Marie Johnson, 41, faces charges of unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under 18, oral copulation and committing a lewd act on a child, court records show.

She was arrested on Jan. 11 on 24 counts of sexual assault on a 14-year-old boy, police said.

Johnson, who pleaded not guilty to the charges on Feb. 23, is being held at Santa Rita Jail in Dublin in lieu of a $950,000 bail.

She was initially scheduled to appear in court for a pre-trial on Oct. 11.

Johnson's attorney, Berkeley-based Elizabeth Grossman, did not respond to a Patch request seeking comment on this story.

The Alameda County District Attorney's office was unable to provide details on why the pre-trial has been postponed.

Johnson is scheduled to return to court at 2 p.m. Jan. 17, 2013, in Department 703 of the Gale-Schenone Hall of Justice in Pleasanton.

Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 07:50 PM
@Mr. Phillips, And with your post above, it sounds like you have already presumed the defendant guilty, even before she has had her trial, which in turn is doing nothing more than polluting public opinion and the jury pool here in Alameda County. Sorry, but I'm not going to join in on this chorus of Alameda County "villagers" and brandish my torch and pitchfork against somebody because they were labelled "Frankenstein's Monster". This was the same kind of misconduct out there that got Mehserle's case thrown out of Alameda County back in 2009, because nobody can seem to trust us with cases like this. Considering the weight of the charges and what the defendant did for a living, she may never find herself working as a teacher ever again, let alone find any other work out there given the nature of the charges and that her case wound up getting this kind of attention. The defendant is entitled to her trial as well as is entitled to her defense in that trial. And if all parties stipulate to this postponement, what business is it to the rest of us? And given that this is a criminal trial, the only parties involved are the court, the people represented by the DA, and the defendant--not the rest of us who read and post here. Inserting the so-called "right" of the victims to have this trial is not even codified into law anywhere, because there is no right of the victim to have a swift and speedy trial, only the defendant.
Joe Granada November 01, 2012 at 07:54 PM
If the prosecution wants a speedy trial, why have they not filed any motions to that end?
Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 07:57 PM
I still have my disdain and that I believe is enough to back up what I have posted, both here and on SFGate.com. If that is not enough, "Sean", then you might have unreasonable expectations. I chose to disengage from our discussion about Swalwell there because it seems you want to pick a fight and get everybody aggravated. One of the things one must learn in life is to know when to "walk away from a fight", especially before it gets to the point where punches start getting thrown. If you haven't learned that by now, heaven help you. I owe you nothing, "Sean". And once again, I am disengaging from your discussion about that candidate.
Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 08:07 PM
@Mr. Phillips, Do you have any proof that the defendant actually engaged in this behavior are you just working to "stir things up" and provide evidence before the Court that this case should be moved? If it is the latter, then you and I might be in agreement here and that the case should be moved to a different venue, the farther away from Livermore and Alameda County, the better. If it is the former, then proffer your evidence or forever remain silent. Given the nature of the charges, and if the defendant is not only found not guilty in any trial but is indeed truly innocent, the damage to her reputation has been done to the point that the defendant may never be able to find employment ever again because of what has been already said about her in public forums such as this one. Should you find yourself in similar straits, you better hope that there is nobody out there like you seem to be that wants to taint this case before the rest of us, forever damaging your reputation in this community. Be mindful of what you say and post out there, because people will be referring back to it.
Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 08:17 PM
First off, the prosecution does not have the right to a speedy trial. Only the Defendant does in a criminal action. It goes back to the 6th Amendment in the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution, which applies to the State of California, County of Alameda through the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. Let's take a look at the wording of the 6th Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense." And then the 14th Amendement, Section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Sean November 01, 2012 at 08:29 PM
I expect opinions to be based on facts- unfortunately, not the way everyone lives their lives. Basically, your opinion means nothing if you choose to disengage every time you are asked to back it up and using a "handle" only makes it more obvious who you really are.
Granada Mom November 01, 2012 at 08:34 PM
Having a hard time understanding how a few of you believe this is an appropriate platform for your political banter. This is an article about the case against Marie Johnson involving her former 14 year old student. I am 100% sure that none of you know the facts in this case other than what has been presented in news articles or blogs so how can you possibly form an opinion about guilt or innocence of the accused OR about the "culpability" of the victim? How? While I appreciate the freedom of expression, I would also like to remind you that until this case is over, nothing can be speculated upon. The reality is that this is tearing apart BOTH families regardless of who did (or didn't do) what. Period. Chances are, both families are reading your uninformed and insensitive comments. And as far as commenting on the legal strategy either side is engaged in, have you had the benefit of sitting in on one of their strategy sessions? No, you haven't. I'd also like to remind you that a trial isn't always what the defense OR prosecution want, especially if there is a minor involved. There's this little thing called a plea bargain which has long been used by BOTH sides to BOTH of their advantages. The only thing anyone should be doing is paying attention, respectfully, to what transpires in this case and praying for healing for both families.
david November 01, 2012 at 08:44 PM
Sean, Californicated1 is clearly a mental case (backed up by all is comments here) I wish him well and hope he seeks the help he so desperately requires.
Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 08:57 PM
And what handle is "Sean"? You have offered nothing else as to a family name by which you can argue about "real names vs. fake names". So when you argue on grounds of "truth" based on "fact", you haven't offered anything new, there, either, "Sean". As mentioned before, for all we know, you may be "Sean Bean" or "Sean Lennon" or even "Sean McLaughlin" for all I know. So you can't argue your point on those grounds, either. And as for "david", his arguments also hold no water, either, because once again, all he has to argue with here is what has been posted thus far. For all he may know, I could be writing from the cubicle next to his.
Joe Granada November 01, 2012 at 09:10 PM
There's nothing in the constitution about it, but the prosecution can dispute a defense motion for a delay, just as they can any other. They chose not to, for whatever reason.
Californicated1 November 01, 2012 at 09:27 PM
Knowing what I know of sexual abuse cases, even inside one's own family where a relative went through that, about the only things that "heal" wounds like this are the passage of time and the passing of the people involved in the case. Those wounds are forever for both the victim and the families around them. And if other family members are involved, either through marriage, blood ties or friends of the family, the taint of sexual abuse, either real, perceived or downright false, will follow those involved into their graves--doesn't matter if it happened in 1949 and the accused went to his grave in 1979 while the victim went to hers in 2011, the rest of us who know will always be wondering about that and how much it affected the rest of the victim's life, to the point that the victim allowed that to happen again to one of their children through a second-spouse. And when the rest of us found out what happened to the victim and our ties to them, we never looked at our relationships the same way, either with the victimizer or with the person who let that happen to the victim in the first place. And learning that the person who let that happen had the same situation happen to them when they were a child just basically tainted the rest of our relationships to that family to the point that we all wonder who we can trust out there. And that is what I see here, regardless of whether or not the charges are indeed true. The taint lasts forever.
Sean November 01, 2012 at 09:33 PM
Cali whet you "know" could fit in a very small thimble. I doubt you're in a cubicle, more like a Starbucks. Here's some recent goodies from you. You need to get back on your meds. I have no children and have no stake in how other peoples' children get educated. I'm sure if a microscope were used to examine to how most of these residents here in Danville acquired their wealth, the DOJ would be issuing out more warrants for arrest and brining more people to trial for their actions to determine whether or not the actions these residents used to acquire their wealth was indeed criminal in nature. I hope that as long as the current malaise keeps going on, the majority of the people come to the conclusion that the system as we have it now is broken and beyond repair. When that happens, I hope they resort to the bullet as a means for repair than further ballots. And for the people like this politician Meuser, which side would they like to find themselves on when the bullet takes over where the ballot failed? Do the rest of you know which side you are going to be on?
Larry Dickman November 01, 2012 at 11:13 PM
@ Californicated1 You are an idiot. A typical ACLU type idiot. This state is the utopia you liberals want. All failures in any system we live by is your doing. From the 9th District Circuit Court to the High Speed rail. This is your doing. Don't be responsible for anything. It got to be someone else's fault.
Paisley November 02, 2012 at 01:07 AM
+1 Larry Dickman. When your only means of revenue is income redistribution, I think we've hit the end of the road. In 2009 there were 32 states borrowing from the unemployment trust fund. Which is not a trust fund, but a loan. Which carries with it interest payments. Now there are 19. The other states have repaid that money. Because they are smart. California however, is closing in on owing almost half of the outstanding balance. Almost 10 billion dollars. Not half yet. But soon it will. So, when automatic budget cuts kick in..... all of you people remember that. And remember this - doctors in Greece haven't been paid since May. Of course, that would never happen in the US because we can print money. However, you still will have to lay people off. Which risks the same deflationary spiral as Greece. Unless, this is a completely different nation than I thought it was. We really are at a crossroads. Aren't we? Are we a product of government? Or ourselves? http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-world/20121101/EU.Greece.Free.fall/ http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/labor/state-unemployment-trust-fund-loans.aspx This is how you can tell unemployment really hasn't changed that much in California.
David November 02, 2012 at 03:36 AM
Well at least this forum gives a lot of people a place to show they have no life. Californicated1 is the winner this round. Get a life or at least spend your time doing something productive!!!!! Life is way to short to waste on dwelling on something we can't change. OK back to my life. Have fun
voice of reason November 02, 2012 at 05:38 AM
The defense is doing this so she will get off with time served, rather than a longer sentence.She will plead no contest, have to register as an offender, and spend the rest of her life wondering why this happened to her.
Californicated1 November 02, 2012 at 05:41 AM
@Mr. Phillips, That "other guy" wouldn't happen to be you, there, would it?
Californicated1 November 02, 2012 at 05:52 AM
Look in the mirror when you say that Mr. "Dickman". Not sure why you want to grind your axe, here, but coming after me is only going to waste your time. But what else have you got to argue since your name is taken from a fictional character in a Clint Eastwood film? And by the way, I voted "NO" on that High-Speed Rail initiative. So unless you can prove I have ever been in favor of it, go rattle somebody else's cage, ask "Paisley" out on a date and make sweet passionate love, and then work on convincing her to go out on further dates with you so can continue to make that love and perhaps grow old and have babies together, not always in that order. But you really need to go find somebody else to play with, perhaps take Paisley out to a play where Andrew J. Robinson is performing and see what he has been up to since his days playing against "Dirty Harry", because playing with me is only going to get tiresome, both for you and for me, especially when you don't even have your facts right about me to begin with.
Californicated1 November 02, 2012 at 05:56 AM
You wouldn't happen to be that Sand Flea-andro guy's "doppelganger" out there, would you? That "David" says you're creepy.
Larry Dickman November 02, 2012 at 03:05 PM
Maybe her time served and exposure to women will have rehabilitated her from a petafile to a lesbian. The correctional system will hold her up as a success story. She'll go on to run for office and so on. We'll have true leadership then.
Californicated1 November 03, 2012 at 06:04 PM
Now that is an ugly visual to bring to me and the rest of those reading and posting--some poster professing to be "Larry Dickman" writing about their apparent fetish for Lesbians and Lesbianism. Ewwwwww! There's no "un-ringing that bell".
Al Phillips November 04, 2012 at 03:46 PM
Last night the patch had an article about another teacher caught with "His pant's down". Everyone defending these teachers must realize that there is a real problem. Why do you'll come to their defence, what about the kids
Californicated1 November 04, 2012 at 04:21 PM
"What about the children" has always been the "battle cry" of anybody wanting to get elected or get us to vote for something. The Prohibitionists in the early-20th Century used that argument to get the 18th Amendment passed. The National Socialists used that argument in the 1920s and -30s to get German voters to elect them and their platform. It's been used here in California to pass the "3 Strikes" law back in the 1990s or for the "Defense of Marriage" Act and even Proposition 8. Even Moonbeam has been using it to ramrod his initiatives, just like his immediate predecessor this go-around, Schwarzeneggar. Sorry, but I'm not buying the argument that this is "for the children", Mr. Phillips. It seems to be more for the "I hope that I can use this issue to get me more publicity and get me elected to Ms. Buchanan's seat" than it is actually for the children. So cut the bull! And instead of trying to plug for your own election in these posts, do what Mr. Meuser did and set up your own column here and get people to read it. One demogogue in office is one too many. And if you want to get elected on demogoguery, heaven help the rest of us.
Keith Pickering-Walters November 04, 2012 at 05:37 PM
Mr. Phillips, why are you using two accounts to post comments on Patch? As I stated in a reply to one of your other posts, SB 1530 was not an anti-pedophile law. It was a politically-motivated anti-teacher rights bill. It eliminated due-process rights and would have lead to the termination of teachers when a student upset about earning an F accuses a teacher of a crime. Imagine the power a student would hold over a teacher if they could get them fired in a heartbeat. The processes in place right now work when followed by administrators. The case in Livermore last year is a clear example of the system working. The moment a coach heard the accusation it was reported and the teacher was removed (and in that case arrested). The LVJUSD Administration did everything correctly. I'd be happy to meet with you to review the proposed legislation and speak to you about any legislation you might be interested in proposing - especially if it deals with due process rights. I hope that you do more research than just reading posts by religious bloggers before determining the merit of proposed legislation, especially since you are running for office.
Keith Pickering-Walters November 04, 2012 at 05:44 PM
Mr. Phillips, rather than pontificate and wonder if the District is still paying her salary and benefits or what the Teachers Union has to say on the issue while you not-so-subtly bash Assemblyperson Buchanan, why don't you just contact them? From my experiences, the School District and the Teachers Union in Livermore are both very easy to contact and normally quite willing to have a meeting with someone who has legitimate questions.
Keith Pickering-Walters November 04, 2012 at 06:15 PM
Mr. Phillips, I don't believe that anyone has come to either teacher's defense. I believe that you're confusing the belief that everyone has a right to "innocence until proven guilty" with everyone has a right to "abuse children", which is not correct. Personally, I want to ensure that all parties involved have their rights protected. The accuser needs to have a safe space to make the accusation without public attack or posts by anonymous commenters in their own town that they enjoyed it. The accused needs to have a safe space to defend their reputation and respond to the accusations - whether that's in a principal's office, a police station, or a court of law. The accused also deserves the right to not have their life ruined by a false accusation. Also, I hope you realize that there are 350,000 +/- teachers in California. The screening and training provided for through the processes of education and credentialing in our state are pretty good. Don't let a bad apple rot the reputation of so many wonderful, professional educators. Since you seem so concerned about education, I'd be happy to host your visit to my school. It would be nice to have you see the many successful programs we have going on. Just let me know when you're interested. We have a strict guest policy on campus and I will need to arrange to have you checked in at the front office to get a visitor's badge and an escort.
Julie Creamer November 26, 2012 at 03:55 AM
Assumptions, assumptions! I would guarantee, defense is dragging out. Whoever's representing her, would want the people to forget about it. Better chance of an acquittal.
Natalia Roach January 14, 2013 at 05:37 AM
This is such bull shit! I know this woman and this whole case is bogus! She has better morales than that! When she is proven innocent her life will be forever tarnished over this! It literally makes me sick!
Joe Granada January 14, 2013 at 08:38 PM
Defendants do not have a right to delay the trial indefinitely. To cite just one example, Jerry Sandusky's trial started only seven months after he was first charged, despite the objections of his attorneys that they didn't have time to go through the mountains of documentation that were submitted. It is inconceivable that this trial will be anywhere near as complex as that one was. If the prosecution had wanted an earlier trial date, then presumably they would have filed a public motion to that effect.
Joe Granada January 14, 2013 at 08:43 PM
Three more days until this trial theoretically moves forward. I do not expect that to occur, more likely there will be a settlement and both sides will try to keep everything hush-hush. However, I would think that members of the community are entitled to at least some information about what actually happened here, if only for the sake of our collective peace of mind.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »