Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Federal lawsuit filed against six Antioch Police officers in racist text scandal, three chiefs, City

By 1 Comment

The parties to the lawsuit from pages 1 and 2.

Seeks damages, department practice and policy changes, court monitoring; labels officers’ actions a “conspiracy”

By Allen D. Payton

Oakland civil rights attorney John Burris and associates filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for Northern California on Wednesday, April 19, 2023, against five current Antioch Police officers and one former officer, for their racist and other offensive texts and mistreatment of citizens, plus, three current and past police chiefs, the City of Antioch and Does 1-100. (See related articles here and here)

The texts sent and received by multiple officers on their personal cell phones mentioned at least one Antioch resident, as well as suspects in crimes being investigated by some of the officers.

The suit includes defendants Sgt. Josh Evans, Officers Eric Rombough, Morteza Amiri, Scott Duggar, John Ramirez and Timothy Manly Williams, who left the department in 2021. The lawsuit also includes former Police Chief Tammany Brooks who left in October 2021, former Interim Police Chief and current Captain Tony Morefield, and current Chief Steve Ford, in spite of the fact he didn’t start as interim chief until late April 2022, at the end of the timeframe of the texts between December 2019 and April 2022. Ford was given his permanent position on October 23, 2022. Morefield served as interim chief from Oct. 10, 2021 through April 2022.

The plaintiffs include Antioch resident Shagoofa Khan, the 2017 Youth of the Year who was one of the lead protesters in the city in 2020, was arrested a few times including once for felony arson in January 2021 and at Brooks’ farewell party later that year, and was the subject of one of the vile texts; Adam Carpenter, Joshua Butler, Trent Allen, who is one of the suspects in the murder case that resulted in the release of the texts; plus, Diego Zavala, the son of Guadalupe Zavala, who was unarmed when he was shot and killed by police in 2021 after a seven-hour stand-off with police. (Their last name is listed as Savala in the lawsuit).

The suit describes what occurred between the named Antioch Police officers and the plaintiffs as a “conspiracy and/or conspiracies” and claims they were “the failure and/or refusal of Defendants Brooks, Morefield, Ford and Evans…to prevent or aid in preventing” them from occurring. The suit further claims the four department leaders “maintained customs, policies, and/or practices which encouraged, authorized, condoned, ratified, failed to prevent, and/or failed to aid in the prevention of wrongs conspired to be done by” the named officers.

The suit seeks multiple forms of damages including “past, present and/or future wage loss, income and support, medical expenses”; special damages, any and all permissible statutory damages, and attorneys’ fees. The lawsuit, Case #4:23-cv-01895-TSH, from the firm of Burris, Nissenbaum, Curry and Lacy also seeks department policy and practice changes and Court Monitoring. Burris previously represented the family of Angelo Quinto who died in 2021 in the hospital while not in police custody, three days after an interaction with Antioch Police who were called to their home to stop him from attacking them.

According to Antioch Police Officers’ Association attorney Mike Raines the officers don’t have to obtain their own legal counsel as they are entitled to representation by the City Attorney or a designated, outside law firm.

Second DA report leaked, posted on social media shows texts by Antioch Police officers about two suspects in murder case

By 5 Comments

Focuses on Officer Eric Rombough, involves seven others including sergeant, detective, plus, U.S. Postal Inspector

“Nice babe, another one for the mantle.” – from an unidentified person in response to Rombough bragging about beating and shooting one of the suspects with a non-lethal weapon

WARNING: Contains offensive language

By Allen D. Payton

Another report by Larry J. Wallace, Senior Inspector with the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office was leaked and posted on social media on Saturday, April 15, 2023 about the two suspects and the eight Antioch Police Officers involved in a murder case, plus, a U.S. Postal Inspector, and their racist and other offensive texts. Some of the texts were included in the previously released 21-page report dated March 27, 2023. (See related article)

The 14-page report, dated March 28, 2023, focuses on the “text messages derived from the personal cellular telephone belonging to Antioch Police Department (APD) Officer Eric Rombough” and include “conversations between APD Officer Rombough and the following APD Officers regarding an investigation into Teryon Deshon Pugh and Trent Allen in March of 2021: APD Sergeant (Sgt) Josh Evans, Detective Robert Gerber, Johnathan Adams, Scott Duggar, Timothy Manly Willams, Tom Smith, and Brock Marcote.” The report also shows offensive texts between Rombough and U.S. Postal Inspector Francisco Garcia. Many of the texts reveal mistreatment of the two suspects. Redacted APD Officer texts investigation report 32823

Examples of Text Messages

On March 20, 2021, the report shows text message exchange between Rombough and Gerber:

At 9:16 p.m., APD Officer Rombough responded, “Bro I can’t wait to forty all of them (“forty” or “40” are references to the deployment of the 40mm less-lethal launcher)”

At 9:16 p.m., APD Detective Gerber text, “Hell yeah.”

The report shows more racist texts sent on March 25, 2021:

At 7:36 p.m., APD Officer Rombough texted, “Well we knew they wouldn’t be by the pool.”

At 7:39 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Look at all the Infiniti’s.”

At 7:40 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “And cuz they’re dark black.” APD Officer Adams responded with “(laughing emoji).”

At 7:41 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Gotta get them to smile.”

At 8:02 p.m., APD Officer Rombough continued, “Definitely can’t see them.”

The report reads: On 3/30/202 at 8:22 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text APD Detective Gerber, “This looks like dudes car from his ig.” – a reference to Instagram.

At 8:23 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “And he’s chilling at ruth Chris steakhouse”. I hate all of them.”

At 8:24 p.m., APD Detective Gerber text, “Turds… all turds”, a comment that APD Officer Rombough “liked”.

The texts on the final day of the report’s time period included exchanges with an unidentified person who praised Rombough for mistreating suspects and claim by Marcotte that a nurse laughed about a suspect being in pain:

On 03/31/2021, at 8:29 a[sic].m., APD Officer Rombough text “Yeah 40 deployment” and “F-g–t got his ass whooped.”

At 9:09 a.m., (An unidentified person) text, “Nice babe, another one for the mantle.”

At 9:1 0a.m., APD Officer Rombough texted, “Murder suspect. In custody and that a–hole made me run.” (An unidentified person) text, “Good thing you fast honey.”

At 9:12 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “We managed to setup a perimeter and he ‘got his ass whooped in the back yard and I field goal kicked his head. (An unidentified person) responded, “I thought that was a no no.”

At 9:13 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “No we can do that just no chokes” and “I tried to knock him unconscious. And he got muzzle thumped 6 times before he gave us his hands.”

At 9:12 a.m., APD Officer Marcotte responded, “The nurse saw me smiling when he was ‘making noises in pain and she started laughing (laughing emoji).”

At 9:13 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Lmao.”

At 9:15 a.m., APD Officer Rombough added, “What a b–ch.”

At 9:24 a.m., (An unidentified person) texted, “Glad you’re havin fun babe.”

At 9:25 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “It was nice after a very boring swat op.”

During this same time, APD Officer Rombough also group text his co-workers, APD Officers Brock Marcos, Timothy Manly Williams, (An unidentified person) and Scott Duggar, (An unidentified person)

At 8:45 a.m., APD Officer Rombough texted the group, “Lol I 40d him right next to his throat.”

At 8:46 a.m., APD Officer Marcotte responded, “Oh f–k” and “Cuz he ducked so fast.”

Later that day the report reads, At 4:43 p.m., APD Officer Rombough replied, “Yup and another f–g-ot in the butt” and “2 for the day.”

At 4:49 p.m. (An unidentified person) responded, “Nice babe.”

Only One Reference to Officers Being Corrected by Department Leader

During an exchange with Rombough on March 31, 2021 the report reads, At 3:11 p.m., APD Officer Adams texted, and “…I forgot that Koch wanted us to stop sending dumb sh-t. Oops.” He was referring to Sgt. Matthew Koch. This is the only text in the report that references any department leader correcting officers for their offensive texts.

Text Exchange Between Rombough & Postal Inspector Garcia

The text message exchange with Postal Inspector Garcia in the report reads: On 03/31/2021, a 3:10 p.m. APD Officer Rombough text United States Postal Inspector Francisco Garcia, “I 40d and field goal kicked one that fled from us on foot today.”

At 3:11 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia responded, “(laughing emoji)”.

At 3:12 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Bro but my foot f—ing hurts.”

At 3:16 p.m., APD Officer Rombough sent the following GIF:

At 5:13 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia asked, “Did you find any guns on any of them?”

At 5:21 p.m., APD Officer Rombough replied, “Sorry we were taking down a second ‘murder suspect and he got 40d too.”

At 5:58 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia texted, “(laughing emoji)….That 40 flag is coming along!! Murica!!”

Questions for DA’s Office

Questions were sent to DA’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo Saturday afternoon asking to whom the report was sent, why it was prepared separately from the 21-page report, why it wasn’t sent to the media and was it intended to be shared with the media. He was also asked how the East Bay Times obtained it earlier this week, was it leaked by someone in the DA’s Office and if so, who. Finally, Asregadoo was asked if there is an investigation in the DA’s Office to determine who leaked the 21-page report and this other, 14-page report.

4/17/23 UPDATE: Asregadoo responded Monday morning, “Our inspectors have investigated the matter and determined someone outside of our organization disclosed the reports to the public and press.”

He was then asked again, to whom were the redacted reports sent from the DA’s Office and who in the DA’s Office sent them out. Asregadoo later sent out a press release about the matter with a further redacted copy of the 14-page report.

 

 

Judge rules Antioch Police officers’ racist texts will be disclosed to defense in felony court case

By 1 Comment

“contain unambiguously and historically racist speech directed toward the suspects the officers were investigating.” – DA Diana Becton

By Allen D. Payton

Following a Friday, April 7th ruling by Contra Costa Superior Court Judge Clare M. Maier during a felony court case involving Antioch Police officers, racist texts exchanged by the officers and directed toward the suspects will be disclosed to the defense, District Attorney Diana Becton announced. Several Antioch officers are currently on paid leave and under investigation for alleged racist and other offensive texts, in addition to the remaining seven out of eight officers that have been under investigation by the FBI and DA’s Office since March 2022. One Antioch officer resigned, recently. (See related articles here and here)

According to Contra Costa DA’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo, Judge Maier “oversaw the court procedure to balance the integrity of the Antioch Police Department and Pittsburg Police Department criminal investigation with the constitutional requirement of the disclosure of exculpatory information (i.e., info that is beneficial to a defendant) in criminally charged cases.”

Judge David E. Goldstein is the presiding judge in the felony case against Terryonn Pugh, 20; Eric Windom, 21; Keyshawn McGee, 22, Trent Allen, 20, et al, #01oo1976380.

Statement By DA Diana Becton on Disclosure of Racist Texts in Felony Case

“Today, Contra Costa Superior Court Judge Clare Maier ruled on the disclosure of information that centers on racist text messages exchanged by Antioch Police officers.

For over a year, the FBI and the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office have engaged in a joint federal and state criminal investigation of sworn law enforcement officers from the Antioch Police Department and Pittsburg Police Department. The broad range of offenses under investigation involve crimes of moral turpitude.

Due to the sensitivity and scope of the investigation, a court procedure was established to balance the integrity of the criminal investigation with the disclosure of exculpatory information (i.e., evidence that is beneficial to a defendant).

In accordance with legal precedent, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office has been scrupulous in maintaining the balance as the court constructed.

Recently, additional information has come to light in which police misconduct directly overlaps and impacts a charged felony case.

The joint investigation with the FBI has revealed that Antioch Police officers exchanged text messages which contain unambiguously and historically racist speech directed toward the suspects the officers were investigating.

The racial animus expressed by officers in the recovered text messages trigger additional statutory concerns under the Racial Justice Act.

In seeking further direction from the court, the DA’s Office and the defense appeared in front of Judge Maier on April 4th to present information detailing the overlap of the officers’ misconduct and a charged felony case.

In her ruling today, Judge Maier said that the offensive texts in the two investigative reports shall be disclosed to the defense in the charged felony case. She added, the reports will be redacted to shield cell phone numbers and urged caution in the distribution of the language and images contained in the texts as they can spark more hatred toward Blacks and Latinos.

The integrity of the joint investigation and legal requirements for the disclosure of exculpatory evidence is of paramount importance to the District Attorney’s Office. Our office will continue to work tirelessly to ensure public trust and public safety for the residents of Contra Costa County.

Diana Becton

District Attorney, Contra Costa County”

Contra Costa Civil Grand Jury application deadline is tomorrow Friday, March 24

By 1 Comment

 

The Contra Costa County Superior Court is accepting applications for jurors to serve on our 2023-2024 Civil Grand Jury. The application deadline is March 24, 2023. Application for Grand Jury

Contra Costa County’s Grand Jury consists of 19 citizens. A new Grand Jury is impaneled each year. Grand Jurors are officers of the court, and function as an independent body under the guidance of a Superior Court judge.

Every year, in each of California’s 58 counties, a group of ordinary citizens takes an oath to serve as grand jurors. Its function is to investigate the operations of the various officers, departments and agencies of local government. Each Civil Grand Jury determines which officers, departments and agencies it will investigate during its term of office.

Apart from the investigations mandated by the California Penal Code, each county’s Grand Jury decides what it will investigate. Investigations may be initiated in response to letters from citizens, newspaper articles and personal knowledge.

For more information about the Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury visit Civil Grand Jury: Contra Costa Superior Court (cc-courts.org) and Civil Grand Jury – jury_service (ca.gov).

CA Supreme Court allows City of Lafayette’s approval of Terraces apartment project

By Leave a Comment

The planned Terraces of Lafayette apartment project. Source: O’Brien Homes

Denies request to review lower court’s decision, ends litigation, leaving in place earlier rulings that the City acted properly in approving the development

“This decision is a win for housing, but the fact that this project has taken so long is exactly why we have such a catastrophic housing shortage” – Sonja Trauss, President and Founder of YIMBY Law

By Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst/Public Information Officer

After more than two years, litigation against the City of Lafayette and developer O’Brien Land Company (O’Brien) regarding the City’s approval of the 315-unit Terraces of Lafayette development project has ended and is in favor of the City and O’Brien.

In 2020, Save Lafayette, a citizens group, sued the City and O’Brien to overturn the City’s approval of the Terraces of Lafayette. In November 2021, the Contra Costa County Superior Court rejected Save Lafayette’s claims and upheld the City’s approval of the Terraces of Lafayette. Save Lafayette appealed the Superior Court’s decision.

In November 2022, the Court of Appeal issued a unanimous opinion holding that the City’s environmental review complied with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and that the City properly followed the Housing Accountability Act in approving the project. Save Lafayette requested that the California Supreme Court exercise its discretion and review the Court of Appeal’s decision.

On Wednesday, March 15, 2023, the California Supreme Court denied Save Lafayette’s request for review, making the Court of Appeal opinion in favor of the City the final word in the long-running dispute.

“The Courts have once again affirmed that the City complied with the Housing Accountability Act and the California Environmental Quality Act in its environmental review and approval of this 20%-affordable housing project. The litigation is over, and we should now focus on welcoming new residents to our community,” said Lafayette Mayor Carl Anduri.

Now that litigation has ended, O’Brien will be able to proceed with the development of 315 for-rent apartments, including 63 below-market-rate units on a vacant a 22-acre site at the southwest corner of Pleasant Hill and Deer Hill Roads, adjacent to Highway 24 in Lafayette.

Terraces of Lafayette rendering. Source: O’Brien Homes

In response O’Brien Land Company issued the following press release regarding the court decision:

In a landmark victory for housing rights and state housing law, the California Supreme Court denied review of the unanimous California Court of Appeal ruling in favor of the Terraces of Lafayette

As the last step to finally end the litigation over the Terraces of Lafayette apartment community, the Supreme Court of California denied Save Lafayette’s request to review the First District Court of Appeal’s unanimous ruling that upheld the City of Lafayette’s project approvals. In a published opinion, the Court of Appeal rejected in full Save Lafayette’s lawsuit challenging the Terraces of Lafayette, a 315-unit apartment community by O’Brien Land Company. After nearly 10 years of processing and 120 public hearings, the Lafayette City Council had finally approved the project by a 4-1 vote in August 2020.

The Court’s decision can be found here. Project information can be found at https://www.terracesoflafayette.com.
The project site is in an urbanized area adjacent to Highway 24 and located one mile from the Lafayette BART station. With 20%, or 63, of its dwelling units set aside for lower income households, the Terraces is considered an affordable housing project under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). This will substantially assist Lafayette in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the lower income categories assigned to it by long-standing state law.
Despite the project’s robust legal protections under controlling state law, Save Lafayette has actively opposed the project and all development on the project site for years. The anti-development group also opposed a 44 single-family home compromise project the City approved in 2015 after the City and O’Brien contractually paused processing of the apartment project to consider an alternative the group might accept. Save Lafayette responded by filing litigation and a ballot referendum that overturned the smaller project. Once the voters rejected the smaller project, O’Brien and the City resumed processing the apartments.

“Despite the fact that the project, located on a former quarry site, is supported by the Sierra Club and Greenbelt Alliance, and provides critically-needed, affordable housing, it took 12 years to get to this point after finally getting the project approved and through this and other wasteful litigation,” said Dennis O’Brien, President and Founder of O’Brien Land Company. “It’s been disheartening the last few years to have to tell local residents and workers that we weren’t yet able to build the apartments the City approved. People have long been in need of housing like this for themselves, family members, and local workers, and all we could do was add their name to an interest list and ask them to be patient while we saw the project through an incredibly difficult and time-consuming process. We are elated that we can now move forward.”

Although the apartment project included a full environmental impact report, Save Lafayette’s lawsuit claimed the City’s approval violated the California Environmental Quality Act, a law frequently employed by anti-development NIMBY groups to challenge new housing. The lawsuit also claimed the project was not entitled to the protection of the HAA, which protects housing developments from changes in local land use laws after an application is deemed complete by, among other things, substantially curtailing the circumstances under which a housing project may lawfully be disapproved. As the Superior Court did in 2021, the Court of Appeal rejected Save Lafayette’s arguments and agreed that the City complied with the law in approving the project.

Matt Regan, Senior Vice President of Public Policy for the Bay Area Council added his voice in support of the Supreme Court’s decision saying, “When anyone asks why we have a housing affordability crisis in California, I just show them the history of the Terraces in Lafayette. This is a site where the City said they wanted housing, a developer offered a proposal that met their requirements, and here we are 12 years later after multiple plan changes, referendums, lawsuits, delay after delay after delay, needless costs piled on top of needless costs, and still no homes,” he added.

“The team at O’Brien Homes should be given every credit for refusing to be bullied and sticking with this project.”

The Court of Appeal recognized the HAA’s statutory mandate to interpret and implement the HAA to “afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing” and accordingly held that the trial court “rightly refused to disturb the City’s approval of the project.”

About the decision, Sonja Trauss, President and Founder of YIMBY Law, stated, “This decision is a win for housing, but the fact that this project has taken so long is exactly why we have such a catastrophic housing shortage. The people involved with Save Lafayette should be ashamed of themselves. They have denied housing for more than 700 middle income people for the last 10 years while they fought this project. Imagine if Save Lafayette had spent their time and money actually helping people.”

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

 

 

Contra Costa Superior Court announces escheatment of unclaimed funds

By Leave a Comment

By Matt J. Malone, Public Information Officer, Superior Court of California, County of Contra Costa

Per Government Code Section 68084.1, the Court intends to escheat the sum of $201,665.09 in the Court’s Operations Fund that has remained unclaimed for a period exceeding three years. For more information on the unclaimed funds, please visit the Court’s website at:

https://www.cc-courts.org/fees/unclaimedfunds.aspx

The Court has published a legal notice in the East Bay Times and has sent letters to potential owners of these funds. If you believe that you are entitled to any of the funds, you must complete and submit a Claim Affirmation Form and Claim for Reimbursement. These forms and instructions are available at the above hyperlink. Claim forms must be postmarked no later than March 24, 2023.

COVID spike causes jury selection in Contra Costa Superior Courts suspended until Jan. 14

By Leave a Comment

Cases in which a jury has already been empaneled and the trial underway, will proceed as previously scheduled.

By Allen Payton

In response to concerns of juries being cancelled as of Monday, Dec. 27, a spokesperson for the Contra Costa Superior Court provided the following explanation:

“The Court remains open and fully operational with one exception. The Court has suspended jury selection/panels out of an abundance of caution with the increased infection rate in the County having risen 165%.  This will only impact any case in which voir dire is currently underway or in cases set to begin between now and January 14th. Cases in which a jury has already been empaneled and the trial underway, shall proceed as previously scheduled.

This is a very disappointing development as the Court was making good progress in addressing the backlog of cases.

That said, the risk of exposure and infection for court employees and court users (including defendants detained in county jail) is too great for the time being in light of the new COVID-19 variant and significant rise in infection rates in Contra Costa County.

All other services remain open to the public and are functioning.”