Back to the Future: Hayashi is Run Through Gauntlet over Past Shoplifting

STATE SENATE | 10TH DISTRICT | ANALYSIS | Mary Hayashi said she was ready to discuss real issues at the beginning of a recorded interview with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board. The focus though started with another round of questions over her 2011 shoplifting case, which she later plead no contest.

Much of the inquiry featured repeated questions over the details of the arrest at the San Francisco Neiman Marcus already heard many times. Similarly, Hayashi repeated numerous apologies during the portion of the interview posted online Thursday.

However, in what is sort of a flashback to the type of evasion  Hayashi offered in the aftermath of the incident, she said, “I did not shoplift $2,500 worth of goods.” Hayashi then added, she tried to pay for the good once she was approached outside the department store.

The question now for Hayashi’s bid for the 10th State Senate District is not whether it was a benign brain tumor, forgetfulness or whatever that put those piece of clothing in her shopping bag, but today whether she squandered the level of contempt towards her that may have lessened over the past three years.

As Hayashi noted in the interview, state officials have done far worse or have been accused of far worse acts against California voters since 2011. In addition, Hayashi’s ticket to the pantheon of notorious politicians did not include her duties as an assembly member. But now, the already tenuous acceptance of her as a candidate is rolled back to a time when absolutely nobody was on her side. Back to the days in the fall of 2012 when the once most feared politician in the East Bay sat lonely among the Democratic party leaders she once lorded over, a pariah in search of acceptance.

In the meantime, if Hayashi fails to finish in the top two next June 3, what will be lost is significant because without her in the race and her campaign finance power, it is likely the November election will go from a tightly-contested race to an afterthought, especially if it is the Republican who finishes in the top two. In that scenario, Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski will not have to face the intense scrutiny that asks whether he is an up-and-coming politician or just another assemblyman seeking the next step up on a record without distinction.

9 thoughts on “Back to the Future: Hayashi is Run Through Gauntlet over Past Shoplifting

  1. Her recent lies were lies about her old lies. She can't even keep the lies straight in her head!


  2. On June 3rd, don't you dare vote for Mary Hayashi!


  3. What is even worse than trying to deny it, is the comment about other politicians doing worse things than her shoplifting. That is suppose to inspire confidence?!


  4. By MW:

    That Bay area residents, and of which I am one, would even slightly a joker such as Mary Hayashi for public office is so totally ridiculous, that therefore frankly I cannot decide whether my reaction should be to laugh or cry.

    In other words in most places, and such as for instance outside the totally insane Bay area, a joker such as Mary Hayashi would not even be slightly considered for any job other than as a circus clown.

    But than us Bay area residents also previously backed such jokers as Nadia Lockyer for public office, so agues if Ringling Brothers ever goes out of business, rather than its clowns filing for unemployment, instead they could just get jobs as public “servants” < in and representing the Bay area. However since not just Alameda County government but also San Francisco government would definitely very strongly desire to recruit the very silliest of any clowns that might become available, therefore the only fair method would be that SF and Alameda County would have a draft of any “talent” that might become available, and sort of similar to the system that NBA teams use to choose, select, and draft the most promising high school and college players, so that way no one would get an unfair advantage and be able to grab all of the top “talent.”


  5. Best 22 seconds of the video recording

    “I did not shoplift $2,500 worth of goods. I offered to pay for them immediately. I apologized to them. I tried to tell them I made a mistake of inadvertently being outside of the store. I did not tell them I wanted to take them or run with them. I immediately apologized. ”

    Sounds reasonable to me.


  6. Only 4.5 weeks to go. Mary had $690,000 to begin.

    Any thoughts on her plans for the money.
    On one hand, she must make the top two, but on the other hand, she can't end up June 4th with less than $300,000 with which to run a Sept-October campaign because she is unlikely to pull in much more money.

    Means she has $390,000 max to spend from April through May. Perhaps $150,000 is gone, leaving $240,000 to spend over the next 4 weeks.
    Only so many mailers are effective.
    Towards the final week of May, people are getting 5 to 8 per day, often 2 from one candidate.
    They get a 10 second view then into the trash.

    But Mary must finish second to survive.
    I hope she survives through to the top two.
    That, so she'll use up all that extra $300,000 by November in a probable losing effort.

    Most interesting is how many, if any, mailers Wieckowski will send out highlighting Mary's shoplifting conviction and her now infamous quote
    “I did not shoplift $2,500 worth of goods.”

    Anyone living in the Senate District 10 mailing zone, please keep us updated on what you are getting in the mail.
    Hopefully Steve can post copies of such.


  7. I think that elected officials greatly underestimate the voting public. The public is, in general, very forgiving. However, when a elected official does not take responsibility for their actions, that creates a far worse situation. Hayashi would have been better off if she had admitted her wrong doing in a more straightforward manner without excuses. The excuses of forgetting to pay, brain tumor etc., just created an huge backlash. It is never good to underestimate the intelligence of the voting public. A mea culpa, would have served her far more effectively


  8. One has to question either Mary's intelligence or judgement.
    What was she thinking?
    What did she think there was to be gained in that interview?

    So she goes ahead and then tees up the headline of the election—
    “I did not shoplift $2,500 worth of goods.”

    Everyone watching that video does a “WHAT?” at the same moment in the tape… WHAT?
    Unbelieveable— NO, not just that people don't believe what she is saying, but rather they can't believe she would say such a crazy thing on tape in the face of the established facts.

    You take a guilty plea in court, are placed on 3 years probation, and now tell the public
    “I did not shoplift $2,500 worth of goods.”

    You almost can't be angry at her as she is obviously lost in some strange realm only she understands.
    Kind of like our own version of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford.
    One wonders if this evident flaw in her thinking was the same thing in play when she stole the goods.
    Clearly something weird is going on in her thinking from time to time.
    If she wasn't so arrogant and superior, one might almost feel sorry for her.

    Where was her campaign manager or other advisers?
    Sitting in Sacramento counting their money?


Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s